Recommend me a tripod

[Rudi]

I'll take the other 2 pounds and save $200.

I used to think that too. Then I tried a CF tripod for a weekend of shooting (work), and never looked back. I placed my order with B&H on the following Monday. :smile:

CF tripods dampen vibrations so much better than any aluminium legs I've ever used, so that even if there were no other advantages to CF I would still prefer it to aluminium now. And the bonus is that for the equivalent weight rating, I can have a tripod that is much lighter, usually more compact and doesn't feel cold to the touch like aluminium (which makes a difference in winter. Yes, even Australian winter. ).

For that extra $200 I can have a much better tripod for decades. Unlike digital camera bodies good tripods don't need to be replaced. Ever. I see it as money well spent.

 

[foto2021]

Yep, Benbo tripods are outstanding, but they are also unbelievably heavy! Which is not always bad for a tripod to be, as long as it's not a tripod you want to hike with. :smile:

That certainly isn't true of the Benbo Trekker, which is very sturdy for m4/3 use but also light.

Benbo tripods do take some getting used to. They have a single screw lock for all three legs and are very floppy when that lock is loosened. At first, it's like wrestling with bagpipes, and there is a risk of tripod, camera and photographer ending up in a heap on the ground, but using a Benbo is something that you soon get used to.

There are plenty of alloy tripods that are light and sturdy. The key is to find one with hard drawn tubular legs rather than the soft alloy extrusions that are used on cheap, flimsy tripods. I wouldn't recommend carbon fibre unless the OP has lots of money to burn or must have the lightest possible tripod, but remember that the reduction in weight inevitably causes a reduction in overall stability.

I have already mentioned the Benbo Trekker, which uses hard drawn alloy tubes, but the Manfrotto 190 is also a light and sturdy tripod, and more conventional too. They both weigh about 2 kg (4.4 lbs) with head, which should be light enough for anyone. Those would be my two recommendations to the OP.

Benbo Trekker Mk3

Manfrotto Professional Aluminium Tripod Black without Head - 190 series

 

[linkedit]

I used to think that too. Then I tried a CF tripod for a weekend of shooting (work), and never looked back. I placed my order with B&H on the following Monday. :smile:

You found a tripod that works for you. For me weight is of zero concern. If weight was a concern and I needed it to shoot jobs I would most certainly own a cf tripod.

For that extra $200 I can have a much better tripod for decades.

Not sure I follow there. I still use an aluminum Bogen 3035 tripod that I bought *used* while in college in 1985, it still works like a champ. I expect my new 190XPROB to last just as long.

 

[Rudi]

I have already mentioned the Benbo Trekker, which uses hard drawn alloy tubes, but the Manfrotto 190 is also a light and sturdy tripod, and more conventional too. They both weigh about 2 kg (4.4 lbs) with head, which should be light enough for anyone. Those would be my two recommendations to the OP.

Yes, the 190 is a great tripod, and I recommended it earlier in this thread, but if the OP is willing to spend the money on a CF tripod, he can get a much lighter combination with the same load capacity as the 190 (around 1.3 kg). Or a MUCH MUCH lighter combination with a slightly lower load capacity, which would still be more than good enough for m43 gear.

2 kg might not sound like much, but it all adds up, whether you're taking all your gear to a paid job or trekking the mountains. My heaviest tripod setup is 1.8 kg these days, and can support up to 12 kg in weight. I would expect a travel tripod, or a tripod to be used with m43 only, to be much lighter than that. What is the point of m43 if not to reduce size and weight? So why throw it all out the window with the tripod?

 

[Rudi]

You found a tripod that works for you. For me weight is of zero concern. If weight was a concern and I needed it to shoot jobs I would most certainly own a cf tripod.

Like I said, I used to think just like you. :smile: And weight IS a concern for you. If not, why do you shoot m43 then???

 

[linkedit]

Like I said, I used to think just like you. :smile: And weight IS a concern for you. If not, why do you shoot m43 then???

I use m43 because I have a small body that I can have with me at all times. Though I don't carry a tripod around with me all time.

On days when I have the time to actually make a trip out to specifically shoot something, half of the time I bring my 7d. So, no weight isn't a concern. When i did this for a living I used to bring a Majestic tripod! lol

 

[Rudi]

I use m43 because I have a small body that I can have with me at all times. Though I don't carry a tripod around with me all time.

On days when I have the time to actually make a trip out to specifically shoot something, half of the time I bring my 7d. So, no weight isn't a concern. When i did this for a living I used to bring a Majestic tripod! lol

Fair enough. I have so much gear to bring with me on some days that a CF tripod is nice to have (and it really has other, noticeable advantages over aluminium than just weight). I have kept my 190PRO for backup, because it is a great tripod, so we agree on that (although I will most probably replace it with a smaller CF travel tripod eventually, which will be much lighter and sturdier while supporting the same load). But neither the Manfrotto 190 nor the 055 can hold a candle to my CF Gitzo, which is a lot lighter and so much more sturdy. They are in different leagues (and I am not bashing Manfrotto here, I think they make a great tripod).

 

[Luke]

what are these aluminum and carbon fiber tripods of which you speak. Man up and get a real tripod
The Expedition Wooden Tripod

 

[krugorg]

what are these aluminum and carbon fiber tripods of which you speak. Man up and get a real tripod
The Expedition Wooden Tripod

That thing is awesome. 22 pound capacity!

 

[linkedit]

what are these aluminum and carbon fiber tripods of which you speak. Man up and get a real tripod
The Expedition Wooden Tripod

Those are the old school landscape shooters tripod of choice!

 

[linkedit]

But neither the Manfrotto 190 nor the 055 can hold a candle to my CF Gitzo, which is a lot lighter and so much more sturdy. They are in different leagues (and I am not bashing Manfrotto here, I think they make a great tripod).

Of course the Gitzo is a better tripod, it's probably close to 5x the price of the 190! No one here is denying that Gitzo is most likely the best on the market.

 

[krugorg]

+1 on the Velbon recommendations. I picked up the new UT-43D when B&H started carrying that model (UK based company, so should be easy for you to find). I wanted something that was relatively sturdy and extended to full height, but also was light and packed down to a very small size. I love the tripod and it is amazing how compact it is when folded down:

Velbon - Ultrek

 

[Djarum]

what are these aluminum and carbon fiber tripods of which you speak. Man up and get a real tripod
The Expedition Wooden Tripod

I actually have a telescope tripod that looks like this. The legs alone weigh 15lbs and with the head, about 22 lbs total.

 

[Rudi]

Of course the Gitzo is a better tripod, it's probably close to 5x the price of the 190! No one here is denying that Gitzo is most likely the best on the market.

More like 3-4x the price (of the aluminium version of the 190), depending on where you shop. In my case it was a little over 3x the price. But the Manfrotto 190 model in carbon fibre is also a lot more than the aluminium version, and for a good reason! If you want to compare their relative prices, then you should be comparing the two CF models, otherwise it's an apples vs. oranges comparison.

 

[Rudi]

I actually have a telescope tripod that looks like this. The legs alone weigh 15lbs and with the head, about 22 lbs total.

Wooden tripod legs are great... except for the weight. But there is a reason why surveyors still use wooden tripods, and it's not to do with price. :smile:

 

[Djarum]

Wooden tripod legs are great... except for the weight. But there is a reason why surveyors still use wooden tripods, and it's not to do with price. :smile:

Well, for one thing, I've found wood to dampen vibrations much better than aluminum. I also have a tripod that has 2" steel legs that holds a heavy duty ALT-AZ head for telescopes. Thing will hold about 45 lbs.

I'm waiting for carbon fiber to get cheaper. If I can find a carbon fiber Tripod that would hold 45lbs and not cost me a house, I'd be all over it.

The other issue is that I have yet to see an affordable 5 section carbon fiber tripod. I need something that will fold to less than 20" with a ball head on it. For my uses, I need something to hold about 4 or 5 lbs max.

 

[linkedit]

More like 3-4x the price (of the aluminium version of the 190), depending on where you shop. In my case it was a little over 3x the price. But the Manfrotto 190 model in carbon fibre is also a lot more than the aluminium version, and for a good reason! If you want to compare their relative prices, then you should be comparing the two CF models, otherwise it's an apples vs. oranges comparison.

Are we now going to debate by how many times more expensive a Gitzo is from a Manfrotto?

I'm beginning to think that you're one of those guys that has to have the last word.

 

[~tc~]

The other issue is that I have yet to see an affordable 5 section carbon fiber tripod. I need something that will fold to less than 20" with a ball head on it. For my uses, I need something to hold about 4 or 5 lbs max.

Benro TravelAngel - 14" folded, with head. Fits INSIDE my Tenba mini-messenger.

 

[Djarum]

Benro TravelAngel - 14" folded, with head. Fits INSIDE my Tenba mini-messenger.

I don't consider 400 - 500 dollars "affordable" for me, that is.

 

[~tc~]

Closer to $300 if you shop around.

Strong-Light-Cheap = pick 2