Why are better tripods better?

[NineToTheSky]

I'm a newcomer to digital SLR photography. Recently I went out and bought myself a Canon 400D/XTi, some lenses - the biggest of which is a Tamron 70-300, and a tripod. The tripod is an own brand (from the UK's biggest photographic retailer, Jessops) and it cost me £30.

Reading many forums, most people seem to have Manfrottos and the like, at £100 upwards (way upwards sometimes). I've never seen, let alone used, expensive tripods, so what am I missing? I'm very happy with mine: it's lightweight, the legs extend quickly, the quick release plate releases quickly, my camera is secure, and I can adjust it in any direction. It seems fairly solidly built, so why do people spend three times to ten times as much? I'd love to know.

[thescottandrew]

you dont need to spend hundreds of dollars to have a good tripod, if your tripod is doing its job then there is no need to upgrade.

[NineToTheSky]

What I want to know is what are people paying more for? If mine is as good as you need, why doesn't everyone spend £30 on a tripod?

[puddlepirate44]

Good questions. The big thing with tripods is to make sure they can hold the weight of the camera/lens reliably. I might fork out some more cash for a more stout 'pod just for the assurance that the equipment won't come crashing down. Things I look for in a 'pod are height, ease of operation, and ease of the head (if attached).

[SimonG]

Well, your tripod may meet your needs now, but do you really think that you'd be able to mount a decent telephoto lens to it? Would you trust it to hold £5000 worth of gear? Also, the more expensive tripods tend to be more rigid than their cheaper counterparts, which really helps to dampen movement of the camera and lens when mounted, and in the case of tripods made from exotic materials, they also tend to be a bit lighter.

[DocFrankenstein]

www.bythom.com/support.htm

When you mount a relatively big lens like 70-200 f/2.8 and you have a flash on your camera, the tripod shortcomings usually come through.

Also, my gitzo has a lifetime warranty... it is also very light for the stability it provides.

[NineToTheSky]

I have absolutely no concerns about the security of my camera. (Famous last words :))

My only problem is that I'm 6'4", and the tripod is not nearly tall enough (150cms). But are others taller?

[DocFrankenstein]

yeah... the others are usually taller..

[tumblew33d]

This thread from a couple of weeks back discusses pretty much what you're asking-

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=232205

[NineToTheSky]

Would you trust it to hold £5000 worth of gear?Sadly, I think it'll be a long time before I can afford £5000 worth of gear.

When you mount a relatively big lens like 70-200 f/2.8 and you have a flash on your camera, the tripod shortcomings usually come through.Well I have got a 70-300. What shortcomings should I be finding?

Really what I'm trying to find out is not so much what are the negatives I've got, but what are the benfits you've got, Doc Frankenstein? (and others).

[bolantej]

sturdier legs, stronger head, heavier altogether when compared to my other cheaper tripods. easier to adjust, and the adjustments aren't easily changed unknowingly.

[rent]

there are many factors that can add to the cost of a tripod. some important factors to me, who lugs all his equipment on his shoulders when shooting out in the wild, are the weight of the tripod, the weight it can support, max and min height and independent leg spread.

my carbon fiber gitzo can securely support up to 17 lb (8 kg) of gear, can go as low as 13" (35 cm) from the ground, independent leg spread and only weighs 3.5 lb (1.6 kg). granted it almost costs the same as an entry DSLR body, but it's worth every penny (to me, at least) and will serve many years to come.

-alex

[condyk]

It's a 'fitness for purpose' issue for me, same as most purchases. I projected forward to what I wanted my latest one for, 30D and Bigma when travelling so light CF, stable and strong, and bought something fit for purpose. You can also 'buy the best' but then you are silly ;-)

[lostdoggy]

You'll find out after a long shoot outdoors and they all come out blurred.
You'll find out when the 1st time it tips over.
You'll find out when the camera sarts nose diving.

[CyberDyneSystems]

It's always a hoot when you lose a few thousand worth of camera and lens because your 30l tripod was such a bargain.

It's the old "penny wise pound foolish" saying.

[rdricks]

For a long time I used the "cheap" tripods. They were okay. But as I progressed, my cameras changed as well. Eventually I was using a pro film camera with a vertical grip and flash. Very heavy setup. Every time I would put it on the tripod I would worry. The tripod could not stop the vibrations either. I took one photo that came out crooked because the tripod head was leaning due to the wait. At that point I bought a nice tripod. It is hard to explain, but once you use a good tripod, it is no longer just an accessory. For me it became another tool to use and enjoy. Had I never got the larger cameras and lenses, I would still be happy with the cheap tripods. But now that I have used good ones, there is no going back.

-Ryan

[NineToTheSky]

Thanks for all your responses, and thanks tumblew33d for the link. I think I'm beginning to understand now.

[DavidW]

Well I have got a 70-300. What shortcomings should I be finding?
Your 70-300 is rather lighter than a 70-200mm f/2.8 - the wider aperture of the 70-200 means it's a much heavier lens. My EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS is 1.6kg, and I believe that's without accessories (tripod ring, QR plate, lens hood).

It's all about being steady with the heavier setups, avoiding vibration, the head not creeping when you lock it off in more demanding positions, and the whole rig not dumping your precious camera and lens on the floor.



David

[neil_r]

I have 2 tripods one expensive which is very steady and one very expensive which is rock solid but a pain to lug around. Every time i view results from the former, I wish I had been using the latter.

[JohnJ80]

basically, with tripods - like anything else - you get what you pay for.

The cheap ones $150 or less (approx) tend to be wobbly, they are not durable and their integrated heads will drive you to drink in a hurry (they droop, don't stay where you set them etc...).

The Tom Hogan article is the truth - again, here: http://bythom.com/support.htm Usually people who tell you this is not correct are somewhere in the middle of the expensive process he helps you avoid. Been there, done that and I have several unused (waste of money) tripods in the closet to prove it.

Here is why you need a good tripod:
http://markins.com/charlie/report4e6.pdf

If you consider that a vibration of amplitude 5um will generate one pixel worth of blur and handholding, you generate ~300um of vibration - well you just gave up a huge part of your blur 'budget.' If you want to get anywhere near the possible performance of your lenses, you need to use a tripod. period.

What else is noteworthy is that a tripod is not just 3 sticks coupled together at the top. There is huge engineering that goes into the materials design, the bonding together of dissimilar materials (adhesives technology - connecting carbon fiber to metal is not trivial by any stretch), decoupling the camera mass such that vibrations are not transmitted up the to the camera and then making it reliable over wide temps and abuse, etc....

So, my only advice after basically going down about 2/3rds of the path that Hogan describes is to go for the good stuff, suck it up and spend the money, and then enjoy the benefit for the rest of your shooting days. You suffer once when you buy it and then you benefit. Otherwise you WILL suffer every time you use that cheap tripod, you will get frustrated and you will ultimately quit using it. There is no way to avoid it - any tripod is an increase in hassle and the more you can minimize that the more you can concentrate on your photography.

J.

[NineToTheSky]

I'm getting more and more convinced that I should have a better tripod, but money is an issue. ("Daddy, why have we got no Christmas presents when you've got that very nice tripod?").

The Slik PRO 700DX c/w PRO 700DX head is about £100 (within my budget). Is it any good, or not worth getting, bearing in mind that I already have a cheap and nasty one?

[canonphotog]

What I want to know is what are people paying more for? If mine is as good as you need, why doesn't everyone spend £30 on a tripod?

I have absolutely no concerns about the security of my camera. (Famous last words :))

My only problem is that I'm 6'4", and the tripod is not nearly tall enough (150cms). But are others taller?

Your current tripod may be as good as 'You' need; but fall far short of the needs of others.

If you use your tripod a lot, eventually you will encounter a situation where something different would be useful. Many of the prior posts covered all this for you quite well.

I have two tripods. A Vivitar that is nearly 30 years old, and a Bogen 3221 with a Giottos fluid dampened tilt/pan head. I went with the Tilt/pan head on the newer tripod as that is what I am used to from the older tripod.

Now I am thinking I will change to a ball head sometime next year. The nicest thing about the higher end tripods is the different ways they can be set up. When I get that ball head, I won't need to remove my tilt/pan head to install it.

I'll pick up a short center column (http://www.amazon.com/Bogen-Manfrotto-Center-Column-Tripods/dp/B00009R69U/ref=e_deav_acc_1_2/002-1242755-4778450)to put the ball head on, and change out the center column as needed.

The older vivitar has the ability to remove a large portion of the center column and spread the legs out flat so it can be used inches off the ground, table, what have you.

Some heads have offset built in to them so you can put the tripod over something you want to shoot with macro lens and shoot straight down.

You won't need a better tripod until you start being limited by your current tripod.


Ken

[Mike K]

Did you read the sticky article at the top of this forum about tripod vibration?
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=168589
Mike K

[neil_r]

My only problem is that I'm 6'4", and the tripod is not nearly tall enough (150cms). But are others taller?

I am 6'6" and use a Benbo II and a Manfrotto 475B Pro Geared Tripod. Both of which are fine, in fact the Benbo II would be fine if you were 7'6"

N