Tripods, any input??

[adegiulio]

So, I was tired of taking boring pictures with my plain jane Kodak digital camera, so I asked Santa to bring me a Dig. Rebel, and he graciously obliged. I am not a photographer by any means, but wanted to learn. I am having a lot of fun, but think I might need a tripod. I take a lot of astronomical and nature pics, and they are often blurry, especially long exposure pictures of the moon. Anyway, I went to B&H to shop for a tripod, and was completely overwhelmed with choices. Hundreds of ways to hold a camera steady!!. Anyway, are there any suggestions as to what to look for? Features, brands?

Thanks!!

[DaveG]

So, I was tired of taking boring pictures with my plain jane Kodak digital camera, so I asked Santa to bring me a Dig. Rebel, and he graciously obliged. I am not a photographer by any means, but wanted to learn. I am having a lot of fun, but think I might need a tripod. I take a lot of astronomical and nature pics, and they are often blurry, especially long exposure pictures of the moon. Anyway, I went to B&H to shop for a tripod, and was completely overwhelmed with choices. Hundreds of ways to hold a camera steady!!. Anyway, are there any suggestions as to what to look for? Features, brands?

Thanks!!

A reasonably sized Manfroto (Bogen in the USA) should do the trick. You will have to add a head of some kind too. I'm partial to ball heads but you should look at the pan and tilt variety as well. As a rule of thumb you should get a tripod that is taller than you when it's fully extended. Although it's unlikely that you'll use it this way very often, you don't want to fully extend the tripod and then half to lean over a bit to shoot. That will just kill your back.

As far as the moon goes you get to use the "sunny f16 rule". Normally if it's a nice sunny day and you want to take a picture of the kids playing in the yard, the exposure is 1/ISO @ f16, which is 1/100 @ f16 if you are using ISO 100. In any case that's the same sun that is lighting the moon, and although it goes against most common sense, that's the exposure.

For astronomical photos of dimmer subjects, you are going to need a astronomy tripod guider so the camera moves with the rotation of the earth. Join a local astronomy club and they will tell you everything. But for the moon, a regular tripod and a brief exposure will be fine.

[Belmondo]

You could read volumes on this subject, and still not get a single answer to your question. The reasons are numerous, but essentially it boils down to the fact that there is no single tripod/head that’s ideal for every purpose or taste. I’ve wrestled with this problem since day one, and still haven’t found one tripod that even comes close to being an ideal, all-around unit.

Unfortunately, there is a fundamental conflict between the pursuit of convenience and portability, and the need for a solid, versatile shooting platform. Generally speaking, the terms ‘lightweight’ and ‘rigid’ are not often found in the same sentence when referring to tripods. Even the use of exotic man-made materials like carbon fiber can only go so far towards creating a lightweight piece of equipment that isn’t going to teeter, flex, and wobble under typical shooting situations. As a general rule of thumb, the beefier the tripod, the heavier it will be. Conversely, the lighter (and smaller) a tripod is, the less solid it will be. That’s just the reality of the situation.

Questions you will have to answer yourself before making any decisions are:
1. Where are you going to be using it? More specifically, how far are you going to have to carry it?
2. What is your budget?
3. What equipment will you be using? (i.e. size of lenses, etc.)
4. Will you be using it primarily indoors or outdoors?
5. Will you be better served by a pan/tilt head or a ball head? (each has advantages)
6. Will you want a quick disconnect mount?
7. Will you ever need extra versatility such as ground-level shooting?

I’ve gone through a succession of tripods, each of which I thought would be the perfect solution to my specific needs, and each of which turned out to have one or more glaring deficiencies that caused me to want to keep looking. I now have three different units, each of which serves a specific purpose-----actually four, if you count the monopod. At the bottom end is a throw-away Quantaray unit that I keep in the truck at all times. It’s marginally adequate for spur of the moment photo opportunities, and because it’s an inexpensive unit, I don’t worry about it rattling around in the back of the pickup. Next, I have a Gitzo set of legs that are medium-sized and medium weight. It’s really my ‘go-to’ tripod for the vast majority of my situation. It is probably the best compromise between strength and convenience. It has a Bogen medium ball head and quick disconnect on it. The third unit is a massive thing with legs that look like flagpoles. It is rock-solid, even in gales and earthquakes, and has a large pan/tilt head on it. It weighs only a couple pounds less than the Queen Mary II.

It’s nice to have this range of tripods available depending on my need at the time, but it’s not a perfect solution, nor is it one I could recommend to anyone else. The reality is, what others do is going to be of little help to you. Time, experience, and an occasional mistake will teach you far more than a third person whose needs are very likely quite different than your own.

[scottbergerphoto]

It's hard to add to Belmondo's detailed and well thought out response. But, I'll just add this :lol: , a cheap tripod isn't cheap. You just get disatisfied with it and buy another one until you finally buy what works.
I went to B and H and talked with the salesman about what camera and lenses I would be using. I wound up with a Gitzo, Mountaineer Reporter Carbon fiber tripod(no crank) and a Gitzo ballhead( which I later switched to the Ultimate Ballhead from www.acratech.net . The tripod is very sturdy and light enough to lug all around NYC subways.
Happy shopping,
Scott

[Tapeman]

I too, have a Gitzo mountianeer and it's great. I suggest you spend a lot of money on a tripod. It will be the longest lasting piece of photo gear you will own. I bought a sturdy tripod in the early 70s and still use it. It has outlasted all of my other camera equipment, and will never become obsolete. I have four tripods and the only one I don't use the is cheap one (except to hold one of my 550EXs off camera.)

[Whaler]

I also have a Drebel and I recently picked up a Bogen 3021 with a 3047 head. Simply stated, I love it. It's a bit on the heavy side but, that's what I wanted. If I were to do it all over again I would settle for the 3030 head the 3047 is a bit overkill.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Whalers set up is a great solution.

About the only thing that can be said to be negative about those lovely Mnafrotto legs is that they are heavy. Heavy when compared to either a tripo that is to light for the job,. and heavy when compared to the ultra snazzy Carbon fibre units that cost 3 to 4 times as much.

I have not found mine to be too heavy though,. and given that I use some very long lenses,. I need the strength and to support them.

For Adegiulio, since you are looking to branch out into Astrophotography,. a Bogen 3021 would be bare minimum.. (once you get into "astro" lenses or telescopes,. a BIG tripod becomes pretty important.)

[Andy_T]

I second everything that was said in this thread.

Go to a photo shop with your camera, your heaviest lens and try out the tripods they have.

I'm quite happy with a Bogen (Manfrotto) 3405B 'Video' tripod that cost me about US$ 120 including a quite stable pan/tilt head with quick release. Weighs about 4 pounds and is reasonably small (22 inches closed) It's designed to support up to 11 pounds - that's about suficient for my current equipment and rock solid.

Best regards,
Andy

[adegiulio]

Thanks everyone for the detailed and specific recommendations. Any others?

[Whaler]

Ya, when it happens, let us know what you decided on.

[TeraGram93013]

I have a 20+ year old Bogen 3001 with a 3025 head.

I can not tell you how many shots this set up has helped me take over the years.

If I were to change anything, it would be the head. There are times I wish things moved a little faster and that I had handles instead of knobs, but really, this is a very low priority thing for me. (Unless, of course, you talk to me while I'm in the middle of trying to set up a shot.)

Bogen/Manfrotto is the way to go, imnsho.

You know, funny thing, I didn't know Bogen was part of the Manfrotto group, and yet, there's the sticker right on one of the legs!

[TeraGram93013]

Oh one thing I forgot to mention is, make sure you check the "flipability" of your potential tripod's center column.

On my Bogen 3001, you can take the center column out of the tripod and invert it so that the camera HANGS instead of stands. This is useful for a variety of things, for example, copying small artwork, shooting bugs, low plants, just think on it! You'll come up with other reasons.

Now, mind you, it has been 20+ years since I bought mine and at that time not all of them did this. I thought it was a silly feature until I needed it!

I borrowed a friend's tripod once because I forgot mine, found I needed to get REAL low to the subject, and found I couldn't flip the center column.

FRUSTRATING!

[Whaler]

If you go with the 3025 head I've got one. . . . $20 + S&H

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=23875