Is Carbon Fiber worth the money on tripod?

[bphillips330]

Ok, Loaded question. I have done a lot of research. I am simply an advanced amateur. I have some heavier lenses and I am looking in the future to get the 100-400. Nothing Professional, but when my family and I go on hiking trips, the cheapo tripod (bought at best buy) just does not work the best. I like having tri-pods where the legs are not all attached together. I am forgetting the model numbers, but it seems like everybody has, i think gitzo or manfrotto. (i forget the number, but something pro))

Ok, back to the question at hand. Is carbon fiber worth the extra money. How much money is it usually. $100 dollars more? 200 dollars more? How durable is Carbon Fiber in cold and hot. I have seen other odd brands that do carbon fiber. Are those as good as gitzo or manfrotto?

Are twist locks better than clip type locks? I am guessing I am wanting a 3 segment legs, I know the more segments make it more wobbly. Any suggestions please.

[_aravena]

What's weird is, you'd think CF would be lighter, but I see a lot of complaints of it being heavier, being the opposite of why people got it. AS for locks, I'd think it's more preference. I don't care though, it's on the lower part of the checklist.

It's just funny, having used to race cards carbon fiber was hailed as the must have but it was actually lighter in those repsects.

Aniwho, just stating what I've read here. I don't use my tripod like that to merit more than $100 on it. Preferably less as long as it can hold a camera and not be cheap plastic.

[pturton]

I read somewhere that the Galileo telescope is mounted with CF tubes because the expansion/contraction from hot/cold temperature shift is minimized. Yes, it is worth the extra many $$$ for me because it is lighter, stronger and has better vibration control than other materials in its recommended focal length and load range

I chose a Gitzo GT2430 for my needs with my longest lens being the EF 400 f/5.6 L. The GT2430 is recommended for a maximum focal length of 300mm but for my occasional usage of the 400 FL, I have no problems. My regularly used FLs are 17 to 300 and my heaviest body lens conbination is about 7.5 lbs.

Combine the legset with a quality ball head from Markins or Really Right Stuff and you will have a winner.

As for twist locks, I think that is a personal preference. A quarter turn of both locks on one leg in one motion certainly speeds setup and take-down.

Is Gitzo CF the best? Ask any long time nature pro and I'm sure you will hear, "Definitely, yes." I could kick myself for waiting so long to purchase a quality support package - legset and ball head.

[ben_r_]

I dont think it is. All the times I have considered "upgrading" all I ever found was that the savings in weight was too little for the increased cost.

[Tsmith]

Well in my case for backpacking it is for the simple reason my Bogen setup weighs in at just above 6 lbs. The Gitzo + BH-3 setup I have on order will reduce that weight over 1/2 that to less than 3 lbs total. Loosing 3 lbs is a lot when hiking all day.

[tjrenegade]

If weight is a major factor for you then yes its worth it....if not then I would say its not worth it...just my 2 cents....

[condyk]

Low weight counts a lot for me and so CF is worth it. But then don't blow it by using a heavy head. Choose both carefully with a view to the gear weight you will need to use with it over the next several years.

[DocFrankenstein]

It's the way it eats vibrations. It's not a homogeneous material like steel or aluminum. It's more like wood and the energy has to pass many times from higher density to lower density materials while it travels. This makes it dissipate very fast.

Overall, CF is worth it. The interesting thing about it is that the model looks the same and maybe weighs one pound less or so. But it can support about 2x the weight of it's aluminum counterpart.

The tripod journey ends with gitzo, might as well buy it from the start. You wasted your money on a best buy tripod and it doesn't work. So you can shell out now or shell out later.

www.bythom.com/support.htm

[jrsforums]

Are twist locks better than clip type locks?

I'll let others discuss the CF value judgements, which I am sure they can do better than I. (though I did decide on the "gold standard"....Gitzo).

As far as locks....everyone has their own opinion....but...my personal experience.....

I had a Feisol CF tripod, which uses twists locks. The Feisol is a fine product, but the twists are not anti-rotation. They work well, but you need to follow a "pattern" to extend...untwist-slide-twist tight-untwist next-slide, etc, etc....and do the same...to close. No a big deal, but something you need to learn and follow to make thing s easy. Once you do it they open fairly quickly.

When I got a monopod, I decide on a Manfotto. The snap locks were much faster to open and close.

I recently got the Gitzo 2541L, which has anti-rotation twist locks. Frankly, nothing is easier. With one twist (on each leg) you can undo all the locks, slide to extend...and quickly lock each...in any order. Same in reverse.

Franlky, if I had the Gitzo tripod before getting the monopod, I would have bought a Gitzo.

My 2 cents.....

[condyk]

The tripod journey ends with gitzo, might as well buy it from the start. You wasted your money on a best buy tripod and it doesn't work. So you can shell out now or shell out later.

i never agreed with that argument. It is really about fitness for purpose and an analysis of that requires clear understanding of intended usage. For example, if all I wanna do is drive a few miles to and from work on busy city roads why shell out for a Bentley?

In extreme conditions I see the argument holding but most shooters I guess don't use their tripod on extreme conditions. Well you could say 'just in case' ... but you apply that to everything you buy then most of us would either go bankrupt or die before we saved enough for the ideal car, house, suit, TV, etc.

I'm sure you can get great results with a best buy tripod when used entirely within its limitations. The key when buying is knowing what you indend to do and then buy appropriately. There isn't an implicite 'upgrade path' to gear. It is just a choice made either to look good or because you wanna feel good by owning the best or because there is a specific need that existing gear can't meet.

[steved110]

My Manfrotto 190 ProB is heavy thing, and it definitely reduces the amount of time I actually use it - i wish I had sprung for the CF version, but it is about twice as much. and of course the head is the next issue - they can be pretty heavy and wipe out the gains. Go for a magnesium alloy and choose carefully!

I have a 141RC head, and it is a hassle to use. Heavy too - It's more suited to studio use IMO - I should have asked more questions before buying!

[_aravena]

^Quite. Like I said, I don't need an expensive tripod but I didn't want some cheap plastic thing since I know they can fall in the breeze. So I went the route of Amvona, affordable but well made, and does what I need.

[TheHoff]

Franlky, if I had the Gitzo tripod before getting the monopod, I would have bought a Gitzo.

Funny, I said the exact same thing this morning. The Manfrotto monopod is nice... until it is compared to a Gitzo.

[DocFrankenstein]

i never agreed with that argument. It is really about fitness for purpose and an analysis of that requires clear understanding of intended usage. For example, if all I wanna do is drive a few miles to and from work on busy city roads why shell out for a Bentley?

In extreme conditions I see the argument holding but most shooters I guess don't use their tripod on extreme conditions. Well you could say 'just in case' ... but you apply that to everything you buy then most of us would either go bankrupt or die before we saved enough for the ideal car, house, suit, TV, etc.

I'm sure you can get great results with a best buy tripod when used entirely within its limitations. The key when buying is knowing what you indend to do and then buy appropriately. There isn't an implicite 'upgrade path' to gear. It is just a choice made either to look good or because you wanna feel good by owning the best or because there is a specific need that existing gear can't meet.
Yes, I agree.

But, what's extreme conditions? Purty pictures happen when there's wind and when it's either early or late in the day. So the light levels are low.

So, when you're shooting at slow shutter speeds in windy conditions... do you know how much of a difference the tripod makes?

[steved110]

Most of the stuff I have read on tripods implies you need something heavy to absorb vibration and to not flex. That physical property comes with a weight implication. CF reduces that - so it's good. Photo mags regualry review entry to medium-level pods, and the cheapos always score badly for build quality and stability, good for weight and portability.

My initial choice was based on the feeling that while I wanted a good quality pod, I would not use it that often anyway so the extra weight was worth saving some money for. i feel a little differently now, and am thinking about selling this one and going CF...

My previous tripod was a cheap ( ish) Jessops Atlantic model, all plastic and aluminium with a crank shaft...wobbled badly with anything other than a kit lens on it, and I ebayed it for a staggering loss, I think the buyer got a practically new tripod that cost me £45 , for about a tenner...why don't i ever get bargains on ebay?

[JohnJ80]

)

Ok, back to the question at hand. Is carbon fiber worth the extra money. How much money is it usually. $100 dollars more? 200 dollars more? How durable is Carbon Fiber in cold and hot. I have seen other odd brands that do carbon fiber. Are those as good as gitzo or manfrotto?

Are twist locks better than clip type locks? I am guessing I am wanting a 3 segment legs, I know the more segments make it more wobbly. Any suggestions please.

CF is worth it. It has excellent vibration damping qualities and is light weight.

The flip lock vs twists is like taste great/less filling. That said, Manfrotto's CF is many cuts below that of Gitzo.

There are differences in CF. Read this thread from start to finish. It is a long one, but this includes a number of posts by gitzodave (about 3 pages in), the Bogen product manager for Gitzo.

http://www.naturescapes.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=101990&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=20

This will come back to the idea that you can get stable, light and cheap tripods but you can only get any two characteristics in a tripod at a time, you can't get all three. Good CF (i.e. Gitzo) is not cheap, but it works extremely well and will outlast you.

Also read this:
http://bythom.com/support.htm

and
http://markins.com/charlie/report4e6.pdf

Also a good tripod is more than just the material of the legs. It is the rigidity of the legs, the coupling of the leg locks, the stiffness of the spider/casting etc... There are no shortcuts here, you get what you pay for.

J.

[ed rader]

CF is worth it. It has excellent vibration damping qualities and is light weight.

The flip lock vs twists is like taste great/less filling. That said, Manfrotto's CF is many cuts below that of Gitzo.

There are differences in CF. Read this thread from start to finish. It is a long one, but this includes a number of posts by gitzodave (about 3 pages in), the Bogen product manager for Gitzo.

http://www.naturescapes.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=101990&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=20

This will come back to the idea that you can get stable, light and cheap tripods but you can only get any two characteristics in a tripod at a time, you can't get all three. Good CF (i.e. Gitzo) is not cheap, but it works extremely well and will outlast you.

Also read this:
http://bythom.com/support.htm

and
http://markins.com/charlie/report4e6.pdf

Also a good tripod is more than just the material of the legs. It is the rigidity of the legs, the coupling of the leg locks, the stiffness of the spider/casting etc... There are no shortcuts here, you get what you pay for.

J.

as long as you believe that it will be true :D!

ed rader

[JohnJ80]

Ok, you mean that you don't get what you pay for? That tips a ton of economics theory on its ear. But, hey, I could be wrong.

J.

[ed rader]

Ok, you mean that you don't get what you pay for? That tips a ton of economics theory on its ear. But, hey, I could be wrong.

J.


when it comes to gitzo tripods i feel like i'm on a rolex forum.

rolex's are fine watches and they have a durable in-house movement but they aren't the best watches made just one of the best promoted, marketed and the watch that everyone seeking status wants to be seen with.

now, i have closely checked out the gitzo tripods and they have the best fit and finish of any tripod that i've seen and yes i would say they are the best, and i'll probably own one some day when i've run out of things to buy for my camera hobby.

but if you're telling me that you cannot equally stabilize a camera with a tripod costing half as much i just don't buy it.

ed rader

[jrsforums]

when it comes to gitzo tripods i feel like i'm on a rolex forum.

rolex's are fine watches and they have a durable in-house movement but they aren't the best watches made just one of the best promoted, marketed and the watch that everyone seeking status wants to be seen with.

now, i have closely checked out the gitzo tripods and they have the best fit and finish of any tripod that i've seen and yes i would say they are the best, and i'll probably own one some day when i've run out of things to buy for my camera hobby.

but if you're telling me that you cannot equally stabilize a camera with a tripod costing half as much i just don't buy it.

ed rader

Well, I prefer Baume et Mercier in watches......but Gitzo in tripods.

Ya pays yer money, ya get's yer choice.

[SlowBlink]

Well I have a cheap Slik tripod that's light but pretty solid. It doesn't handle vibrations nearly as well as the five or six hundred dollar CF's so I just take a few extra shots a couple seconds apart. There, saved myself a couple hundred dollars.

Course if I was birding/macro/astro I'd need a real one.

[DocFrankenstein]

when it comes to gitzo tripods i feel like i'm on a rolex forum.

rolex's are fine watches and they have a durable in-house movement but they aren't the best watches made just one of the best promoted, marketed and the watch that everyone seeking status wants to be seen with.

now, i have closely checked out the gitzo tripods and they have the best fit and finish of any tripod that i've seen and yes i would say they are the best, and i'll probably own one some day when i've run out of things to buy for my camera hobby.

but if you're telling me that you cannot equally stabilize a camera with a tripod costing half as much i just don't buy it.

ed rader
You've never seen a linhof tripod?

[Hogloff]

when it comes to gitzo tripods i feel like i'm on a rolex forum.

rolex's are fine watches and they have a durable in-house movement but they aren't the best watches made just one of the best promoted, marketed and the watch that everyone seeking status wants to be seen with.

now, i have closely checked out the gitzo tripods and they have the best fit and finish of any tripod that i've seen and yes i would say they are the best, and i'll probably own one some day when i've run out of things to buy for my camera hobby.

but if you're telling me that you cannot equally stabilize a camera with a tripod costing half as much i just don't buy it.

ed rader

Ed, totally agree with you here. I'm a little tired of hearing about the story of everyone eventually ending up with a $600 Gitzo. That's bunk. I have a feisol setup that has served me well. Have not lost any shots because of the tripod. Saved $300 over a Gitzo. I used a 2nd hand Manfrotto 3021 tripod of many years -- cost me a whole $75. Strong and stable and can stand up to any wind I ever shot in. Only reason I switched to a CF Feisol is for the weight and compactness as I am doing a lot of trekking through the Rockies and needed something lighter / smaller. Looked at Gitzo, but saved myself 1/2 the price and have been very happy with my decision.

I wonder if all these people who recommend Gitzo to start off because you'll eventually get there also take the same approach with their cameras and lenses. Do they own the best ( D3 / 1DIII / 1DSIII ) or maybe some medium format digital back...because they will eventually wind up there anyway.

The other thing I get a little tired about is the constant quote of a couple of articles as if they were gospel.

[DocFrankenstein]

I wonder if all these people who recommend Gitzo to start off because you'll eventually get there also take the same approach with their cameras and lenses. Do they own the best ( D3 / 1DIII / 1DSIII ) or maybe some medium format digital back...because they will eventually wind up there anyway.
I can't speak for "all those people", just for myself.

Yes, I do try to buy the best once and then just use it. The times I bought something cheap and had it break or not work persuaded me that that's the philosophy I want to live by.

The other thing I get a little tired about is the constant quote of a couple of articles as if they were gospel.
Not gospel. It's just easier to post a link than to retype it. I also can't cut and paste, because of the copyright issues.

[ed rader]

Ed, totally agree with you here. I'm a little tired of hearing about the story of everyone eventually ending up with a $600 Gitzo. That's bunk. I have a feisol setup that has served me well. Have not lost any shots because of the tripod. Saved $300 over a Gitzo. I used a 2nd hand Manfrotto 3021 tripod of many years -- cost me a whole $75. Strong and stable and can stand up to any wind I ever shot in. Only reason I switched to a CF Feisol is for the weight and compactness as I am doing a lot of trekking through the Rockies and needed something lighter / smaller. Looked at Gitzo, but saved myself 1/2 the price and have been very happy with my decision.

I wonder if all these people who recommend Gitzo to start off because you'll eventually get there also take the same approach with their cameras and lenses. Do they own the best ( D3 / 1DIII / 1DSIII ) or maybe some medium format digital back...because they will eventually wind up there anyway.

The other thing I get a little tired about is the constant quote of a couple of articles as if they were gospel.


if i have to hear about that special carbon fiber just one more time i swear i'll barf ;)!

ed rader

[TheHoff]

The Gitzo carbon fiber really gives my 5D images that POP.

[jrsforums]

if i have to hear about that special carbon fiber just one more time i swear i'll barf ;)!

ed rader

Tired of being on a fiber diet, huh? :lol:

[Vermin87]

I'm in the Cal Poly Supermileage club, and our car is built almost entirely with carbon fiber. It's very strong, but it cost us about $10,000 in carbon fiber to build the faring. Thanks to a frame that only weighs 6lbs though, we're able to get 1900MPG...yes, one-thousand nine-hundred miles per gallon. We're hoping to break 2000MPG this spring at our competition.

Carbon fiber is very strong, light-weight and resistant to changes in temperature, as long as it is weaved properly. Is it worth it? That's up to you to decide. My tripod weighs around 10lbs but it doesn't budge. If that isn't okay for you, then get a carbon fiber one.

[Tsmith]

My tripod weighs around 10lbs but it doesn't budge. If that isn't okay for you, then get a carbon fiber one.

Wouldn't won't to tote that on 5+ mile hikes with 1500'+ elevation gain. The very reason I'm coming on board the CF bandwagon this time around.

[ed rader]

Tired of being on a fiber diet, huh? :lol:


i'm actually a huge fan of CF. i started using carbon fiber forks on my road bikes right after greg lemond made them popular.

and i've owned two road bikes that were made of carbon fiber: one was a monocoque kestrel.

i also love titanium. i had my wedding band custom made from titanium inlaid with gold.

today the only bike i own is a titanium litespeed pisgah with a rigid carbon fiber fork.

my point is i understand the benefits of space age materials and yes i know that not all CF is equal.

but were talking about tripods not race bikes.

i've gotta hand it to gitzo because they make a sexy product and they know how to market it.

ed rader

[ed rader]

Wouldn't won't to tote that on 5+ mile hikes with 1500'+ elevation gain. The very reason I'm coming on board the CF bandwagon this time around.


for your specific purpose and your love of landscapes i think you made the right choice :D.

ed rader

[condyk]

So, when you're shooting at slow shutter speeds in windy conditions... do you know how much of a difference the tripod makes?

i am a fair weather photographer so that is not a 'fitness for purpose' issue I worry about :p

Seriously, if I was doin' that I would hang my bag from the hook and give the thing some added stability.

I checked out the Gitzo super-light jobbies in my local Jessops before my last Africa trip with the 110% commitment to buy one. However, I was not impressed with the build or feel and I wasn't willing to go beyond £300/$600US for something i know would hardly get use. I wanted light and ease of use (I like flip locks) and confidence in build. I actually prefered my current 'frotto 190 so bought it. I am happy with it.

Gitzo isn't the end of the rainbow because the rainbow ends up in different places for different people. CF as a technology seems great. The Feisol and Dynatrans are also pretty great bang for ya buck. a tripod that is carried and used gets better results than one left at home. Folks can just decided what their budget is and get recommendations at any level. They'll do good.

[Tareq]

I don't want to add more than what everyone said.
I have the latest tripod is Gitzo GT5540LS and i can tell it is about same or lighter than my Manfrotto 190XProB+804RC2.
And i was using my tripod Gitzo G1540T as traveler and really it helped me alot and i am so happy with it, maybe not so sturdy for little heavy equipment but i handle that.

[r.morales]

1st -CF tripods are not the lightest , strongest or even the bestest .
2nd - Pound for pound CF is generally has the most strength - BUT it depends on how it is put together .
3rd - CF generally starts breaking inside 1st - no cracks or other signs of problems . [ fishing poles and golf clubs . ]
4th -Read the warranty on CF's

[Tareq]

1st -CF tripods are not the lightest , strongest or even the bestest .
2nd - Pound for pound CF is generally has the most strength - BUT it depends on how it is put together .
3rd - CF generally starts breaking inside 1st - no cracks or other signs of problems . [ fishing poles and golf clubs . ]
4th -Read the warranty on CF's

Too bad, we spent on some of CFs already :(

[JohnJ80]

if i have to hear about that special carbon fiber just one more time i swear i'll barf ;)!

ed rader

Then don't read those threads.

I get tired of the opposing view that cheap is just as good. So what?

That's the whole problem with tripod specifications. There is no standard and there is no specification that you can really compare unit to unit and mfg to mfg and that is a problem. Then you get a lot of confusion in comparing fit and finish and trying to extrapolate that to image quality.

So, if you feel that what has been presented is incorrect, I'd love to see any testing you've done that shows the relative performance in a quantitive sense. Then you could prove the opposing view wrong and we could all talk about something else.

J

[ed rader]

Then don't read those threads.

I get tired of the opposing view that cheap is just as good. So what?

That's the whole problem with tripod specifications. There is no standard and there is no specification that you can really compare unit to unit and mfg to mfg and that is a problem. Then you get a lot of confusion in comparing fit and finish and trying to extrapolate that to image quality.

So, if you feel that what has been presented is incorrect, I'd love to see any testing you've done that shows the relative performance in a quantitive sense. Then you could prove the opposing view wrong and we could all talk about something else.

J


yep. i'm not into tripod worship or rocket science. and no tests are forthcoming :D.

ed rader

[peterbj7]

I don't know the answer but I do know the question - the most significant factor by far in a tripod (beyond the obvious like height and stability, and to a lesser extent weight) is vibration damping. I had one years ago (no idea of the brand) that damped vibrations very well, but that was just used with a rangefinder camera. I haven't so far seen one for a hefty SLR/telephoto that I regard as good. You can add quite effective vibration damping to a tripod, but of course it increases its weight & bulk and slows down its use.

[DocFrankenstein]

1st -CF tripods are not the lightest , strongest or even the bestest .
What is the bestest?

4th -Read the warranty on CF's
What does it say? My gitzo just has something like limited lifetime warranty with reasonable exploitation.

[peterbj7]

Carbon fibre has an explosive failure mode - push it too far and it shatters into myriads of tiny jagged fragments. I don't know whether this is at all age dependent as is the case with aluminium, which tends to crystallise over time. Slowly mind, though not as slowly as glass. Neither material bends much before it breaks. Steel on the other hand is very much more elastic and normally will never shatter. Depending on the alloy it may have a very strong tendency to return to it's original shape when deformed. One reason it still makes the best bicycle tubing for anything other than track racing.

[DocFrankenstein]

Carbon fibre has an explosive failure mode - push it too far and it shatters into myriads of tiny jagged fragments. I don't know whether this is at all age dependent as is the case with aluminium, which tends to crystallise over time. Slowly mind, though not as slowly as glass. Neither material bends much before it breaks. Steel on the other hand is very much more elastic and normally will never shatter. Depending on the alloy it may have a very strong tendency to return to it's original shape when deformed. One reason it still makes the best bicycle tubing for anything other than track racing.
Yes, I've noticed my "better" aluminum frame hits my gonads very effectively every time there's a bump. The steel on the other hand dampens it.

I never heard about aluminum crystallizing though. Does it occur under stress?

I wouldn't want a steel tripod though. It will vibrate even more than aluminum does.

[slimninj4]

Looking at the Giottos line I see the CF tripods are about 1-1.5 lb less than the alum ones. Now I only bring my tripod out to a party or downtown DC so that would not affect me much. If I was to do 15 mile treks in the mountains that is a different story.

Reading one of this months mags from the UK they did a high end review of fiesol, gitzo, giotto and a few others. They said the gitzo was good but over priced. I think the fiesol came out on top by a few percent.

[JohnJ80]

Carbon fibre has an explosive failure mode - push it too far and it shatters into myriads of tiny jagged fragments. I don't know whether this is at all age dependent as is the case with aluminium, which tends to crystallise over time. Slowly mind, though not as slowly as glass. Neither material bends much before it breaks. Steel on the other hand is very much more elastic and normally will never shatter. Depending on the alloy it may have a very strong tendency to return to it's original shape when deformed. One reason it still makes the best bicycle tubing for anything other than track racing.

The explosive failure mode would require a very high load against the capacity of the tubing. That is not the case in tripods. They become ineffective long before (orders of magnitude) before they catastrophically fail.

I'd debate the bicycle tubing claim. I have both a CF bike and a chrome moly bike - I'll take the CF one every time for ride quality and performance.

J.

[pturton]

Yeah, steel tubing just buckets and deforms into a useless mess when it is over stressed as does aluminium tubing. I suppose if I sat on my CF legs they would shatter but any tripod of the same weight of any material would also be irrepairably damaged.

The GT2530 is reportedly cabable of holding a small person's weight (150 lbs) - my 3 lb. GT2530 easily supports 86 lb. and has faster vibration dampening than my 5 lb. aluminium legset which will also support a similar load.

The original poster asked, "Ok, back to the question at hand. Is carbon fiber worth the extra money. How much money is it usually. $100 dollars more? 200 dollars more? How durable is Carbon Fiber in cold and hot. I have seen other odd brands that do carbon fiber. Are those as good as gitzo or manfrotto?"


Yes the CF is worth the extra money to those that need light weight solid support. Is a Rolex worth its price - not to me since a Timex works as well.

How much extra money - never looked at the difference because I usually buy what I want to fit my needs.

How durable in hot/cold - as I mentioned, it is used in space on the Galileo telescope.

Are the odd brands and knock-off products as good as the original - _never_, because they cut more corners than the engineering of their own product.

As for bicycles - my 20 + year old 10 speed mountain bike which weighs a ton still works for me even though it is a bit rusty.

Have Gitzo CF tripods ever failed? - yes.

[pturton]

Another question to ask yourself - Will you feel guilty for spending all those extra hard earned dollars for the tripod and ball head you think you want or think you need? If so buy a lower grade clone, knock off or odd brand.

[ed rader]

Carbon fibre has an explosive failure mode - push it too far and it shatters into myriads of tiny jagged fragments. I don't know whether this is at all age dependent as is the case with aluminium, which tends to crystallise over time. Slowly mind, though not as slowly as glass. Neither material bends much before it breaks. Steel on the other hand is very much more elastic and normally will never shatter. Depending on the alloy it may have a very strong tendency to return to it's original shape when deformed. One reason it still makes the best bicycle tubing for anything other than track racing.


none of the pro teams use steel tubing. they all ride CF and aluminum. i'll take titanium over any other frame material but you won't see it used much in the peloton because of cost.

ed rader

[Phil Light]

I think the most important thing that seems to have been overlooked here is that carbon fiber looks WAY cooler! And after that, does anything else really matter? 8-)

[bphillips330]

Wow, I love when you type a simple question, and 5 pages later :) it is still going. I guess it was not so simple. I have found all this imformation very usefull. I think i am giong to get the 055/488rc2 set. I would love carbon fiber, but i have a problem of buying WAY more than I realy need. I do like to hike, But this is only once or twice a year on vacation. Realistacly, i can save the 200 or so dollars and use towards a 1.4 tc :D

[Tareq]

Wow, I love when you type a simple question, and 5 pages later :) it is still going. I guess it was not so simple. I have found all this imformation very usefull. I think i am giong to get the 055/488rc2 set. I would love carbon fiber, but i have a problem of buying WAY more than I realy need. I do like to hike, But this is only once or twice a year on vacation. Realistacly, i can save the 200 or so dollars and use towards a 1.4 tc :D

Gitzo GT5540T is about same weight of 055 but more sturdy and CF, sure it will be better choice, if i can remember i saw one of the friends owns 055XProB, i feel it is little heavier than my 5540.

Good luck.

[bphillips330]

Gitzo GT5540T is about same weight of 055 but more sturdy and CF, sure it will be better choice, if i can remember i saw one of the friends owns 055XProB, i feel it is little heavier than my 5540.

Good luck.


How much is a gt5540? I found some L models packages on B&H but they were 1000-2000 dollars:( I am thinking 278 or the other package. How much for those gitzo legs (5540) with a decent head?

[Tareq]

How much is a gt5540? I found some L models packages on B&H but they were 1000-2000 dollars:( I am thinking 278 or the other package. How much for those gitzo legs (5540) with a decent head?

The leg only is $785
head can be vary depends on your need, 488RC2 is $107, $300-400 fr RRS or Markins

[jhom]

I think a 5 series will be overkill for the OP's needs and requirements. A 2 or 3 series Gitzo will do nicely unless he is going for 500mm+ lenses. Once you have a Gitzo there is no looking back.

[Tareq]

I think a 5 series will be overkill for the OP's needs and requirements. A 2 or 3 series Gitzo will do nicely unless he is going for 500mm+ lenses. Once you have a Gitzo there is no looking back.

and thats why i've got 5 series, i can't imagine to get 3 series now and when i upgrade to 500 or 600 or even 800 in the future then i have to go again to 5 series, i think 5 series is including 3 series and above, so i take 1 tripod rather than two in the future, watch the prices of 3 and 5 series, all are expensive and above $500 or 600, so i go for the most sturdy even it is overkill [at least i didn't go with 5560], spend once better than to spend twice or more.

[RPCrowe]

You can either get a CF tripod that supports the same as an aluminum tripod but, weighs less or get a CF tripod of the same weight as the aluminum sticks but is either taller or can support heavier loads - or both.

[jhom]

and thats why i've got 5 series, i can't imagine to get 3 series now and when i upgrade to 500 or 600 or even 800 in the future then i have to go again to 5 series, i think 5 series is including 3 series and above, so i take 1 tripod rather than two in the future, watch the prices of 3 and 5 series, all are expensive and above $500 or 600, so i go for the most sturdy even it is overkill [at least i didn't go with 5560], spend once better than to spend twice or more.

I would agree unless I needed a lighter legset. In that case, I would go with one of the other Gitzo series. At this point, I'm quite happy with my 2 series for general purpose support. I see the 3 and 5 series as special purpose legs.

[Tareq]

I would agree unless I needed a lighter legset. In that case, I would go with one of the other Gitzo series. At this point, I'm quite happy with my 2 series for general purpose support. I see the 3 and 5 series as special purpose legs.

I know, i am happy with my Manfrotto 190XProB and also Gitzo Traveler GT1540T, just i got that 5 series because it seems this year i will have some big investments on gear.

[iacas]

I'm happy with my Gitzo GT2530EX and a the monopod listed in my sig, for a variety of reasons.

I made due with a cheap tripod and monopod for awhile. I won't make that mistake again.

[malla1962]

It's the way it eats vibrations. It's not a homogeneous material like steel or aluminum. It's more like wood and the energy has to pass many times from higher density to lower density materials while it travels. This makes it dissipate very fast.

Overall, CF is worth it. The interesting thing about it is that the model looks the same and maybe weighs one pound less or so. But it can support about 2x the weight of it's aluminum counterpart.

The tripod journey ends with gitzo, might as well buy it from the start. You wasted your money on a best buy tripod and it doesn't work. So you can shell out now or shell out later.

www.bythom.com/support.htm (http://www.bythom.com/support.htm)I agree.;)

[TPG]

On weight,

A gym membership is cheaper than the carbon fiber upgrade. ;)

sissies. :lol:

[foxbat]

On weight,

A gym membership is cheaper than the carbon fiber upgrade. ;)

sissies. :lol:
High altitude + long distance defeats gym membship

- A gym member.

[Tareq]

On weight,

A gym membership is cheaper than the carbon fiber upgrade. ;)

sissies. :lol:

should we have bodybuilding courses for photographers now ;)
70-200 and 400[2.8L] are too heavy, so we need strong photographers, lol

[Tapeman]

I am happy with my Gitzo.

I will replace it when the new ones come out, made from unabtainium.

[Wilt]

should we have bodybuilding courses for photographers now ;)
70-200 and 400[2.8L] are too heavy, so we need strong photographers, lol

No, doing 100 curls with a 1Ds with 24-70 f/2.8L or 30 bench presses with a 1Ds with 70-200 f/2.8L in each hand while waiting for your client to change clothes obviates the need for an official body building program.

[Tsmith]

I am happy with my Gitzo.

I will replace it when the new ones come out, made from unabtainium.

I hope to be happy with mine whenever UPS decides to deliver it _ :neutral:

[DocFrankenstein]

I hope to be happy with mine whenever UPS decides to deliver it _ :neutral:
At least the shipping is going to be cheap.

Yeah, I ordered my weightless strings for a physics project. They had them, but now I got an email saying they can't find em. Must be hard.

[mitchella68]

CF is sexy, I mean how many ladies are going to want a guy with aluminum legs, The gym membership is a great idea so when you run up a hill your respiration and heart rate settle quicker for a better shot. But I do not have either! But I have the Rolex, it works, and it has worn better than several other brands. I am not sold on the CF yet, and I have looked at them, played with them and I suppose I will have to buy one to know if its worth it. Tripods and bags are there ever the perfect one?

[condyk]

Tripods and bags are there ever the perfect one?

No :-)

[blonde]

if it is worth it is really a personal things and it is up to you to decide. for me, i went with a CF Gitzo and even though it was expensive, i couldn't be happier. i tried the budget tripod route and i already watched my entire gear almost falling into the river. i tried the Manfrotto aluminum and even though it was great, i did notice the heavy weight. i finally decided to put my Amex where my mouth is and ordered the 3530 CF from Gitzo. i got that one because i know that many pros use that one on a daily basis and i know that the gitzo can take the abuse. since i got mine, it has been inside the ocean in salt water, it has been in mud all the way up to the tripod head, it has been in the wetlands in Florida with the legs stuck deep into the mud, it has been on sandy beaches with sand that got all the way into the legs. and guess what? all it takes it 5 mins cleaning job and it is good as new.

for me, the $600 that i paid for it was money well spent. i promised myself that i will not save any money on anything that is support related. my head was also $600 and again, money well spent and i enjoy it every time i use it.

[malla1962]

Tripods and bags are there ever the perfect one? Tripods yes bags no.;) I have about 5 bags and one Gitzo CF tripod:D

[r.morales]

Where does the vibration come from that the CF will dampen ? If I use the non CF does that mean I should leave the IS on when on tripod ? I'm confused ???

[jhom]

Where does the vibration come from that the CF will dampen ? If I use the non CF does that mean I should leave the IS on when on tripod ? I'm confused ???

Here is the Markins vibration study that should help explain some of the vibration: http://markins.com/charlie/report.html

[DocFrankenstein]

Where does the vibration come from that the CF will dampen ? If I use the non CF does that mean I should leave the IS on when on tripod ? I'm confused ???
Wind, pressing the shutter, adjusting the camera...

If you're shooting with a telephoto, you might even be holding the camera and not using the cable release.

[agedbriar]

Fancy a Carl Zeiss tripod?

Here you go...

http://www.zeiss.com/C12568CF00206298/EmbedTitelIntern/TripodSalesFlyer.pdf/$File/Tripod+sales+flyer.pdf

[malla1962]

Fancy a Carl Zeiss tripod?

Here you go...

http://www.zeiss.com/C12568CF00206298/EmbedTitelIntern/TripodSalesFlyer.pdf/$File/Tripod+sales+flyer.pdf
its not very light.;)

[agedbriar]

Exactly the same weight as a Manfrotto 055 ... which it is.

But it bears the Carl Zeiss name and price tag.

[malla1962]

Exactly the same weight as a Manfrotto 055 ... which it is.

But it bears the Carl Zeiss name and price tag.I had the 055proB for a while but found it not very stable with the column extended:( But I dont have this problem with the Gitzo.:D

[r.morales]

jhom - thank you - It explained a lot and answered questions I didn't know I had .
My bogen 3246 with the 186 head took better / sharper pics than with the 3047 head . I also noticed a little difference in sharpness when I used a QR plate with out the cork .[ sharper with cork ]
It also explained why pictures taken at f/4 are sharper than at f/16 . I like as much DOF as I can get , but you notice the difference when you start cropping . [ vibration explained why ]
From what the article said - IS mite introduce vibration at smaller f stops [ to me f/16 is smaller than f/4 .
I learned a long time ago that my pictures were sharper when hand held at games [ I'm in cheap seats ] when trains go by , at water falls and weddings that are close to freeways .
I am reading about tripods because 2 years ago I was in Mexico at a wedding . I have a house there and had an old bogen tripod [ it was there about 10 years ] Anyway it was ugly [ tarnished and scratched ] and a nephew is now a photography there - loved the 'pod and wife said she gave it too him . Go buy another . I figured I would get one last year but the only ones I found were Wall-mart specials .
From what I am reading - it's CF time .

[jhom]

jhom - thank you - It explained a lot and answered questions I didn't know I had .
My bogen 3246 with the 186 head took better / sharper pics than with the 3047 head . I also noticed a little difference in sharpness when I used a QR plate with out the cork .[ sharper with cork ]
It also explained why pictures taken at f/4 are sharper than at f/16 . I like as much DOF as I can get , but you notice the difference when you start cropping . [ vibration explained why ]
From what the article said - IS mite introduce vibration at smaller f stops [ to me f/16 is smaller than f/4 .
I learned a long time ago that my pictures were sharper when hand held at games [ I'm in cheap seats ] when trains go by , at water falls and weddings that are close to freeways .
I am reading about tripods because 2 years ago I was in Mexico at a wedding . I have a house there and had an old bogen tripod [ it was there about 10 years ] Anyway it was ugly [ tarnished and scratched ] and a nephew is now a photography there - loved the 'pod and wife said she gave it too him . Go buy another . I figured I would get one last year but the only ones I found were Wall-mart specials .
From what I am reading - it's CF time .

I'm glad the article helped. IS helps some but won't get rid of all the vibration. Vibration is everywhere. CF helps in reducing some of the vibration.

A tripod is an essential tool in photography. There are all different types of tripods. In my opinion a good CF tripod is like having a good lens. A Gitzo CF tripod is equivalent to having a Canon L lens.

[Tsmith]

UPS finally delivered my new Gitzo GT0530 + Kirk BH-3 ballhead. Totally blown away by the sturdiness of such a compact designed tripod. This will fit the bill for my hiking setup perfectly.

Holds my EOS 40D + 70-200 f/4L with ease and feel very confident it'd support the 300 f/4L IS in the future.

Excellent investment for my needs

[TPG]

Where does the vibration come from that the CF will dampen ? If I use the non CF does that mean I should leave the IS on when on tripod ? I'm confused ???

Harmonic resonance I'd guess. (Without reading the pdf)
You can kill it by putting something against one of the legs of an aluminum tripod.

[peterbj7]

I'm using a 5d with a 100-400L IS lens. I am seriously considering getting a 1Ds III. Which model of Gitzo should I buy to support these setups properly?

[TheHoff]

2530, 2540, 3530, 3540 (in any of the different variations)

xx30 indicates 3 leg sections, xx40 indicates 4 so they fold smaller

2xxx indicates the lighter 2 series, 3 indicates the beefier line suggested for 400mm+. 3540 is really the sweet spot, IMO.

[iacas]

2530, 2540, 3530, 3540 (in any of the different variations)

xx30 indicates 3 leg sections, xx40 indicates 4 so they fold smaller

2xxx indicates the lighter 2 series, 3 indicates the beefier line suggested for 400mm+. 3540 is really the sweet spot, IMO.
I second that. I have the 2530 and love it. I like the EX model too, since I think that changes up how the column works (that it has one). Comes in handy for flower shots, among other things.

[Tsmith]

My ultimate lite weight backpacking setup.

http://www.pbase.com/smith_xt/image/93734553/original.jpg

[TheHoff]

Wow, I've never seen the 0xxx series nor have I seen one dominated by the ballhead like that. Congrats on a great rig!

[mcteague]

UPS finally delivered my new Gitzo GT0530 + Kirk BH-3 ballhead. Totally blown away by the sturdiness of such a compact designed tripod. This will fit the bill for my hiking setup perfectly.

Holds my EOS 40D + 70-200 f/4L with ease and feel very confident it'd support the 300 f/4L IS in the future.

Excellent investment for my needs

I've been looking for a lightweight hiking tripod as well. My old Bogen 3021 is just too big for this application. I have the exact setup, 40D and 70-200 f/4L, and worried the GT0530 would be too little support. Glad to hear your setup is working. Now I just have to convince myself that it is worth the money over an aluminum Manfrotto 190XPROB or the new carbon version.

Tim McTeague

[JohnJ80]

UPS finally delivered my new Gitzo GT0530 + Kirk BH-3 ballhead. Totally blown away by the sturdiness of such a compact designed tripod. This will fit the bill for my hiking setup perfectly.

Holds my EOS 40D + 70-200 f/4L with ease and feel very confident it'd support the 300 f/4L IS in the future.

Excellent investment for my needs

At 200mm and certainly 300mm you will be greatly exceeding the specs of this tripod if it the legs are fully extended.

http://www.gitzo.com/Jahia/site/gitzo/pid/4765/cache/bypass?gitzoView=flatView&curLevel=1CAT&curFamilyId=NONE&curMarketId=MARKET%3AMKT1&actualPathCategoryKey=1CAT%3AAAA1%3A2CAT%3ABB59%3A 3CAT%3ACC49%3A4CAT%3AD464&productContainer_windowsize=10&ctnscroll_productContainer=&kindOfProductCollectionRequest=productDetail&detailPid=5267

The max focal length recommended is 135mm (I would expect that to be effective) and recommended is 75mm.

I think you might be over judging the stability of this tripod a bit.

J.

[bphillips330]

My ultimate lite weight backpacking setup.

http://www.pbase.com/smith_xt/image/93734553/original.jpg

I hate to ask, how much was this set?

[pixelhack]

CF reduces or dampens vibrations?

I am a flyfisherman, and I build flyrods as well. CF is used as a fishing rod material (not just fly fishing) because it TRANSMITS vibrations from the line/fly/lure/fish to the fisherman's hand better than other materials. In fact, to get a more sensitive rod, you can use graphite/CF components for the grip and/or reel seat as well so that eveything between your hand and the fish (with the exception of the line) is graphite. A line that doesn't stretch will also increase the sensitivity. With a quality graphite rod, you feel even the tiniest vibrations MUCH better than you do with other materials like fiberglass or bamboo that dampen vibrations more than CF.

I'm a novice when it comes to pro-level tripods, so I will take everyone's word for it that CF is more stable for photography. Maybe is has to do with the combination of the tubes' stiffness, diameter, thickness, etc... Tripod legs are not the same size as fishing rods, of course. The stiffer and more rigid a material is, then the more resistant to small movement or vibration it becomes. Vibration dampening materials are typically things like rubber and very flexible materials. CF isn't a dampening material, but it can be stiff enough to resist vibration to start with. If one end of a piece of CF vibrates, you'll feel it on the other end very well though. It would take a larger force to move a very rigid object and make it wiggle enough to blur a photo, so I'm not trying to argue with the effectiveness of expensive CF tripods. Just semantics, I guess.

[blonde]

CF reduces or dampens vibrations?

I am a flyfisherman, and I build flyrods as well. CF is used as a fishing rod material (not just fly fishing) because it TRANSMITS vibrations from the line/fly/lure/fish to the fisherman's hand better than other materials. In fact, to get a more sensitive rod, you can use graphite/CF components for the grip and/or reel seat as well so that eveything between your hand and the fish (with the exception of the line) is graphite. A line that doesn't stretch will also increase the sensitivity. With a quality graphite rod, you feel even the tiniest vibrations MUCH better than you do with other materials like fiberglass or bamboo that dampen vibrations more than CF.

I'm a novice when it comes to pro-level tripods, so I will take everyone's word for it that CF is more stable for photography. Maybe is has to do with the combination of the tubes' stiffness, diameter, thickness, etc... Tripod legs are not the same size as fishing rods, of course. The stiffer and more rigid a material is, then the more resistant to small movement or vibration it becomes. Vibration dampening materials are typically things like rubber and very flexible materials. CF isn't a dampening material, but it can be stiff enough to resist vibration to start with. If one end of a piece of CF vibrates, you'll feel it on the other end very well though. It would take a larger force to move a very rigid object and make it wiggle enough to blur a photo, so I'm not trying to argue with the effectiveness of expensive CF tripods. Just semantics, I guess.

this is the first time i have heard of this honestly. from everything that i know, CF is always used because it dampens vibration. from car aero parts to tripods, one of the main reasons to use CF is because it does not transmit vibration...

[Wilt]

CF reduces or dampens vibrations?

I am a flyfisherman, and I build flyrods as well. CF is used as a fishing rod material (not just fly fishing) because it TRANSMITS vibrations from the line/fly/lure/fish to the fisherman's hand better than other materials. In fact, to get a more sensitive rod, you can use graphite/CF components for the grip and/or reel seat as well so that eveything between your hand and the fish (with the exception of the line) is graphite. A line that doesn't stretch will also increase the sensitivity. With a quality graphite rod, you feel even the tiniest vibrations MUCH better than you do with other materials like fiberglass or bamboo that dampen vibrations more than CF.

I'm a novice when it comes to pro-level tripods, so I will take everyone's word for it that CF is more stable for photography. Maybe is has to do with the combination of the tubes' stiffness, diameter, thickness, etc... Tripod legs are not the same size as fishing rods, of course. The stiffer and more rigid a material is, then the more resistant to small movement or vibration it becomes. Vibration dampening materials are typically things like rubber and very flexible materials. CF isn't a dampening material, but it can be stiff enough to resist vibration to start with. If one end of a piece of CF vibrates, you'll feel it on the other end very well though. It would take a larger force to move a very rigid object and make it wiggle enough to blur a photo, so I'm not trying to argue with the effectiveness of expensive CF tripods. Just semantics, I guess.


I would speculate that the direction of the carbon fibers within a fishing pole are oriented specifically for the transmission of the important vibrations to the fisherman's hand. OTOH, Gitzo uses multiple layers of CF, each in a different direction so they are in six directions, as I recall. So by having these directions, some layers are to dampen vibration.

[pixelhack]

Hmmm.... Fishing rods are often built with multiple layers too, but they're smaller diameter and thinner walled to make them flexible. This allows them to move/oscillate in reaction to very small forces, unlike a sturdy tripod leg.

Again, I'm not saying CF tripods aren't stable. Just saying that marketing hype about "vibration dampening" may be just that. They likely resist vibration more than they dampen vibration. Either way, it would lead to a sharp photo and a happy photog. :)

[DocFrankenstein]

CF reduces or dampens vibrations?

I am a flyfisherman, and I build flyrods as well. CF is used as a fishing rod material (not just fly fishing) because it TRANSMITS vibrations from the line/fly/lure/fish to the fisherman's hand better than other materials. In fact, to get a more sensitive rod, you can use graphite/CF components for the grip and/or reel seat as well so that eveything between your hand and the fish (with the exception of the line) is graphite. A line that doesn't stretch will also increase the sensitivity. With a quality graphite rod, you feel even the tiniest vibrations MUCH better than you do with other materials like fiberglass or bamboo that dampen vibrations more than CF.

I'm a novice when it comes to pro-level tripods, so I will take everyone's word for it that CF is more stable for photography. Maybe is has to do with the combination of the tubes' stiffness, diameter, thickness, etc... Tripod legs are not the same size as fishing rods, of course. The stiffer and more rigid a material is, then the more resistant to small movement or vibration it becomes. Vibration dampening materials are typically things like rubber and very flexible materials. CF isn't a dampening material, but it can be stiff enough to resist vibration to start with. If one end of a piece of CF vibrates, you'll feel it on the other end very well though. It would take a larger force to move a very rigid object and make it wiggle enough to blur a photo, so I'm not trying to argue with the effectiveness of expensive CF tripods. Just semantics, I guess.
You're comparing a CF fishing rod with what? Bamboo? Plastic?

You'll feel the vibrations better because the rod is lighter.

On the other hand for tripod, the thing that matters is how fast the energy is lost when it travels through the material. CF does a better job than steel or aluminum, because it's not homogeneous.

[Tsmith]

At 200mm and certainly 300mm you will be greatly exceeding the specs of this tripod if it the legs are fully extended.

http://www.gitzo.com/Jahia/site/gitzo/pid/4765/cache/bypass?gitzoView=flatView&curLevel=1CAT&curFamilyId=NONE&curMarketId=MARKET%3AMKT1&actualPathCategoryKey=1CAT%3AAAA1%3A2CAT%3ABB59%3A 3CAT%3ACC49%3A4CAT%3AD464&productContainer_windowsize=10&ctnscroll_productContainer=&kindOfProductCollectionRequest=productDetail&detailPid=5267

The max focal length recommended is 135mm (I would expect that to be effective) and recommended is 75mm.

I think you might be over judging the stability of this tripod a bit.

J.

Unless you have actually seen or better yet used this combination its kinda hard to pass judgment. I sold a Manfrotto 3001BD and side by side this tripod is more sturdy with the Kirk BH-3 ball head. Spoke with a few users over at naturescapes.net that use it as such without any problems, just have to use caution as I do with all my gear anyway. As long as the lens has a collar as the attaching point and not the camera it becomes a very stable setup.

It'll indeed serve my purpose as intended.

I hate to ask, how much was this set?

$364.95 tripod & $255 + $55 for head and plate.

[JohnJ80]

Hmmm.... Fishing rods are often built with multiple layers too, but they're smaller diameter and thinner walled to make them flexible. This allows them to move/oscillate in reaction to very small forces, unlike a sturdy tripod leg.

Again, I'm not saying CF tripods aren't stable. Just saying that marketing hype about "vibration dampening" may be just that. They likely resist vibration more than they dampen vibration. Either way, it would lead to a sharp photo and a happy photog. :)

I also believe it matters on how it is laid up. CF, done properly, does a great job of dampening vibration but retaining its rigidity. That's why they make bike frames out of it now.

J.

[r.morales]

Anybody know anything about this CF pod ?
Davis & Sanford 70" @ 47th st photo