Help Picking Tripod

[norcal99]

I know this may be common knowledge to all of you but I'm totally new to digital photography and am looking into buying a tripod. I've been scanning B&H's website and wanted to know if there really is that much of a difference between a $20 walmart tripod and the $100+ ones that B&H sells. I just want something to shoot in low lighting situations and be able to do relatively quick panning shots. Any recommendations?

Thanks,
Mike

[Deckyon]

There is so much difference it is scary.

Here is what I use and I cannot recommend it highly enough. One of the best investments you can make behind the camera:
Manfrotto 3021PRO Tripod - roughly $129
Manfrotto 322RC2 Tripod Head - roughly $119

[booggerg]

For still cameras, the advantage really is in the heft and stiffness of the tripod. If youre using a light camera, the walmart tripods are a nice alternative to the heavier pro-sumer ones. I come from a video background and the walmart tripod simply doesn't cut it because we need fluid head movements the pricier tripods provide. You don't need a fluid head for still photography.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Did you see the Sticky file in "Talk about Photography" forum on tripods?

It may be of some help. :)

[Belmondo]

You can learn a lot from watching professionals. People that do things for a living are not given to wasting money on nonessentials. If a pro photographer spends $500-$1000 on a tripod/head, there must be a reason.

I would say the difference between a $29 tripod and a $100 tripod is probably going to be a lot more noticeable than might be apparent between a $100 tripod and a $500 unit. Even so, and inspite of the seemingly small differences in quality/features, few professionals would be caught dead using a $100 tripod.

Thre are some areas where ameteurs will cut some corners and not be seriously handicapped. The $100 tripod would be an example. You'll proabably get a fairly rigid set of legs, and a ho-hum, but adequate pan/tilt head. Maybe you'll even get a quick release feature.

For $29, you're going to get something that is of little use. The legs will not be very stiff, and the head will likely be nearly useless.

Depending on what you plan on using the tripod for, you might be better off buying an inexpensive monopod. Obviously, if you need a tripod, that's not an answer, but if you're just looking for a way of steadying your shots, it could be a lower cost solution. A cheap monopod will still perorm 90% of the function of an expensive monopod, unlike a cheap tripod.

[Marvinspu36]

I had a $40 Velbon tripod with pan-tilt head and quick release. Which was fine for my Olympus C-4000z. But, I quickly found that it was useless for taking pictures in low light with my 20D. The column and pan-tilt head would oscillate everytime I touched or moved the camera. It would take 2-5 seconds for it to settle down. Even the mirror action would cause it to oscillate some. All this resulted in photographs that were just not quite crisp due to the vibrations. This was really evident when shooting with the 200mm lens.

Another major concern was that with my telephoto lens and 20D on the cheap Velbon tripod, I could see the plastic head bending some, which eventually would result in fatigued plastic. I'd hate to loose a couple thousand dollar camera and lens just to save a couple hundred dollars.

I just bought the Bogen 3021BPro with a 488RC2 ball head. I love it. It is rock solid. The ball head is easy to adjust, and has a separate pan adjustment, so you don't have to loosen the ball head to pan. It is definately worth the extra money. You won't regret it. I bought mine with the added spiked feet and an extra quick release plate for $295 including shipping from B&H. It's a small price when you compare it to the cost of all my lenses and the camera. One thing I really like about the 3021BPro tripod is you can mount the column horizontally for taking macro shots, and it will go as low as 8" off the ground.

Whether you use a ball head or pan tilt head will depend on your use. Click here (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=53864</a>) to go to the Sticky Thread on tripod selection. And if you still have questions, then ask away.

[MarkoPolo]

It's confusing, that's for sure. My favorite tripod is the Gitzo 2220, about $210. Aluminum legs, very sturdy and will allow you to set camera in really unusual angle to get close ups of objects on the ground. I use a Kirk BH-3 ball head ($240) with it but a good less expensive alternative is the Giotto's medium ball hea for $80. Hope this helps. Mark

[cactusclay]

It's pretty hard to go wrong with a Bogen/Manfrotto. They are sometimes a bit heavier than some more expensive carbon fiber ones, but they will last a lifetime and do about everything you need. The new pro models have some great features.

[norcal99]

wow thanks for your replies. I never would have known there was so much difference. Looks like I'll bite the bullet and get a good tripod. Thanks!

[Medic1]

You will not be disappointed if you go with a better tripod...trust me. This topic has been beat to death, and not long ago I was one of the ones asking the questions.

I decided to go with a Manfrotto tripod and head. It was a great decision, have not regretted it at all. A friend opted for the cheap alternative. Side by side, his looks like a kids toy compared to the Manfrotto.

[Lioness]

Can someone explain how a monopod may perform 90% of what a tripod will do? They seem like fairly different tools. Also, does a monopod require/use a head like a tripod? Do they have quick release plates?

Also - when shopping for tri/monopods do I need a tripod that will support my camera, lens & head or do I just need to worry about the weight of my gear (ie the description assumes and accounts for putting a head on the tripod)

[Bob_A]

Can someone explain how a monopod may perform 90% of what a tripod will do?

Where did this info come from? Maybe you misread what Belmondo stated in his earlier post. :)

Bob

[HJMinard]

Can someone explain how a monopod may perform 90% of what a tripod will do? They seem like fairly different tools. Also, does a monopod require/use a head like a tripod? Do they have quick release plates?

Also - when shopping for tri/monopods do I need a tripod that will support my camera, lens & head or do I just need to worry about the weight of my gear (ie the description assumes and accounts for putting a head on the tripod)

I don't know if I agree with the percentage thing, but monopods are definitely a lightweight, useful alternative to lugging around and setting up a tripod. It's probably not what you want for landscapes or portraits, but they're fantastic for sports, wildlife, etc. They are far more stable than handheld, and therefore allow for slower shutter speeds and larger lenses.

Monopods do NOT require a head, although many of us like to use this (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=5491&is=REG) tilt head from Manfrotto. It allows a quick switch to portrait orientation. It also includes a quick release setup that - no, is not included with a monopod.

I don't know for sure, but I would assume that the weight limit for tripod legs is for all gear attached ... so you need to determine the weight of your gear and the weight of your chosen head.

[zach]

Follow this link~ http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=53864

Very informative.

[Lioness]

Bob- you are right-it said a cheap monopod does 90% of the job of an expensive monopod- not tripod :)

[Lioness]

zach- thanks for the source. I think it will help a lot!

[Lioness]

hj-so the head states it supports a certain amount of weight (eg 6 lbs) and the legs say they support say 6 lbs too-does that mean I can't have 6 lbs on top of the head because the legs won't support the gear and head?

Hope my questions aren't completely inane-I'm learning! :)

[robertwgross]

If you put a ten-pound lens on a head that is rated for only five pounds, then the head is going to "creep" or slowly allow the lens to droop down. That head simply will not support a heavy lens.

If you put a ten-pound lens and a two-pound camera together on a tripod that is rated for only five pounds, then you stand a major risk of the whole thing tipping over on the least provocation, like a wind gust. Watching a couple of thousand dollars worth of good camera and lenses go over is a sad thing.

Most people want a tripod that is very stiff, and not springy. They want to be able to shoot three shots in a row and have them have the exact same framing. As strange as this may sound, I don't. I want a tripod/head that is slightly springy. When I have a long lens on it, I am able to lean on it a little to perfect the framing of the next shot. I don't want to have to loosen a ball head, or fool with tripod legs. That is for my normal outdoor photography, which normally involves mid- to long lenses and normal shutter speeds in normal light. On the other hand, when you are in dim light, then often you have to shoot with a very long shutter, like 5-10 seconds. In that case, you want the stiff tripod that won't budge at all.

---Bob Gross---

[HJMinard]

hj-so the head states it supports a certain amount of weight (eg 6 lbs) and the legs say they support say 6 lbs too-does that mean I can't have 6 lbs on top of the head because the legs won't support the gear and head?

Hope my questions aren't completely inane-I'm learning! :)

I believe that's correct, Lioness ... if you have six pounds of gear on a 1 pound head that's rated for six pounds, you'll need a tripod or monopod that is rated for at least 7 pounds.

[Lioness]

Bob-would you mind explaining the "springy" effect you use a little more? is the spring only useful when taking quick shutter pictures? I have always been under the impression the whole point of the tripod is to reduce all movement.

[Lioness]

hj- Thanks!

So the monopod sounds like it is a much more versatile and useful tool for everyday use- like if I am out just shooting pictures and walking around but want a little more stability than free-hand. Is this a correct assumption? and if so- what is a good monopod? What kinds of things should I look for in a good one?

[robertwgross]

Bob-would you mind explaining the "springy" effect you use a little more? is the spring only useful when taking quick shutter pictures? I have always been under the impression the whole point of the tripod is to reduce all movement.

The classic purpose of a tripod is to reduce all camera and lens movement to the point where it does not affect the image capture. So, if you are shooting a slow shutter of 5-10 seconds, then you can't have any motion at all for 5-10 seconds.

On the other hand, if you are shooting with faster and faster shutter speeds, then this means there is less time for the camera shake to affect the image capture. Then the opposite of this is true as you get to longer and longer lenses. You have to have relatively little motion with very long lenses (something like the reciprocal of the effective focal length). Then to counter all of that, many of the longer lenses have Image Stabilization, so you really can shoot slower than the reciprocal and it still works fine.

My point is that for the typical outdoor/wildlife shooting I do, and with my typical 100-400 L I.S. lens, I do not need any super rock-solid tripod. I need a moderately stable tripod/platform to shoot from, but it does not need to be anything super. I keep the head tightening controls loose enough that I can still pivot and tilt, and I keep it all loose enough that I can just lean on the whole works and budge it a little more. But, that is just for me. Your mileage may vary.

---Bob Gross---

[DSMITH131]

I use a Manfrotto 3021BPRO Leg & Bogen 3265 Grip Action Head even though i dont like the 3265 (it's useless with big len like 50-500) planning on getting the 410 to replace it

[gary_hendricks]

Here are some tips.


If you need to buy a tripod, you will need to think about what features you consider to be most important. Ideally, we want to have one that is inexpensive, lightweight, and sturdy.


But inexpensive and lightweight tripods are flimsy; sturdy and inexpensive tripods are heavy, while sturdy and lightweight tripods are expensive. Get what I'm trying to say? You need to compromise and think about what's important to you.


Another tip - when inspecting a tripod, extend the legs. Do they slide out smoothly, or make strange scraping noises? Do the locks that hold the sections in place grip tightly?


When you're in the store, actually set the tripod up on the floor with the legs extended and the center column down. Place your hand on the platform where the camera would be. Press down with a few pounds of force. Make sure it feels sturdy.


Another tip is to look at the the platform. Are the controls easy to find and use? Can you rotate the camera to a vertical position easily? Can you level the camera easily, or do you have to adjust the extension of individual legs to correct for uneven ground?

Oh, also consider how low to the ground the tripod allows you to shoot. I frequently take pictures with the camera close to the ground, not only for close up shots of small things, but also, using a wide angle lens, for landscapes.

One accessory that makes tripods much easier to use is called a quick release. A plate screws onto the base of your camera, and a locking platform mounts on the tripod. Then you can snap your camera into place on the tripod instantly without screwing it on and off each time.


Hope this helps. :D

[Avalonthas]

My rule of thumb is if it cant support my weight then it cant support my requirements. (Yes I have balanced myself on instore tripod demo's and broke a few because they couldnt support me (and yes i walked away fast lol)).

[KevC]

My rule of thumb is if it cant support my weight then it cant support my requirements. (Yes I have balanced myself on instore tripod demo's and broke a few because they couldnt support me (and yes i walked away fast lol)).

I'm not calling you fat, but they actually let you balance yourself on store demos? I don't know how much you weigh, lol... but I'd check the specs of the tripod before "getting on"

How many tripods support 100lbs+? :D

[spoolin_photography]

My rule of thumb is if it cant support my weight then it cant support my requirements. (Yes I have balanced myself on instore tripod demo's and broke a few because they couldnt support me (and yes i walked away fast lol)).

ROTFLOL, i cant realy do that im my camera shop, its kinda hard when they know who you are

[HKFEVER]

If you put a ten-pound lens on a head that is rated for only five pounds, then the head is going to "creep" or slowly allow the lens to droop down. That head simply will not support a heavy lens.
---Bob Gross---

I concern about this issue.

I need opinion about:
- Will Manfrotto 441 + Velbon PH-263QL + Velbon QRA-635L(B) quick shoe adapter can hold 1DsMKII + 70-200 IS or 300 IS?
- What head is better than the above Velbon ball head?
- But I like the Velbon's quick release shoe and adapters, because it is bigger than original Manfrotto's and I have couple of them.

[ijohnson]

I remember one time I used a cheap $30 plastic tripod with my camera. It was a 10D with the 70-200 2.8 and the 1.4x extender + battery grip.

It was completely useless. It was just swaying back and forth constantly with no chance for it to stop. The very light breeze was moving the camera. It was pretty funny.

You might want to keep that in mind if you think you might buy a heavier lens or camera set-up some day (assuming you do not already).

Good luck.

[Lioness]

So definitely go with a tripod versus a monopod? Even if most pictures are just I'm walking around and shooting?

[ijohnson]

So definitely go with a tripod versus a monopod? Even if most pictures are just I'm walking around and shooting?

I think they are totally different things. Maybe you should get both. A tripod can serve the same purpose that a monopod does. A monopod cannot be a tripod however. If you can only get one, I would have to go with the tripod then you can save up for the monopod if you think it would be useful.

I've always wanted a nice, extendable carbon fiber walking stick with a nice grip that doubles as a mount. Anyone heard of such a thing? Oh well, I'll just go to bed and hope that I can dream about it tonight.

[straightshooter1965]

Greetings everyone … I am new to this board and new to the scene; I wanted to say hello, drop my suggestion on a mono-pod, and ask about tri-pod “counter-balances”.

I use the Manfrotto “Photo Monopod 679” in the field, and find it quite satisfactory and would buy another if the need presented itself. It’s also one of the few “pods” I feel comfortable mounting my camera on.

The Rebel XT 8mg has a plastic body and the half decent lenses are heavy glass, this is not a marriage made in heaven! Has anyone heard of a “counter-balance” for the Rebel XT?

I shoot other “hardware” also, so I understand how strong plastic can be, but this just seems so unnatural!?!? Just seems destine to fail. Anything????

Peace,

JD

[straightshooter1965]

Greetings all ... I had posted this in a reply yesterday, but since no response, I figured it got buried.

I want to use my tripod more with the 70-300 and 28-135 lenses, but the body of the Rebel XT is Plastic and that "glass" is heavy. The visual of course is the lens simply prying itself apart from the camera!

Does anyone make a "counter balance" attachment for the Rebel to accommodate these lenses?

Peace all,

JD

[Jon]

They're not that heavy. Canon designed the camera to be able to handle the stress. If there was likely to be a problem, they'd make a tripod ring for those lenses like they do with the 70-200 f/2.8s and 100-400 among others.

Manfrotto makes a couple of lens supports (http://www.bogenimaging.us/product/itemlist.php3?manufid=1&sectionid=103) if you're really worried, though.

[storeman]

I had the 75 -300 MKII and that didn't show any sign of leverage problems of the kind you are describing. Not seen the 70-300 so dont know how it compares in size or weight. All the lens I have seen that could possibly cause that kind of problem have the tripod mount as mentioned by Jon.

[cdifoto]

I use my 24-70L on my XT attached to my tripod without problems and it's almost 2x heavier than each of those lenses you mentioned.

[rudgej]

I've got a 70-200 f/4 L lens which is reasonably heavy and use it without problem on my 350D/XT. I've also borrowed a friend's even heavier f2.8 IS version and used that again without problem.

I would say that if you are worried, then why not get a tripod collar and balance the weight that way?

[rudgej]

Oops, everyone was far faster to post about the tripod collar/mount than I was. :o

[straightshooter1965]

Thank you all very much. That pretty much solves that one. I do other "shooting" as well, and quite frankly I've see the Tupperware of the future and it's hardcore, but this particular "fit" just seems odd to me, and worth $60.00 just put my mind at ease. If I break my Camera; my wife will make me wait a long, long time before a replacement is considered. She's not pleased with the maintenance and "gadget" costs associated with my two favorite activities!!!

Thank you all once again, EXACTLY what I was looking for, Outstanding!!!

Peace,

JD