Yet another tripod ?!

[EricL]

So I'm looking at some Gitzo tripods paying close attention to the weight limits. Why do most of the Gitzo's have weight limits up to 26 pounds but in the information they suggest up to but not exceeding a 300mm? Are they figuring that everyone hangs a weight under the camera? What's up?? Here is one example: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/548397-REG/Gitzo_GT2541EX_GT2541EX_6X_Carbon_Fiber.html#featu res
Thanks.

[JohnJ80]

So I'm looking at some Gitzo tripods paying close attention to the weight limits. Why do most of the Gitzo's have weight limits up to 26 pounds but in the information they suggest up to but not exceeding a 300mm? Are they figuring that everyone hangs a weight under the camera? What's up?? Here is one example: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/548397-REG/Gitzo_GT2541EX_GT2541EX_6X_Carbon_Fiber.html#featu res
Thanks.

Load limits are basically worthless, if not entirely so. It matters much more how you mount the load on the tripod. Cantilever the mass out away from the center of the tripod, and the results will vary much more than if the mass is balanced.

Furthermore, I doubt you would ever find 26lbs to put on your tripod. In general, load limits are more just a figure of merit within a given tripod manufacturer's line. Two manufacturers don't use the same methodology to test tripods. Gitzo's limits are the load at which that tripod won't be able to take an "acceptable" photo. Others use it as the limit at which the tripod mechanically fails (breaks). You can't compare the two. When we are worried about 100um vibration amplitudes, the point at which the tripod breaks is just not germane.

The focal length spec is what matters. For example, my Gitzo 1258 ( a precursor but essentially the same as the 2541) can damp about one half the vibration amplitude as my Gitzo 3540LS (I've actually tested them). That makes sense since my 1258 is speced up to a max of 200mm, and the 3540LS to a max of 400mm. A 400mm lens is twice the magnification of the 200mm so any tripod needs to be able to damp out twice as much vibration with the 400mm as it would have to with the 200mm for equivalent results.

Finally, there is controversy about hanging a mass on a tripod as to whether that helps or hurts. Based on the testing I've done, I think if you have a good carbon fiber tripod and the tripod is not in danger of falling over (wind, precarious footing etc...) that there is little need for additional mass based on some of the testing I have done. That said, this debate rages on and on like the need for UV filters on each lens or which is better on a tripod flip or twist locks. Suffice it to say that it is much easier to make it heavier (although i doubt you would hang 10lbs on a tripod) than it is to make it lighter.

J.

[René Damkot]

I *know* I can hang from my 1325, so I agree that the weight limit is useless info.

Tripods aren't about carrying weight, but about adding stability ;)

[EricL]

That is some great information. Thanks. I am pretty sure I know the answer to my question but how do you like your Gitzo?

[JohnJ80]

Like them a lot - I have two. They are sort of the top end gold standard. They will outlast you.

J.

[bps]

Load limits are basically worthless, if not entirely so. It matters much more how you mount the load on the tripod. Cantilever the mass out away from the center of the tripod, and the results will vary much more than if the mass is balanced.

Furthermore, I doubt you would ever find 26lbs to put on your tripod. In general, load limits are more just a figure of merit within a given tripod manufacturer's line. Two manufacturers don't use the same methodology to test tripods. Gitzo's limits are the load at which that tripod won't be able to take an "acceptable" photo. Others use it as the limit at which the tripod mechanically fails (breaks). You can't compare the two. When we are worried about 100um vibration amplitudes, the point at which the tripod breaks is just not germane.

The focal length spec is what matters. For example, my Gitzo 1258 ( a precursor but essentially the same as the 2541) can damp about one half the vibration amplitude as my Gitzo 3540LS (I've actually tested them). That makes sense since my 1258 is speced up to a max of 200mm, and the 3540LS to a max of 400mm. A 400mm lens is twice the magnification of the 200mm so any tripod needs to be able to damp out twice as much vibration with the 400mm as it would have to with the 200mm for equivalent results.

Finally, there is controversy about hanging a mass on a tripod as to whether that helps or hurts. Based on the testing I've done, I think if you have a good carbon fiber tripod and the tripod is not in danger of falling over (wind, precarious footing etc...) that there is little need for additional mass based on some of the testing I have done. That said, this debate rages on and on like the need for UV filters on each lens or which is better on a tripod flip or twist locks. Suffice it to say that it is much easier to make it heavier (although i doubt you would hang 10lbs on a tripod) than it is to make it lighter.

J.

John,

As usual, I love reading your posts.

Spot on!
Bryan

[hsroxas]

Load limits are basically worthless, if not entirely so. It matters much more how you mount the load on the tripod. Cantilever the mass out away from the center of the tripod, and the results will vary much more than if the mass is balanced.

Furthermore, I doubt you would ever find 26lbs to put on your tripod. In general, load limits are more just a figure of merit within a given tripod manufacturer's line. Two manufacturers don't use the same methodology to test tripods. Gitzo's limits are the load at which that tripod won't be able to take an "acceptable" photo. Others use it as the limit at which the tripod mechanically fails (breaks). You can't compare the two. When we are worried about 100um vibration amplitudes, the point at which the tripod breaks is just not germane.

The focal length spec is what matters. For example, my Gitzo 1258 ( a precursor but essentially the same as the 2541) can damp about one half the vibration amplitude as my Gitzo 3540LS (I've actually tested them). That makes sense since my 1258 is speced up to a max of 200mm, and the 3540LS to a max of 400mm. A 400mm lens is twice the magnification of the 200mm so any tripod needs to be able to damp out twice as much vibration with the 400mm as it would have to with the 200mm for equivalent results.

Finally, there is controversy about hanging a mass on a tripod as to whether that helps or hurts. Based on the testing I've done, I think if you have a good carbon fiber tripod and the tripod is not in danger of falling over (wind, precarious footing etc...) that there is little need for additional mass based on some of the testing I have done. That said, this debate rages on and on like the need for UV filters on each lens or which is better on a tripod flip or twist locks. Suffice it to say that it is much easier to make it heavier (although i doubt you would hang 10lbs on a tripod) than it is to make it lighter.

J.


Just want to express my appreciation for this explanation. It is only now that I gained a better understanding of what is more important in choosing the appropriate tripod. It never occurred to me that the damping ability of a particular tripod model is in fact the main consideration. In the past, it was the weight load capacity that has always been of interest to me.
Thanks again.