Help decide between Standard and Long tripods

Hi,

So, I already have their traveler tripod which I love and use a lot. But I am looking for a more permanent tripod for when portability doesn't matter as much and am trying to decide between these 2:

http://www.gitzo.us …ng_3-section%2C_eye-level

This is the "Long" version, and goes to 59".

http://www.gitzo.us …section%2C_stan​dard_level

This is the standard, and goes to 52".

I am 5'11" (and 1/3"). I've researched this for hours and read many posts about this and just cannot get a straight answer on what would be best for me.

Also, want to note that the long version is actually cheaper, so I'd prefer to get that if it would work.

So, I realize that one could simply not lock the legs fully extended on the longer set to get the same height as the standard. Would you find that too much of an annoyance to do over and over?

Would the Long version be too long fully extended (above my eye level?)

I read somewhere where the person did some calculations and for someone around my height he calculated a 54" tripod would be eye-level (based on measurements of his eye height and ballhead height, etc.) Sounds about right? And in that case, that would be in the middle of these--then take the standard or long?

Thanks for the help!

Different strokes for different folks...

1. Some folks want to set their tripod up to suit their height, so that they do not have to stoop at all.
   
2. Some folks want to set their tripod up to the 'best for composition', which means that only sometimes does max extension enter the picture (so to speak)
   
3. Some folks want a very tall tripod that forces them to stand on a ladder to shoot, because of the high camera angle for product shots in the studio.
   

Out of curiosity: Why a series 5? I see nothing in your sig that even remotely needs that big a tripod…

On the length: Your length is irrelevant, unless you're shooting for instance flying objects while standing up: Then you want a comfortable position. Otherwise, the subject mostly determines shooting height IMO.
For the rest: What Wilt says.

René Damkot wrote in post #15287598
Out of curiosity: Why a series 5? I see nothing in your sig that even remotely needs that big a tripod….

true. it is definitely overkill for what i have now, and most likely will ever have. but i don't want to think 2x about whether a more sturdy tripod would have helped against heavy wind, unstill waters, or just taking a very meticulous macro shot.

i did take a shot of the moon from my traveler 1-series yesterday and saw 0 shake from the 2x zoomed in live view with the lens @ 300mm. so, if their 1-series is that good, yeah, i agree with you that a series 5 is completely overkill.

bottom line--i just never want to look back. got my travel setup. now just want me "nothing is sturdier" setup.

and thanks wilt and rene for your answers. i will definitely consider them. i might think about "downgrading though"... i have to do some calculations to see if the series 5 is practical to take on a backpack while hiking. i guess if it's too heavy or long when collapsed i might not ever use it.

Gitzo 3 series is pretty beefy compared to my 2 series. I believe they have a long version too.

If I had a traveler, I'd pair it with a 3 series. -- since I can't afford both, I went with a do it all (for my needs) 2 series.

ninhja wrote in post #15287687
Gitzo 3 series is pretty beefy compared to my 2 series. I believe they have a long version too.

If I had a traveler, I'd pair it with a 3 series. -- since I can't afford both, I went with a do it all (for my needs) 2 series.

yeah, i should probably consider this as well.

i doubt i'd ever have a lens longer than 400mm in the near future. and i'm sure the 3 series is plenty fine for that given my 1 series is fine with my 70-300.

hmm...

René Damkot wrote in post #15287598
Out of curiosity: Why a series 5? I see nothing in your sig that even remotely needs that big a tripod…

Because you never know what you'll be shooting with tomorrow.

At 5'9" I went with the RRS TVC-33. Slightly taller than me when fully extended, but I wanted a tripod that 1) built to last 2) can extend to eye level.

I have a Benro Travel Angel for when I fly.

JJD.Photography wrote in post #15287708
Because you never know what you'll be shooting with tomorrow.

At 5'9" I went with the RRS TVC-33. Slightly taller than me when fully extended, but I wanted a tripod that 1) built to last 2) can extend to eye level.

I have a Benro Travel Angel for when I fly.

...and that

i just looked at gitzo's site: the 3 series is about the same length collapsed and about 2lbs lighter. 2lbs to me probably isn't a deal breaker if i am willing to lug around all the camera stuff hiking, for the "perfect picture." the length is probably more important to me, but both are the same in that respect.

anyway, off topic, sorry.

k, it really sounds like having a tripod that is taller than your eye-level is not a big deal--just don't extend the legs all the way is what i am hearing.

Xyclopx wrote in post #15287732
2lbs to me probably isn't a deal breaker if i am willing to lug around all the camera stuff hiking, for the "perfect picture." t

I would not let the weight make or break a tripod. I typically balance the tripod on my shoulder which seems to counter either end when walking between shoots.

A 5 series tripod is only useful with lenses like a 500mm f/4 and up, it's even able to handle the mythical 1200mm f/5.6L I'd get a GT3542LS It's plenty sturdy, it can handle a 500mm f/4L, so your setup will be a breeze for it. Maybe take a look at the Feisol CT3472 as well, it's really good as well and a bit cheaper.

I have a Manfrotto 055X PRO TRIPOD w/804RC2 HEAD which I mount my 40D on, and I am 6' tall. When I have my tripod legs fully extended (center post in lowest position) I can't see the top display window. My choice is to either lower the tripod legs or stand on something. My tripod is super sturdy, and correspondingly heavy, but I don't carry it around. -rick

alazgr8 wrote in post #15289745
I have a Manfrotto 055X PRO TRIPOD w/804RC2 HEAD which I mount my 40D on, and I am 6' tall. When I have my tripod legs fully extended (center post in lowest position) I can't see the top display window. My choice is to either lower the tripod legs or stand on something. My tripod is super sturdy, and correspondingly heavy, but I don't carry it around. -rick

thanks... so does it bother you that it's not eye level when fully extended?

Xyclopx wrote in post #15289876
thanks... so does it bother you that it's not eye level when fully extended?

My tripod puts the cameras viewfinder higher than my eye. After awhile you get used to how far the lower section needs to be extended to achieve the correct eye level height. Having a higher tripod has come in handy many times with sometimes wishing it even went higher. I am also a firm believer that you should use the sturdiest tripod that you are willing to carry for the shoot, I say go for the GT5532LS

DavidR wrote in post #15290661
My tripod puts the cameras viewfinder higher than my eye. After awhile you get used to how far the lower section needs to be extended to achieve the correct eye level height. Having a higher tripod has come in handy many times with sometimes wishing it even went higher.

^
One can always use some model paint (hobby store) or fingernail polish to put a dot of paint on one (or more) legs at the perfect point of partial leg extension, once the ideal extension is determined. With fingernail polish at least you know it is easily removed later, should you want to restore the tripod to unmarked status before selling.

Wilt wrote in post #15287331
Different strokes for different folks...

1. Some folks want to set their tripod up to suit their height, so that they do not have to stoop at all.
   
2. Some folks want to set their tripod up to the 'best for composition', which means that only sometimes does max extension enter the picture (so to speak)
   
3. Some folks want a very tall tripod that forces them to stand on a ladder to shoot, because of the high camera angle for product shots in the studio.
   

I have two tripods, one of which lives only in the studio, because of its tremendous weight in addition to its tremendous height.

NOT extending all sections out is not all that difficult...set one leg and lock to length, then stand it on the ground and extend the other two legs down to the ground and lock, then splay out the legs.


Some folks want a shorter collapsed length, to permit putting a tripod (sometimes without ballhead attached) inside a suitcase for holiday travel.

I never understood why people always setup their tripod to eye height. It is very rare that the best composition is always at eye height. I guess convenience over getting unique photos is where it's at these days.