Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Accessories 
Thread started 25 Nov 2012 (Sunday) 12:54
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Help decide between Standard and Long tripods

 
Xyclopx
Goldmember
1,714 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 202
Joined Jul 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Nov 25, 2012 12:54 |  #1

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 (external link)

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

http://www.gitzo.us …section%2C_stan​dard_level (external link)

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! :)


Dean Chiang (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Blog (external link) | Gear (external link)
My Photos (external link)
Instagram @xyclopx (external link) @feetandeyes (external link) @gastramour (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
43,952 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3325
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Nov 25, 2012 13:25 |  #2

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.

You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
René ­ Damkot
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
39,856 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Feb 2005
Location: enschede, netherlands
     
Nov 25, 2012 14:39 |  #3

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.


"I think the idea of art kills creativity" - Douglas Adams
Why Color Management.
Color Problems? Click here.
MySpace (external link)
Get Colormanaged (external link)
Twitter (external link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Xyclopx
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,714 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 202
Joined Jul 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Nov 25, 2012 14:50 |  #4

René Damkot wrote in post #15287598 (external link)
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.


Dean Chiang (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Blog (external link) | Gear (external link)
My Photos (external link)
Instagram @xyclopx (external link) @feetandeyes (external link) @gastramour (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ninhja
Senior Member
Avatar
867 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2009
Location: Southern California
     
Nov 25, 2012 15:00 |  #5

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.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Xyclopx
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,714 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 202
Joined Jul 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Nov 25, 2012 15:03 |  #6

ninhja wrote in post #15287687 (external link)
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... :D


Dean Chiang (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Blog (external link) | Gear (external link)
My Photos (external link)
Instagram @xyclopx (external link) @feetandeyes (external link) @gastramour (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JJD.Photography
Goldmember
1,458 posts
Likes: 49
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Puerto Rico
     
Nov 25, 2012 15:06 |  #7

René Damkot wrote in post #15287598 (external link)
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.


His And Her Photographs (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Xyclopx
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,714 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 202
Joined Jul 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Nov 25, 2012 15:12 |  #8

JJD.Photography wrote in post #15287708 (external link)
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 :D

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.


Dean Chiang (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Blog (external link) | Gear (external link)
My Photos (external link)
Instagram @xyclopx (external link) @feetandeyes (external link) @gastramour (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JJD.Photography
Goldmember
1,458 posts
Likes: 49
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Puerto Rico
     
Nov 25, 2012 16:48 |  #9

Xyclopx wrote in post #15287732 (external link)
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.


His And Her Photographs (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
freddyronny
Senior Member
316 posts
Joined Dec 2009
     
Nov 25, 2012 19:08 as a reply to  @ JJD.Photography's post |  #10

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.


Canon EOS 70D / Canon Eos 450D / Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 / Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 OS / Canon 50mm f/1.8 II - Canon 18-55mm IS / Kenko Pro 300 1.4 DG / Sigma 2x APO DG / Canon 430 EX II Flickr (external link) / 500px (external link) / lsfotografie.webs.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alazgr8
Member
Avatar
233 posts
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Orange County, CA.
     
Nov 26, 2012 00:36 |  #11

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


Rick S.
My Gear = Canon 50d ~ EF 100 f/2.8L IS USM Macro ~ EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS USM ~ EF-S 17-55 IS USM f/2.8 IS ~ EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM ~ EF 28-135 IS f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Xyclopx
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,714 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 202
Joined Jul 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Nov 26, 2012 01:47 |  #12

alazgr8 wrote in post #15289745 (external link)
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?


Dean Chiang (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Blog (external link) | Gear (external link)
My Photos (external link)
Instagram @xyclopx (external link) @feetandeyes (external link) @gastramour (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DavidR
Goldmember
1,544 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 61
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Titusville, Florida
     
Nov 26, 2012 09:02 |  #13

Xyclopx wrote in post #15289876 (external link)
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 :)


Sony a9II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
43,952 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3325
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Nov 26, 2012 09:34 |  #14

DavidR wrote in post #15290661 (external link)
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.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,606 posts
Likes: 415
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Nov 26, 2012 10:44 |  #15
bannedPermanent ban

Wilt wrote in post #15287331 (external link)
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.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,077 views & 0 likes for this thread
Help decide between Standard and Long tripods
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Accessories 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is jdvann
930 guests, 323 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.