Which tripod for someone that's 5'8"/173cm tall?

I'm currently an owner of the Markins Q3T and Gitzo GT1542T combination. I was originally considering either the Gitzo GT2541 or the GT3541. Now I have reconsidered and I want something taller. I want a tripod that can fit a carry-on suitcase (going to get the biggest one that will match TSA limits) and also allow me to use my camera at eye-level. I don't intend to use the centre column. I also intend to get the RRS BH-40 ballhead. The Gitzo GT2542L have my attention. Its maximum height without the centre column is 151cm and with the RRS BH-40, it may be comfortable to use. Any comments guys?

I'm about the same height as you, and the Feisol 3442 fully extended with the RRS BH-40 brings the camera viewfinder to pretty much exactly eye level. The 3441T makes it about 1 inch too high up fully extended (centre column down).

Sirrith wrote in post #15978418
I'm about the same height as you, and the Feisol 3442 fully extended with the RRS BH-40 brings the camera viewfinder to pretty much exactly eye level. The 3441T makes it about 1 inch too high up fully extended (centre column down).

Doesn't that tripod uses aluminum? I'm looking for a carbon fibre tripod.

Just want to make sure that you're not using the centre column?

lsquare wrote in post #15978403
Its maximum height without the centre column is 151cm and with the RRS BH-40, it may be comfortable to use. Any comments guys?

That sounds plenty tall enough. If you're 173cm then your eyeballs are probably at about 160cm. The ballhead and camera body add around 20cm so you'll end up with the viewfinder around 10cm above your eyeballs.

lsquare wrote in post #15978421
Doesn't that tripod uses aluminum? I'm looking for a carbon fibre tripod.

Just want to make sure that you're not using the centre column?

They're CF, not aluminium. The parts that are aluminium on the Feisol are the same parts that are aluminium on the Gitzo, except the Feisol parts are better quality because they're CNC machined instead of being cast.

And nope, with the 3441T I specifically said centre column down, and the 3442 has no centre column (unless you choose to add the optional centre column).

hollis_f wrote in post #15978484
That sounds plenty tall enough. If you're 173cm then your eyeballs are probably at about 160cm. The ballhead and camera body add around 20cm so you'll end up with the viewfinder around 10cm above your eyeballs.

If that's the case, then won't the 2542L be too long for me and that I should go for something at about 140cm fully extended with centre column down?

I really wonder if anyone at around my height who have experience with the Gitzo GT2541 can tell me if that will be a better tripod for me then?

Sirrith wrote in post #15978485
They're CF, not aluminium. The parts that are aluminium on the Feisol are the same parts that are aluminium on the Gitzo, except the Feisol parts are better quality because they're CNC machined instead of being cast.

And nope, with the 3441T I specifically said centre column down, and the 3442 has no centre column (unless you choose to add the optional centre column).

I've never used a Feisol tripod before. From the pictures, the Feisol appears to be a cheap tripod. I know there are good reviews, but perhaps the pictures doesn't do it any justice? Sorry, I'm not trying to offend anyone here.

Will the 3442 fit the maximum size carry-on suitcase for US Airlines?

lsquare wrote in post #15978715
If that's the case, then won't the 2542L be too long for me

There's no need to raise it to its maximum height. When I bought my tall person's tripod (I'm 195cm) I deliberatley went for something a little taller than I really needed - it makes it more comfortable to use for things high in the sky (birds, planes, starry things).

But if the Feisol is the right size you really ought to check it out. Tom knows what he's talking about and the range gets many recommendations.

hollis_f wrote in post #15978785
There's no need to raise it to its maximum height. When I bought my tall person's tripod (I'm 195cm) I deliberatley went for something a little taller than I really needed - it makes it more comfortable to use for things high in the sky (birds, planes, starry things).

But if the Feisol is the right size you really ought to check it out. Tom knows what he's talking about and the range gets many recommendations.

I only have experience with Gitzo tripods. I've owned a Gitzo GT1531, GT1541T, and now the GT1542T. From the pictures, the Feisol doesn't seem to look as nice as the Gitzo tripods. I know I should I know better than to judge by pictures. The price on the 3442 is pretty good! It's US$399 and it's something that I will have to consider now that Tom have mentioned it.

I can't tell from the pictures, but do you think the Feisol 3442 have a stance as wide as its peers? I did a little bit of reading on the web and I'm getting the impression that it's not as wide as some Gitzos so it may not be as stable. Any comments?

Gitzo are definitely built to higher standards; their prices reflect that. But that doesn't mean the Feisol is "cheap" by any means. In fact, some of the parts Feisol use are higher quality than Gitzo. And their customer service is much better from what I hear (I have no experience with Gitzo CS, but I see many complaints).

The Feisol "stance" is a bit narrower at the first leg angle I believe. It does not, however, affect stability during real use.

Here is my summary which I've gotten tired of typing out:

Sirrith wrote in post #15764731
the following is what my Feisol has been through since I've had it:
Took it to Iceland and used it on sharp volcanic rocks in the rain, it was partially submerged in freezing salt water (unintentionally by a rogue wave as well as intentionally at Jokulsarlon), in sand (which thanks to the wave also got everywhere), under the hot shower back at the hostel with me to wash out the salt and sand.

Took it to Scotland where it was used on wet grass and mud.

Took it to China where it was scraped along granite rocks and used in relatively strong winds hiking around the Yellow Mountains (I was extremely thankful for the light weight there, have you ever walked up and down steep stairs for 6 hours straight with a loaded pack?).

Back here in Hong Kong it has been used on very uneven rocks, and has fallen into a river twice, being completely submerged as well as being bashed against rocks (both my ballhead and the legs bear the scars).

In France it was used in a snowstorm as well as being buried in the stuff.

All in all, I don't see how a more expensive tripod would have fared any better (I do not have a single failed shot which was due to the tripod in any of those conditions, all blurry shots were a result of me bumping against the tripod or camera during the exposure, and the tripod has been so easy to use as well).

One more thing to note actually:
These particular models of Feisol use machined aluminium parts as opposed to cast metal on the Gitzo, which means they are stronger and more resistant to impacts. They are also more costly to make.

I own the Feisol 3441S, and concur with Tom regarding the quality of their tripods. While it may not be a Gitzo, it is still a high quality product IMO. I really like the compact size of the 3441S. It takes up very little space in my luggage when we fly, and is light enough not to be a problem with all the weight restrictions now being placed on luggage. I am 5'10", and this model is not too short for my use.

Sirrith wrote in post #15978485
They're CF, not aluminium. The parts that are aluminium on the Feisol are the same parts that are aluminium on the Gitzo, except the Feisol parts are better quality because they're CNC machined instead of being cast.

The Feisol base and other metal parts are milled from a solid piece of high grade aluminum. The Gitzo base and other metal parts are made of die cast magnesium alloy. Aluminum is heavier than magnesium alloy. Parts made from a casting process have been known to fracture in extreme cold but the occurrence is rare.

lsquare wrote in post #15978715
If that's the case, then won't the 2542L be too long for me and that I should go for something at about 140cm fully extended with centre column down?

I really wonder if anyone at around my height who have experience with the Gitzo GT2541 can tell me if that will be a better tripod for me then?

If you want this to be your most stable tripod then I think it's worth avoiding anything that has a center column.

I'm 5' 8" and my main tripod is a Gitzo 3541LS systematic with a RRS leveling base and an Arca-Swiss Z1 ballhead (the A-S is tall). The max height of this tripod is 146cm (57.5") and the tripod base to the top surface of the clamp jaw is 13cm (5 & 1/8"). With a normal camera for me (Leica M /Sony NEX) on top the viewfinder is exactly at my eye level.

Gitzo have three 2-series systematics, the 2542S and 2532S look too short with max heights of 130 and 136cm respectively. However the 2542LS could be right at a max height of 150cm (59.1"). This tripod has laser markings on the second leg section for quick setup to a height of 135mm. The 2542LS is 60.1cm (23.7") folded.

i'm 5' 10" and I use the GT 2541 for everything. I previously used the the GT 1541 (not the traveller) which was taller but I wanted something studier and the GT 2541 can easily be carried on or checked. are you saying the GT 2541 isn't tall enough?

lsquare wrote in post #15978403
I'm currently an owner of the Markins Q3T and Gitzo GT1542T combination. I was originally considering either the Gitzo GT2541 or the GT3541. Now I have reconsidered and I want something taller. I want a tripod that can fit a carry-on suitcase (going to get the biggest one that will match TSA limits) and also allow me to use my camera at eye-level. I don't intend to use the centre column. I also intend to get the RRS BH-40 ballhead. The Gitzo GT2542L have my attention. Its maximum height without the centre column is 151cm and with the RRS BH-40, it may be comfortable to use. Any comments guys?

Dont forget the viewfinder is a few inches above the top of the ballhead. My guess, the viewfinder mounted on a GT2542L with a BH-40 is around 65.5". For reference, I am 5'10" and my eye level is 65". In other words, that will be too tall for you since you wont be able to see the top of the camera or tilt the camera down. For your height i would stay around 53-55" for the tripod alone. Some that come to mind are listed below.

GT2541 is 52.5"
GT3541 is 52"
GT3541LS is 57.5"
CT3442 is 54.3"

I have the GT2541 and I am 5"10. the viewfinder is a few inches below my eye level, but i would rather have it be a touch shorter than too tall

I use the Sirui T-025 as my travel tripod and tsa has never said a thing to me about it. Folds down to 11.8 inches. I'm 5'8". This is for only travel. If you can only get a single tripod, I would go with the GT2542L.