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 General Gear Talk Tripods, Monopods & Other Camera Support 
Thread started 14 Jan 2015 (Wednesday) 05:13
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Tripod weight with Tamron 150-600 telephoto lens

 
shamlyn
Member
93 posts
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Seattle, WA
Post edited over 3 years ago by shamlyn.
     
Jan 14, 2015 05:13 |  #1

2 days ago, I rented a Tamron 150-600 to try it out before I decide if I should purchase it. Throughout the day of getting it, my tripod was able to hold up the weight, granted it was 1/300 of a second and not long exposures. Last Night, I went out to do some long exposures with my lens and noticed that it wasnt hard for the the lens to move. There wasnt much in the way of movement for the Tamron lens attached to the tripod, but touching the camera even for just a few seconds seemed to shift out of focus and then I would have to refocused the lens (Just for long expsures). Do I need to invest in a Gimbal head for taking photo's of wildlife, or should I invest in a heavier tripod?

Also, my lens was off to the side of the ballhead since my Acratech GP has a gimbal feature.

Here is the tripod I am currently using:

Induro CT 113 - Tripod weight capacity 17 pounds

Acratech GP Ballhead - Tripod Weight Capacity 25 pounds

Canon 6D - 1.7 pounds

Tamron 150-600 - 4.5 Pounds.

Thanks




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Phoenixkh
a mere speck
6,731 posts
Gallery: 63 photos
Likes: 1313
Joined May 2011
Location: Gainesville, Florida
     
Jan 14, 2015 05:53 |  #2

That does seem to be the lightest carbon fiber model Induro makes, if my quick web search is accurate.

The bottom line is..... your camera is moving. I would take some time to determine exactly what is moving or if it's a couple things. You said your camera moves when you touch it so that begs the question: are you using a remote shutter release?

I had a similar problem but I was using the inferior (to me, at least) Manfrotto quick release clamping system. At least, you are using the Arca Swiss system so you can eliminate that as a problem.

From what I've read, the Acratech is a very fine tripod head, though with a heavy lens hanging from the side in gimbal position, that might be causing the vibration. I suspect it could be a combination of that and the legs vibrating as well, but you'll have to do some testing to figure it out for sure.

I fixed my issues but it cost me a year's camera gear budget.


Kim (the male variety) Canon 1DX2 | 1D IV | 16-35 f/4 IS | 24-105 f/4 IS | 100L IS macro | 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II | 100-400Lii | 50 f/1.8 STM | Canon 1.4X III
RRS tripod and monopod | 580EXII | Cinch 1 & Loop 3 Special Edition | Editing Encouraged

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shamlyn
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
93 posts
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Seattle, WA
     
Jan 14, 2015 05:58 as a reply to  @ Phoenixkh's post |  #3

Thanks for that info, and yes I am using a remote control shutter release. However my camera attached to the teletphoto lens and being that it moves just a bit worries me.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KaosImagery
Goldmember
Avatar
1,358 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 1152
Joined Sep 2009
Location: near Saratoga Springs, NY
     
Jan 14, 2015 08:10 |  #4

I have the CT214 set of CF legs with a Sirui K30x head. Yesterday, I took some shots with the 7D and 150-600, controlled with my iPad via Camranger wireless. When in live view at 10x magnification, I could see some movement. I think this was due to the wind which was picking up. The 7D also had the neck strap on it, so I folded that up and taped it with gaffer's tape.

The Induro CF tripods are pretty secure, but are light, so sometimes movement comes into play.

One thing you can do it weight the tripod a bit. I put my camera bag under the legs and hook a bungee cord from the case to the hook in the center of the legs. The little bit of tension keeps the cord from moving in the breeze and stabilizes the tripod.


Website (external link) flickr (external link) 500px (external link) FaceBook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnf3f
Goldmember
Avatar
3,889 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 571
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wales
     
Jan 14, 2015 18:13 |  #5

Forget the weight of your camera + lens and, more importantly, forget the weight rating of your tripod!
I had a well known tripod that was rated at 8 Kilo but would get a bit iffy with a 7 kilo load - as you would expect. I have an old Gitzo rated at 12 kilo but is pretty happy supporting over 100 Kilo - namely me! Weight ratings are pretty meaningless as there is no standard.
Your problem is not the weight of your setup, as it is pretty light. The problem is that your lens goes to 600mm and as such must be treated/supported the same as any other 600mm lens if you want to get the best from it. That means a big rigid (probably Carbon Fiber) tripod and I am afraid that is not going to be cheap.

If you can track down a decent (used) Gitzo 1329/1327 tripod then they will do the job very nicely! They often come up on the secondhand market at not too silly prices. I have one up for sale but I live in the UK. Feisol make some very nice tripods at reasonable prices. A couple of friends of mine have their Tournament models which are impressive for the price but I would suggest you treat these as an absolute minimum - one of their larger models would be better.

There are some quite decent cheap Gimbal heads on the market at the moment. A friend of mine bought one that worked pretty well with my Canon 300 F2.8 L IS + 2 x extender (600mm) and a bit heavier than your setup. Unfortunately it is not listed anymore, but I am looking at getting one of these for my 300 F2.8:

http://www.ebay.co.uk …isers&hash=item​3cf0829420 (external link)

Hope some of this helps.


Life is for living, cameras are to capture it (one day I will learn how!).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lenty007
Member
218 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 17
Joined May 2006
Location: Ghent, Belgium
     
Jan 16, 2015 06:25 |  #6

I'm not following!
The Tammy is very good handholdable so why not try to use it that way?!
I have a 400F2.8 for birding and this beast can't be used at hand (at least not longer than 5 mins).
The tripod/monopod has left me missing a lot of good shots in the wild.
So I bought the Tammy and I walk all day long "in the wild" and missing a lot less!

Even indoors I use the Tammy handholdable with indirect flash (at 1/60), even at 600mm! I used it last week on a new years party at work with some good result. (Please don't ask for results cause the colleagues would like to keep their privacy).

I suppose it's a matter of technique.

Good luck
Alain




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
12,777 posts
Gallery: 1161 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 8336
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Jan 24, 2015 20:29 |  #7

Heya,

When it comes to 600mm, you need a very sturdy tripod. The only way this is going to happen, while being light weight, is carbon fiber. So you're looking at something costly. If you go aluminum, that's fine, it will just weigh more. Personally I don't care about the weight, so I went aluminum and I'm still happy with it. I've used lighter smaller tripods and it definitely changes how sturdy a 600mm lens is. You can see it bob and weave when you're looking at the moon for example in Live View. Amazing how much movement is going on, especially if it's windy. You also have to consider solid ground, setting up in some sand and putting weight on it, it's moving, you may not see it, but it is. You've got to get a pretty sturdy ground, for it to matter that your tripod is sturdy. I also find that ballheads for big lenses are not very good. They sag. Even big ballheads sag it seems. It's not the weight. The lens could weigh 1lb, but if it's 4 feet long (it's not, but you get my point), it will exert a lot of pressure. Long lenses, even light ones, need a different support to be sturdy. This is where the gimbal comes in, and they are excellent for long lenses as it takes that off-balance nature that ballheads introduce. Sag is gone, balance is there, and it's rock solid.

I use:

Benro AF2970
Obteka GH1
Canon 1D Mark II
Tamron 150-600 VC

The tripod is pretty light, but still very sturdy and large. Handles the weight fine. It's aluminum, not expensive either. The GH1 is a fine gimbal, good performance for cost. The two together hold my heavy 1D2 and long 600mm Tamron like it's a feather and there's no sagging, no movements, and makes using it at lower shutters a breeze. I typically hand hold this setup, but for some things, I like to have the tripod & gimbal (like birding from a blind, song birds; lunar shots, etc).

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nellyle
Goldmember
Avatar
1,228 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 280
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Bedfordshire, UK
     
Jan 25, 2015 03:34 |  #8

MalVeauX wrote in post #17398552 (external link)
Heya,
I also find that ballheads for big lenses are not very good. They sag. Even big ballheads sag it seems.

Very best,

The right ballhead won't sag with a big lens. I used to have a Kirk BH1 that didn't, even at some crazy angles.
My current ballhead, a Uniqball is rock solid.


5D3, 7D2, 1D3, 40D, 14 f2.8 Samyang, 17-40 L, 28-80 L, 70-200 2.8ii L, 200 2.8ii L, 200-400 L, 1.4 ii,
http://chris-stamp.smugmug.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JVthePT
Goldmember
Avatar
1,468 posts
Gallery: 130 photos
Likes: 735
Joined May 2012
Location: SE Iowa
     
Jan 25, 2015 18:13 |  #9

I have a Vanguard Auctus 283 with a SBH-300 head on it and I also use the Opteka GBH-1 Gimbal with the 150-600 and I have put a 1d4 on it, 6d, 7dII, SL1 and all work great.


6D & 7D mark II - Canon 16-35 f/4 IS L, Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L, Canon 24-105 f/4 L IS, Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II L, Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS II, Canon 50mm f/1.8 STM, Canon 85 f/1.8, Canon 100 f/2.8 USM macro, Canon EF 1.4x III
flickr (external link)

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

6,387 views & 0 likes for this thread
Tripod weight with Tamron 150-600 telephoto lens
FORUMS General Gear Talk Tripods, Monopods & Other Camera Support 
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 rflynn
703 guests, 302 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

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.