CF vs AL legs

I have looked into this through many threads and still haven't been fully convinced...

I am looking at a manfrotto 190CX3 or the 055XPROB currently, which I'd pair with a 498RC2 ballhead.

And I am wondering... is the extra cash for those CF legs worth it? I intend on using this thing on hiking trips and all around use alike. It would be used for long exposures quite a bit of landscapes, and possibly even to support my camera during time lapses and eventually one end of a dolly track.

I understand CF's makeup allows it to absorb vibration better from what I've read. What I'm unclear of is does that mean it will be less wobbly in wind? Logically, to me at least, it would seem a heavier tripod, despite the type of metal, would be more resistant.

Currently I have one of those cheap, generic plastic tripods that you get for around $30 - the lack of independent leg movement, the built in plastic head... so either way the tripod I choose will be quite an upgrade. But I am just wondering how CF stands vs Al in windy conditions. As well as if that ball head I am looking at would be a good pair with a CF tripod, due to its own weight.

Thanks in advanced for any input.

oh and an induro akb2 is also in the running to make things more complicated due to its price and rec from a dolly company.

If you intend to carry it around, go with the 190CF legs or even one of the 099 CF models; the XPROB aluminum is both large and heavy. Mine wound up being left at home 99% of the time and not used, simply because of size (wouldn't strap to a pack well) and weight.

The CF also gets less cold to handle when you're out and about in inclement weather.

Snydremark wrote in post #13946004
If you intend to carry it around, go with the 190CF legs or even one of the 099 CF models; the XPROB aluminum is both large and heavy. Mine wound up being left at home 99% of the time and not used, simply because of size (wouldn't strap to a pack well) and weight.

The CF also gets less cold to handle when you're out and about in inclement weather.

+1 I love that I can drop it or something and that it'll last a long time.... But man does it get annoying to hold due to how heavy it is. Your gear is gonna get heavy enough.... do yourself a favor and get the CF legs.

If you have the funds to go CF, just do it! You'll appreciate the lighter weight, durability and stability!

A buddy of mine has an aluminum tripod that is big & heavy and he only brings it along when we have <200 yrds to walk, because it is so darn big & heavy. He recently carried my Gitzo GT3541LS / RRS BH-55 combo for an hour to see what he thought and is now cursing me because he wants to upgrade his tripod setup (lmao).

The CF tripods, as mentioned by Snydremark, will not get 'as' cold in the winter months so you can actually handle them with bare hands!

The CF legs do look good. Do these products hold their value pretty well too? I saw many reviews saying these legs would not be strong enough for dolly tracks, which i intend on getting in the future, so i could swap out this tripod with another when the time comes, but until that point i dont see the need for a heavier tripod with my setup.

CF all the way, I have the aluminum 190XPROB and it's too heavy in my opinion to "hike" with. There are lots of options including less expensive brands like Dolica so don't get hung up on one brand. Also your body and lenses are light weight so you might even consider a small lightweight tripd for your hiking stuff and a heavier more sturdy model for the other types of uses. I have a Manfrotto 7322CY-BB strictly for hiking and it's very light and short and can handle all my lenses w/o issue.

I have the 055XPROB and I feel it's too heavy to carry sometimes along with the camera body and lenses, the only time I take it out is when I can pretty much drive up to the spot where I will be shooting otherwise it'll be left at home most of the time

The Manfrotto 055 is 5.07 lbs. while the 055 CF is 3.92 lbs. a saving of 1.15 lb. at an expense of $189 difference in price! With the head that you specify, the total is 6.22 lbs. vs. 5.07 lbs, or 82% of the total weight for 211% of the price of the less expensive product! Many have thought that the Manfrotto CF simply does not warrant the expense for the weight savings, but that is a judgement call that only you can make for yourself.

Wilt wrote in post #13953709
The Manfrotto 055 is 5.07 lbs. while the 055 CF is 3.92 lbs. a saving of 1.15 lb. at an expense of $189 difference in price! With the head that you specify, the total is 6.22 lbs. vs. 5.07 lbs, or 82% of the total weight for 211% of the price of the less expensive product! Many have thought that the Manfrotto CF simply does not warrant the expense for the weight savings, but that is a judgement call that only you can make for yourself.

211% saved on back pain = )

seoul4korea wrote in post #13953769
211% saved on back pain = )

Then it is no time to be half-*ssed...time to save 2 lbs. by getting a Gitzo 25xx, and spend another $160 more than the 055CF.

Manfrotto saving 1.15 lb at $189 more ($164/lb. saved), or Gitzo saving 3.15 lbs. at $451 more ($143/lb. saved) than the 055 aluminum.

^see... im not dropping that much on a tripod right now, until i invest in better glass probably...

I ended up ordering an induro akb2 out of impulse based on it only weighing 4.2lbs, costing only 180, and recommended by dynamic perception for their dolly track (which i plan on getting in the future). If I don't like it once received I can either resell or return it. But right now, spending 270 or 350 on a tripod just didnt seem like the right decision. Hopefully this tripod suits my needs, and with a lack of heavy lenses I feel it will.

Wilt wrote in post #13953709
The Manfrotto 055 is 5.07 lbs. while the 055 CF is 3.92 lbs. a saving of 1.15 lb. at an expense of $189 difference in price! With the head that you specify, the total is 6.22 lbs. vs. 5.07 lbs, or 82% of the total weight for 211% of the price of the less expensive product! Many have thought that the Manfrotto CF simply does not warrant the expense for the weight savings, but that is a judgement call that only you can make for yourself.

THANK YOU!!! This is exactly what I've been thinking. I'm looking at smaller tripods (Manfrotto 190 range size-wise) and with the ballhead, the difference between Aluminum and CF is about 200g (1.4kg for CF, 1.6kg for Alu...both on average, as I'm comparing a number of models from each category).

It's especially small if you add it to the rest of the weight...5D body, 16-35L II, spare batteries, backpack, water, food, etc...I'm easily carrying 20 lbs on my back on a hike...will 0.5 lbs make a difference...doubt it.

Is that roughly 15% savings in weight worth a 250-300% premium (small alu legs are cheap, small CF legs are still expensive)...I think not. That price difference will get me some nice ND filters, a remote release and a few more things

LowriderS10 wrote in post #13955140
THANK YOU!!! This is exactly what I've been thinking. I'm looking at smaller tripods (Manfrotto 190 range size-wise) and with the ballhead, the difference between Aluminum and CF is about 200g (1.4kg for CF, 1.6kg for Alu...both on average, as I'm comparing a number of models from each category).

It's especially small if you add it to the rest of the weight...5D body, 16-35L II, spare batteries, backpack, water, food, etc...I'm easily carrying 20 lbs on my back on a hike...will 0.5 lbs make a difference...doubt it.

Is that roughly 15% savings in weight worth a 250-300% premium (small alu legs are cheap, small CF legs are still expensive)...I think not. That price difference will get me some nice ND filters, a remote release and a few more things

That, in essence, was my decision. Ordered a tripod and a 10-stop ND instead of just a tripod because of it. And I don't think I'll regret it. Worst case scenario I invest in more expensive filters and tripods and resell mine, but I know I'll get some use out of them.

sullivanrp wrote in post #13955495
That, in essence, was my decision. Ordered a tripod and a 10-stop ND instead of just a tripod because of it. And I don't think I'll regret it. Worst case scenario I invest in more expensive filters and tripods and resell mine, but I know I'll get some use out of them.

Exactly...I've been using the same garbage $40 tripod for 5 years and it's just getting to the point of needing replacement (the head burst some sort of fluid/oil and it's all sticky and doesn't want to move smoothly).

Heck, I've been using this (folds to about 10 inches, and is something like a foot and a half all extended, cost me $39) with my 1D3 and 16-35L II haha...it looks like the world's most awesome camera perched atop a toy tripod!

I guess if you want garbage holding your $2000-$3000 camera and lens up.