Manfrotto tripod MT055 Carbon Fiber or aluminum, Help

I am going to upgrade my tripod and i choose Manfrotto MT055 but can't understand somethings below:
CF: weight: 2 kgs: Price: $479.88
Aluminum: weight: 2.5 kgs: $209.88

it seems there is big difference about price here
about weight difference is only 0.5k (weight is very important for user)

i haven't ever used carbon tripod so i don't know how is good.
my budget is limited but i can wait more time to get Carbon one if it is worth.
comparing between aluminum and carbon. is carbon one really worth with this price?

anyone used to have aluminum and carbon, pls give suggestion.

CF less subject to vibration than aluminum, but can be more fragile.

Aluminum dents, CF shatters.

CF lighter than aluminum.

I have the previous 055 version in CF and prefer it to the aluminum version I previously had.

this also depends if you leave the house with it! skip aluminum and get the carbon fiber version,$479.88 is not that much for a real good tripod these days.

brucea wrote in post #17279273
CF less subject to vibration than aluminum, but can be more fragile.

Aluminum dents, CF shatters.

CF lighter than aluminum.

I have the previous 055 version in CF and prefer it to the aluminum version I previously had.

CF is lighter 0.5 kgs than aluminum only
finally i chose CF why? man
i think of course CF is better than aluminum such as stable, weight.. but it is just little, meanwhile we have to pay more $270 for CF. is it worth?

Carbon fiber absorbs vibration a little quicker than aluminum, and is a bit lighter in weight but both can provide stable support. I use both and provided you don't use much of the center column (if the tripod has one) and use them in appropriate situations there's little to choose.

Often the price difference is really big as in your case but I'll bet the manufacturers' margins are way more on the CF. Aluminum is dismissed these days as is wood but they are still both very useful materials for support. I'd get the aluminum version.

A bit more expensive - but far, far better:
http://www.feisol.net …od-ct3372-rapid-p-57.html
Even this little tripod performs about as well as a carbon Manfrotto 55 :
http://www.feisol.net …od-ct3342-rapid-p-30.html
+ it's half the weight.
I have no connection to Feisol, it's just that I have used a few of them and they are very good - especially for the price. I prefer, and use, Gitzo tripods but they are expensive! Worth it - but still expensive.

johnf3f wrote in post #17284470
A bit more expensive - but far, far better:
http://www.feisol.net …od-ct3372-rapid-p-57.html
Even this little tripod performs about as well as a carbon Manfrotto 55 :
http://www.feisol.net …od-ct3342-rapid-p-30.html
+ it's half the weight.
I have no connection to Feisol, it's just that I have used a few of them and they are very good - especially for the price. I prefer, and use, Gitzo tripods but they are expensive! Worth it - but still expensive.

Tks John, feisol is over my current budget.
maybe i will go with aluminum version until i can't carry it and then will switch to CF

Manfrotto has always taken flack for the 055 in carbon fiber not being as dramatic a reduction in weight compared to the 055 in aluminum for the price differential. It is why many folks decide to go with other companies' carbon fiber tripods...cost effectiveness. I decided to bite the even-higher-cost bullet and chose the higher priced (yet more cost effective weight savings) Gitzo 25xx myself, many years ago, for exactly that reason. I had a Bogen (Manfrotto) 3221 (predecessor to the 055) for decades before that.

cafecanon wrote in post #17284647
Tks John, feisol is over my current budget.
maybe i will go with aluminum version until i can't carry it and then will switch to CF

Pity you don't live in the UK as I have an older model Gitzo that you could have for less than the carbon Manfrotto.
Check out the used market, E bay etc you may be pleasantly surprised.