Help me pick a tripod

hi all

need your expertise...

im about 6'ft tall and i'd like to be able to have tripid as high as me, i figured close to 70" is what i need.

i want to be able to use it with 30d and be able to use it with macro lenses or later with tele lenses, say up to 400mm

so it has to support that weight

also, i kinda want it to be nice and sturdy, sturdier the better

also looking for nicely priced ones as well

thanx!

what u guys think of this? http://www.amazon.com/​dp/B000EDNOFG/

ptolemy wrote in post #4881343
what u guys think of this? http://www.amazon.com/​dp/B000EDNOFG/

Junk.

What I would recommend is this one.

You want a tripod that is tall enough so that you don't need to raise the center column for everyday height. I'm sure the maximum height of the piece of junk you linked to was with the center column fully extended.

SkipD wrote in post #4881473
Junk.

What I would recommend is this one.

You want a tripod that is tall enough so that you don't need to raise the center column for everyday height. I'm sure the maximum height of the piece of junk you linked to was with the center column fully extended.

u said junk, but can you explain why/ so i can learn...

thanx

ptolemy wrote in post #4881703
u said junk, but can you explain why/ so i can learn...

Sure.

Obviously, I have not been able to handle that tripod, but I doubt that either you or I could ever find one in a store to test it out.

It is unknown who makes it, so you would probably have a really tough time finding parts for it. Even if it did not break, you would definitely want extra quick-release plates and possibly other accessories for it. Good luck finding them.

The head is permanently attached to the tripod. That eliminates the possibility of changing heads down the road when you find a reason to do so. Many of us find "three-way" heads clumsy to handle and to pack/carry and choose to use a good ball head instead. A lot of us have more than one head, as some are better for some uses than others.

If the best feature they can advertise is the "Self-adjusting conical bearing locking system", there must be a lot of missing features compared to decent tripods.

I see absolutely no way to get your camera any closer to the ground than about two feet (if you're lucky) with that tripod. With the Manfrotto tripod and head I showed you, you can have your camera fully supported with its base about 3 inches above the ground if you wish.

The tripod is fully two pounds heavier than the one I pointed you to. That will make it more difficult to carry and use, and the Manfrotto tripod I showed you is considered to be on the heavy side by many folks. If a tripod is too heavy to carry, it won't get used. That's why many folks invest in very expensive carbon fiber versions of good tripods to reduce the weight by maybe a pound or pound and a half.

Until they realize what a decent tripod is like, a lot of folks start with one from Wal-Mart and scrap it in a year or two, then repeat the cycle. In other words, it makes a lot of sense to buy a good quality versatile tripod once that you can live with for the rest of your photographic life. The Bogen/Manfrotto tripods that I have will last me for the rest of my days and do quite well for whoever inherits them for a long time to come.

Tagging onto what Skip has already stated, spend the extra $$$ and buy quality now or you'll pay for it later....Check out this link:

http://bythom.com/supp​ort.htm

BTW, I am also using the Manfrotto 055XPROB Legs with the 488RC2 Head -- I have been incredibly satisfied with the build quality and versatility this rig offers. When I made the final decision to order this set up, it was pretty simple; I calculated what I had invested in my equipment (camera body, lenses, hot shoe flash, etc) and I looked at the el cheapo tripod setup I was using. I cringe when I think of that thing! I was entrusting a $40 pair of legs with a non-detachable head to hold up my expensive equipment. Didn't make much sense, really. So it was time to buy a new rig -- And I was already out $40 bucks. Those legs are still setting in my basement, collecting dust and cobwebs (might prove to be a good place to go looking for macro work! )

Good Luck!

Never skimp on a tripod... It holds everything else youve poured your hard earned money into. Its like building a beautiful home on a crap foundation, youre only setting yourself up fro tragedy.

ben_r_ wrote in post #4883163
Never skimp on a tripod... It holds everything else youve poured your hard earned money into. Its like building a beautiful home on a crap foundation, youre only setting yourself up fro tragedy.

i agree.....but what i think confuses people is when you read the article by thom that is so widely referred to as gospel he says you need $1k tripod.

So, you're in for a minimum of US$800, but more likely somewhere around US$1000. Thus, I've saved you a minimum of US$700 if you just opt for this approach from the beginning.

i think that's BS .

ed rader

ptolemy wrote in post #4881343
what u guys think of this? http://www.amazon.com/​dp/B000EDNOFG/

In that price range I would go for this one:
http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …315_700DX_Pro_T​ripod.html

I obviously agree with Ed on this one...I didn't come anywhere close to spending the $1K that the article suggests you spend on your rig.

Thom's article, much like anything you read, should be interpreted as one man's opinion. I think it's a good reference that serves the purpose of making the point that you should buy quality from the start, or you'll pay for it later. As I indicated in my prior post, I'm already into my rig for $40 bucks more that I would have been if I had just spent the coin and bought the Manfrotto in the beginning.

I'm with Ed -- A $600 tripod, especially for my purpose, is BS!

thank you all for the info.

my issue is, the removable head and such. i am not there yet to even understand why i'd have 2nd head, so basic one is better for me.

however, i saved this post and will use it in the future. thanx

Yea sorry, I didnt mean to sound like I agreed with a $1000 tripod thats insanely overpriced. I think I spent about $400 on my set up and feel that one can easily get a VERY nice setup for about 280 like say the ever popular Bogen 055XPROB and Bogen 488RC2 ball head.

ben_r_ wrote in post #4883353
Yea sorry, I didnt mean to sound like I agreed with a $1000 tripod thats insanely overpriced. I think I spent about $400 on my set up and feel that one can easily get a VERY nice setup for about 280 like say the ever popular Bogen 055XPROB and Bogen 488RC2 ball head.

no i wasn't saying that at all.....

it's just that that article gets thrown around a bit and if i were a noob with a new 400d and kit lens it would scare the hell out of me .

i know where the author is coming from .... but it takes a while to get there .

ed rader

ed rader wrote in post #4883439
no i wasn't saying that at all.....

it's just that that article gets thrown around a bit and if i were a noob with a new 400d and kit lens it would scare the hell out of me .

i know where the author is coming from .... but it takes a while to get there .

ed rader

But in the end you will most probably reach the same conclusion.

Unfortunately, most of us will go down the path that Thom is warning us to avoid. I've been there. I started out with a no name brand and then moved to a Sunpak. As I grew with my hobby I learned to appreciate better quality legsets, Manfrottos and Berlebach. I gone through them: 3001 > 3021 > 055MF3 and Report 8023. Now I have Gitzo. The same happened with ballheads. Was it more costly than buying what Thom suggests? Yes. However, it hasn't been as costly as Thom indicates because I have been able to sell all my previous legsets without much loss. For me it has been a learning process that could have been shortened dramatically by heeding some of the advice of others. I can fully appreciate the very strong hesitancy of buying an expensive legset in the very beginning. We all need to crawl before we can walk and then run.

ed rader wrote in post #4883220
i agree.....but what i think confuses people is when you read the article by thom that is so widely referred to as gospel he says you need $1k tripod.

So, you're in for a minimum of US$800, but more likely somewhere around US$1000. Thus, I've saved you a minimum of US$700 if you just opt for this approach from the beginning.

i think that's BS .

ed rader

I am not quite sure the classification on "BS" is appropriate.

A lot of what a person's needs in a tripod are going to depend on what they are going to put on it. If you are using 'Super Teles', you are going to be on one end, while a 70-200 f/4.0 will put you on the other. Blended with that will be how "fussy" you are about the quality of your shots, how tall you are, etc.

Once you have determined the needs for your tripod, you have the other trade offs of price and weight. For example (ignoring a quality discussion, but assuming equal) the 055XPROB legs weigh 5 lbs. To get that to ~3 lbs will cost 2 to 3 times. Worth it?....only you can make that trade off....

The 488RC2 is a good, well priced head (I still own one). While once set it will not "creep", with a 70-200 f/2.8 and , more often, a 100-400(at 400), it will, as Hogan asks "...Frame a shot with the tripod head loosened. Tighten the head down. Did your shot move?..." If you don't mind "adjusting" for that shift, you have a great ~$100 head. If you want to avoid that (and/or are using longer/heavier lenses) you will have to go for a ~$300 to $400 head. One nice addition with the better head is the friction control which will allow you to set resistance when the head is released, so it doesn't flop around.

I think Hogan is expressing what is needed for a high quality solution for tripods/heads. SkipD is recommending a "sweet spot" option for a good tripod with an attractive lower price. Does that make either of these recommendations "BS"? In my opinion, *NO*....just answers to different questions.