Manfrotto 055MF or Feisol CT-3371

bikejanitor wrote in post #5179100
C'mon Ed, all of us non-manfrotto tripod users know how evil you manfrotto tripod users are.

I'm 6'1" ...the 40D view finder w/my set up comes to 69"s and inch higher than my eye level.

The 8"s is in addition to the base height of the manfrotto 53"s to reach the base height of the feisol's 61"s.

I apologize Ed for my clarification of the weight issue. It obviously came across to you as argumentative, hostile and insinuating a conspiratorial attitude ...that's the problem w/emails....you can't see the person's face and sometimes a totally innocent comment can be misunderstood.

Question for you Ed; how smoothly does your rc2 move?

My rc4 is a little sticky when I have the tightness set so I can move my setup and not have it fall when I remove my hands.

Rey, I apologize to you for causing this digression from your topic. But I do hope Ed and I have helped you.

Regards
Bill

no sweat Bill. it sounds like that tripod would be too tall for me.....i would have to not extend the legs all the way, which would be a PITA.

the height of my manfrotto is perfect. if it were any taller i would have a problem.

are you using a grip on your 40d? i'd guess you aren't.

the 488 works very well. i recently bought the 488 to replace my 486 which was definitely harder to use (micro-adjustments).

ed rader

No worries Bill. Ed and yourself have had a meaningful discussion that was related to the topic. My main concern is stability and rigidity. Weight is an issue but I'm no stranger to lugging heavy gear around. I think between these two I'd probably go with the Feisol ATM. I'm waiting on my RRS ball head before making a final decision, but I think it would have a happier home on the Feisol.

Got my BH55 LR today. Mounted it on my 3001 legs and noticed a bit more stability. Now I need the vibration dampening carbon fiber legs to go with it

Well, after weeks of racking my brain and debating the merits of these two choices, in the end I decided not to go with either...

Instead I thought, why not get the set-up that I really want instead of settling. So I splurged a bit and got this.

I use a 40D with grip and since my eye is 65" from the ground, and the camera is 5" from grip base to eyepiece, I need 60" in height combining the legs and ball head, with the centre column fully down. Since most large heads (like mine) are also 5" tall, the legs (column not extended) need to be 55". I am 70" tall.

I found several manufacturer's websites, and some dealers' websites, to be contradictory and wrong, concerning heights of different models (especially Velbon).

I settled on my Giotto's MT-7371 and MH-3300 which is more than tall enough for me.

Maxdave

Regarding not having to fully extend the legs, I chose to mark the partially extended position just with a common pencil, at the appropriate position. I think extending that last sections to those marks is something I will live with to get the height I need without bending ....

Maxdave

I just bought the Manfrotto 0055MF4 Pro and like it a lot.
Very solid tripod for use with my 40D.