Markins M10 OR Q3?

My heaviest lens is a 24-70 f/2.8, and possibly adding a 70-200 or 80-400 in the future. For legs I am using the Gitzo 2540.

With the above gear, would I be better off with a Q3 or M10? Markins has suggested that I go with the M10, is there any reason to think otherwise?

I'm about to list my Q3 for sale since I just picked up a 100-400. Go for the M10

M10.

Personally on the 2540 I would def go with the M10. The Q3 is too small and will look a little odd on a 2 series tripod and if you intend to go up to 400mm in the future youll want the extra support of the M10.

ben_r_ wrote in post #6096506
Personally on the 2540 I would def go with the M10. The Q3 is too small and will look a little odd on a 2 series tripod and if you intend to go up to 400mm in the future youll want the extra support of the M10.

I don't quite agree with the Q3/2 Series look. I think it looks great. More importantly, it works great. But I agree with the M10 if the future holds a 400. The M10/2 Series also looks good and works great.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

I emailed Markins with pretty much this very question and they said the same thing, that the M-10 would be noticeably better with a 400mm lens. I went with the M-10 - couldn't be happier.

It would be nice to have both side by side to compare. I don't see myself getting the 80-400 or 200-400 for at least a year.

I know a lot of folks have said the Q3 would work fine, but for those who are using it what type of lenses are you using? Does it make the sweet spot where you don't have to fully lock a breeze in both the 24-70 and 70-200 ?

That does look great What are you using with this setup?

jhom wrote in post #6096671
I don't quite agree with the Q3/2 Series look. I think it looks great. More importantly, it works great. But I agree with the M10 if the future holds a 400. The M10/2 Series also looks good and works great.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

jhom wrote in post #6096671
I don't quite agree with the Q3/2 Series look. I think it looks great. More importantly, it works great. But I agree with the M10 if the future holds a 400. The M10/2 Series also looks good and works great.

Okay, Ill give you that one, that does look pretty darn good! Perhaps I was thinking of a 3 series with a Q3 head on it. But yea, def go with the M10, and when you upgrade to a 3 series some day go for an M20 too!

davewolfs wrote in post #6096886
It would be nice to have both side by side to compare. I don't see myself getting the 80-400 or 200-400 for at least a year.

I know a lot of folks have said the Q3 would work fine, but for those who are using it what type of lenses are you using? Does it make the sweet spot where you don't have to fully lock a breeze in both the 24-70 and 70-200 ?

The Q3 will easily handle the 24-70 and 70-200. When you start using focal lengths greater than 300 it begins to show some weakness. That is why I got a M10. I started to use FL between 300-500 more frequently. Remember, it is only ~4oz difference between a Q3 and M10.

So the M10 seems to be a given here, but what about the legs?

Everyone is suggesting the M10 if you plan to go longer than 300mm, but aren't the Gitzo 2-series tripods rated for under 300mm lenses? I know, there are under-ratings, but I've read about vibration issues with 300mm and on when coupled with a Gitzo 2-series.

I've read some other posts online and its been suggested that the Q3 might be stickier with heavier load then say the M10. So for 4 ounces, I think I'd rather have that smoothness. As far as legs go for a 80-400 zoom I would hope that the 2540 is enough.

Esquire08 wrote in post #6097296
So the M10 seems to be a given here, but what about the legs?

Everyone is suggesting the M10 if you plan to go longer than 300mm, but aren't the Gitzo 2-series tripods rated for under 300mm lenses? I know, there are under-ratings, but I've read about vibration issues with 300mm and on when coupled with a Gitzo 2-series.