Which tripod...

Hyburnate

Hyburnate

Hyburnate

Soldato
Joined
29 Jul 2011
Posts
15,682
Location
Near Northants / MK
I'm after a tripod for around the £35 mark, I don't want to spend too much on one yet as I want to see what use I'll get out of it. I'm open to suggestions but didn't really want to create a thread.

The two I'm looking at at the moment is these two:
  • Velbon DF-61
  • Manfrotto MKC3-H01
I'm not going to be using it for video, just for keeping the camera steady but will be using a cable release too. I really do like the look of the Manfrotto head over the Velbon, however the Velbon looks better quality. Thoughts?
 
I have never seen a 35 quid tripod that is usable for a DSLR with anything more than the kit lens, and even then there are issues.

I would maybe consider buying a bean bag instead. Cheaper, more stable.
 
I was looking for some thing for that price range! But soon realized most of them would not support a DSLR with a zoom lens.
There is a good one in the MM though ;)
 
It'll only be a 400D, which will be there for a while. It'll be the kit lens and a telephoto probably around 300mm focal length (1.6x effective 480mm) but not sure on which to go with yet.
 
Anything like RedSnapper just a little cheaper, lets ignore the budget... To a degree :p I'm not talking drastically cheaper like, perhaps, £20 cheaper?
 
Hyburnate said:
It'll only be a 400D, which will be there for a while. It'll be the kit lens and a telephoto probably around 300mm focal length (1.6x effective 480mm) but not sure on which to go with yet.
Click to expand...

Equivalent focal length is the biggest thing that needs to be taken into consideration. Obviously with the longer foal lengths small movements of the lens lead to large movements of the image across the sensor causing blur. Therefore the longer the lens the more stable the tripod has to be.

And physically long lenses also act as a lever so small forces at the front (puff of wind) can make bigger movements to the camera, and bigger lenses have a bigger area to catch the wind as well.
 
What are you using it for?

The only tripod <100 I'd consider is a SLR Gorilla Pod. The ball head is good as well.

Can get the tripod for £25, only problem is it obviously doesn't have much height to it...

kd
 
Have you looked at the Hahnel Triad 40 Lite Professional, £48.50 delivered so in budget, ball head on top, 5kg weight limit and gets good reviews.

The thing to remember is once a tripod has ticked the strong, sturdy and the right height boxes you're paying for two things, a name and better quality materials / construction / design (ok more than two ;)).

Put a cheap £20 tripod down in your home to take family portraits it'll be fine. Do light trails, fireworks etc. it'll be fine. Scale the Himalayas, explore the tropics, get on and off public transport a lot or let some clumsy muppet knock it over consider buying something of a higher quality that'll take the punishment.

Tripod are snake oil past a certain price point.
 
I have a Hahnel Triad 30 which I bought second hand from a friend. Goes for about £40 new. It seems very sturdy and has a secure ball head, a separate panning mechanism, a spirit level and quick release plate. There's also a hook at the bottom which will allow you to attach a sand bag or whatever. I use it with about 1kg of gear usually but it's designed to hold up to 4.
 
Last edited:
Sh4rkie said:
Have you looked at the Hahnel Triad 40 Lite Professional, £48.50 delivered so in budget, ball head on top, 5kg weight limit and gets good reviews.

The thing to remember is once a tripod has ticked the strong, sturdy and the right height boxes you're paying for two things, a name and better quality materials / construction / design (ok more than two ;)).

Put a cheap £20 tripod down in your home to take family portraits it'll be fine. Do light trails, fireworks etc. it'll be fine. Scale the Himalayas, explore the tropics, get on and off public transport a lot or let some clumsy muppet knock it over consider buying something of a higher quality that'll take the punishment.

Tripod are snake oil past a certain price point.
Click to expand...

Speaking from experience (going through several tripods from £20-100 that do a great job f holding up my tomatoes or supporting my flash), that is BS. Cheap tripods invariably end up being far too unstable, induce blur from vibrations and the heads are horrible to get exact framing often sagging under even a light lens like 70-300mm.


For sure the cost of high end tripods is insane but it is the same for anything. You wan to buy a canon 200-400mm f/4 L then you drop your pants and take it from behind compared to a sigma 120-400mm f6.3
 
D.P. said:
Speaking from experience (going through several tripods from £20-100 that do a great job f holding up my tomatoes or supporting my flash), that is BS. Cheap tripods invariably end up being far too unstable, induce blur from vibrations and the heads are horrible to get exact framing often sagging under even a light lens like 70-300mm.


For sure the cost of high end tripods is insane but it is the same for anything. You wan to buy a canon 200-400mm f/4 L then you drop your pants and take it from behind compared to a sigma 120-400mm f6.3
Click to expand...
Agree to a point, my caveat was it was strong, sturdy and right height irrespective of price ;)

Many moons ago I used to use a very old Argos (or might even of been an Index one that's how old it was) no name tripod that was about £15 at the time. Provided the centre column wasn't extended and it wasn't blowing more than a light breeze it coped pretty well. In doors it was great because it was a controlled environment. It was hopeless at doing lots of things though, it was too short, it had the extra supports on the centre column which meant it wouldn't get down low and the plastic 'quick' release worked when it liked. And yeah the head had to be adjusted a few mm back because it had lots of slack. It coped well enough for the odd time i dragged it out.

My cheapo Redsnapper does a cracking job for me. Its stable, meaty, the ball head copes with my kit (body, grip, at most a 70-300 lens, flash altho that lot does turn into a sail if the wind picks up). Carabiner my camera bag to the centre column and the stability goes up a few notches. Its not perfect by any stretch but for value for money for my usage, it'll do more than i can ask of it.

Point being you can spend not a huge amount of money and you'll get something that will cope very well within reasonable boundaries. Just expect the product to probably be heavier, less innovative, cheaper materials and less polished than its more expensive cousins.
 
part of the advantage i gained from moving DSLR to mirroless is everything become lighter. so requirement on tripod also reduces.

another suggestion is get a unstable tripod and leave the image stablisier on :D (ok, this is a joke)
 
jonneymendoza said:
i went for a gitzo tripod. love it.

edit: either spend £200 minimum on tripod and head, or dont bother
Click to expand...

My Redsnapper RSF-284 & RSH-12 head came to £120, I guess I have to throw that out in the bin now.

If you buy a really cheap tripod, you'll probably end up thinking 'this is crap'. So you'll either end up buying another one or not using the one you bought, ergo you've just wasted your money. £100 is a more reasonable budget.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom