Spec me a tripod

[mejinks]

Im looking for a nice tripod for my new dslr and am bewildered by the range out there. Im not looking to spend £6 on a super cheap, but conversely I dont want to spend silly money either.

I like the look of the manfrottos, but find them very costly, not to mention there seems to be 40 models with subtle variations.

Ideally I would like something which is tall enough I don't get back ache using it.

Ideas please?

 

[glosrfc]

Don't skimp on a tripod. If you try to cut corners, you'll end up buying so many unsuitable cheap tripods that you would've been able to purchase a couple of high-quality ones in the first place.

Generally, you need to ask yourself a number of questions before deciding on any spec.

1. How much kit will it have to support? With a DSLR, a reasonable telephoto lens, plus the tripod head, you should be looking for a tripod that can support between 5 and 8 kgs. With a battery grip, flash, and a larger lens, you could be looking at supporting close to 10 kgs.

2. How portable must it be? If you drive to most locations, or plan to use the tripod in a studio setup, then you can probably go for aluminium. If you hike to locations then you need something lighter such as carbon fibre but this will add around £100 to the cost.

3. How tall do you want it to be? You want a tripod that will reach eye-level yet still remain stable. The number and length of the leg sections dictates this - most tripods will have 3 leg sections while others have 4. Depending on the manufacturer, the extra sections can either make the tripod taller, or it will usually make the collapsed height more compact without affecting the overall height. Regardless of whether these extra sections add height, or make the tripod more portable, they will introduce more instability. You can also raise the centre column but this is probably the most unstable arrangement of all. Most manufacturers will give you details about the height with the column raised and lowered, as well as the number of sections. Only you will know the right height for you - but you should find many tripods that provide close to an eye-level height within those raised and lowered ranges. Ideally you should pick one that's closest to the lowered range, but also remember that the tripod head will add extra height too, usually between 4 and 6 inches.

4. What will you use the tripod for? For portraits a normal centre column will be fine but, for macro work, you might prefer a column that can be reversed so the tripod head is closer to the ground. Or you might want multi-positional legs that can splay out further, which also lowers the overall height of the tripod. Some of the Giotto tripods have a centre column that can swivel through 180 degrees and be locked in virtually any position you wish.

5. What extra features do you want? Personally, I've never bothered with spirit levels on a tripod but that might appeal to you if you take landscape or architecture pics. Do you want spiked feet for slippery terrain, or standard rubber feet? Or maybe spikes inside a rubber foot - or removable feet so you can swap them around? Foam on the legs can be useful in cold weather but it's not a priority purchase. One thing that is a priority is a central column that comes with a hook from which you can hang weights, such as your camera bag. This will help with the overall stability of the tripod. Will you want 1/4" or 3/8" fittings on the tripod? Most of the serious manufacturers will provide both, but not all. Do you want snap-locks on the leg extensions, or tightening collars? The former are generally quicker to operate while the latter are sturdier.

6. What kind of tripod head will you want? You can get tripods that come with a built-in head, or just purchase the legs to which you can add the head of your choice. A built-in head is great, if that's the one you want and it's the only type you'll ever use, as it's the cheapest option. Built-in heads are usually of the pan and tilt variety which is more suited for video work. Or you can buy a kit that comes with the legs and a removable head. If the head provided with the kit (usually a ball-head but not always) is what you want, then this is also a slightly cheaper option. Just purchasing the legs is the most sensible option though as you can buy the head you actually want and still swap heads in the future. Other common tripod heads are those that can flip the camera from horizontal to vertical, panoramic heads, and three-way heads. There are also very expensive specialist heads. Bear in mind that the type of head will also influence questions 1 and 3.

As you can see, it's probably not possible for someone to spec a tripod for you, particularly as you haven't given a great deal of information about what you intend to use it for, and how. It also explains why there is such a choice of different tripods on the market. But hopefully those questions will help you decide. If it helps any more, you will be looking at paying £100-150 for a decent set of aluminium legs; £200-250 for carbon fibre legs; plus £40-100 for a reasonable tripod head although you can save a bit if you shop around.

It took me a while to decide on the right tripod for me, and I went for a Giottos MTL9361B which gets consistently good reviews. Retail is usually £250 but you can pick them up for half that on a certain site. Other makes you can look at are Manfrotto, Benro, and Slik. If you do decide to spend silly money instead, then Redsnapper and Gitzo will relieve you of a few £100 more for essentially the same standard of tripod.

 

[mejinks]

Wow, thank you for taking the time to reply. I didn't really think about what I would use it for. I quite like studio work, and also wildlife photography, so an all round tripod would be most use. I've gone and looked at some tripods at a local shop and even the heavier ones don't seem a burden, although how that plays out after a 3 mile hike, who knows.

With regards to heads, are there any disadvantages/advantages to particular ones?

Someone I know is looking to sell a Manfrotto 055XDB Tripod with a 804RC2 Head. It seems to get good reviews although doesn't have spiked feet (are there any real advantages to having them?) so do you think that would be a good place to start?

 

[D.P.]

When buying a tripod one of the key variables is what is the length of the longest lens that you will want to use on the tripod? e.g. a 100-400 on a crop body gives a lot of reach so the smallest movements get highly magnified (which is why when you hand hold the image drastically moves with your hand shake).

Ideally you want to out your biggest and longest lens on the tripod and be able to tap the front of the lens without imparting a vibration. Most tripods fail at this and so are essentially useless for long lens use but will be fine for wide and standard angle work.


The typical mantra is choose 2 of the following: stable, cheap, light.
You can't have all 3 and an unstable tripod is useless so if you are on a budget you are looking at heavier steel tripods that can bed very affordable and very stable.


Some other tips:
Buy the tripod with the least number of leg sections possible, 3 or less is best. Tripods are only as stable as the weakest part, which tends to be the end section of the legs. With telescopic legs each section gets smaller and thinner and less stable, but that is where you need the most stability because that is the ground contact and that is what is supporting the weight of all the tripod and camera and lens.

Avoid center columns whenever possible. The weight should always be at the center of the apex of the triangle made by the legs. This is the strongest part of the system. Adding a center column will mean the camera exerts a torque moment about the tripod apex. One way to see this is to imagine a ruler held to the edge of the table. If only 1cm overhangs the table and you try to ping the end of the ruler then not much will happen, a slight low amplitude vibration. Now push the ruler so like 20cm stick out, ping the end of the ruler and you get a large amplitude lower frequency vibration- if the camera was at the end of the ruler the movement would induce blur.
If a center colum is important then you will have to go up a couple of models to get a sturdier tripod.

The other downsides to a center colum is the increased weight, size and cost. The benefit is getting some thing that can go taller if need be but I haven't yet ever found a situation where that is important (potentially if you need to shoot over a wall or fence)

 

[glosrfc]

The main thing is that, whatever tripod you get, it must be stable enough to carry your kit without any movement. Cheap tripods might look appealing on price, but they can be quite frustrating to use if the legs start to collapse, or the head creeps down under the weight of your camera and lens.

So start by figuring out how much load you expect it to bear. Once you've done that, then think about how much you will be carrying it. Carbon fibre is lighter than aluminium but more expensive. Aluminium is stronger should you accidently tread on it. Also think about how compact you want it, for example if you plan on taking it on overseas trips. More leg sections usually means the collapsed tripod is smaller, but more leg joints can introduce instability. You've started the right way though as you've already tested a few models.

Heads generally come in two flavours. Ball and socket heads are secured with a single screw/lever and can be rotated quickly in a number of directions - think of it like your shoulder joint. They're the most popular all-round choice as they're easy to use and they're great if you're planning to shoot subjects that move in different directions, e.g. birds and wildlife. The simplest ball and socket head will have a single screw/lever that releases the ball so allowing it to move freely in any direction. Others have an additional screw that secures the base of the head - releasing this allows the head to rotate around the vertical axis without releasing the ball, allowing you to pan the camera easily.

For detailed composition work, a three-way head is more suitable. As the name suggests, these can be independently adjusted around three axis - think of your wrist joint that can move your hand up and down, from side to side, and can also rotate. Each axis can be set individually which means there are three screws/levers to adjust. So they're great for studio work, shooting architecture, or still-life photography, where the subject isn't liable to move quickly.

Other heads include gimballs, pistol-grips, panoramic, and geared. Gimballs are specialist heads for wildlife/sports where the camera is suspended inside the head itself. The idea is that you can freely move the camera in any direction without having to fiddle around releasing levers, etc. But they are very expensive and take a lot of fiddling to set up right. Pistol-grips are essentially a ball and socket head without the securing lever. Instead, this is built in to the trigger on the grip - squeeze the trigger and the ball is freed to allow it to move and the grip can also be used to pan the head around. Panoramic heads are designed mostly for rotating the camera around the vertical plane so you can sweep the horizon and they're also marked with degree etchings so that multiple shots can be aligned and stitched together later. Geared heads are simply three-way heads where the adjustment screws/levers have worm gears allowing you to more accurately align the three planes. Consquently they also come at a premium price.

The last head you'll see advertised is a tilt-head. These are quite simple in that they quickly switch the camera from a horizontal to a vertical position. They're primarily aimed at monopod users that want to take a vertical picture but still keep the monopod upright.

The advantage with using a seperate head is that you can swap them for a different one depending on the type of photography you're planning to do. For most general photography, a ball-head will do the trick as it offers the speed and flexibility of most other heads. If you take mostly landscapes, architecture, or work in a studio, then a three-way head will probably be the better choice. But, with a decent tripod, you can always change later. The cheaper tripods will have a built-in head, usually one designed for panning a video camera. Buying one of these is therefore a false economy as you won't be able to use a more suitable head without buying a new tripod.

The key consideration when purchasing any head is to make sure that, like the tripod itself, it's rated to carry the combined weight of your camera and lens. You might also want to think about whether the head has a quick release mechanism that allows you to remove and attach the camera quickly. This usually involves the attachment of a plate to the base of the camera which can be clicked into position on the head, ideally with a safety mechanism that prevents it from being accidently released. Most of the better makes of tripod head will usually provide some kind of quick release mechanism.

Spikes aren't that important - they're only of use on rugged terrain where the tripod may be prone to slipping. For most work, rubber feet will be fine.

The Manfrotto is a fine beginners tripod. It's quite heavy to lug around, about 2.5kg, and it can support up to 4kg in weight. The legs can be positioned at a range of angles which will be useful if you want to do any macro photography, although I'm not sure if the centre column can be reversed or not and you might need a low-angle adaptor to get really close to the ground. The Pro version of this tripod does allow the centre column to be positioned at 90 degrees to the tripod legs, and can support an extra 3kgs if that's a consideration.

The head is a three-way pan and tilt model which uses levers to control the movement in the three planes. Although not as quick to use as a ball and socket head, it should be fine for any of your studio work. It also has a quick release plate with double-locking for additional security.

If you can get it for a good price, it will serve you well. If you can, ask the individual why they're getting rid of it - if they tell you that the head is no use for shooting wildlife, and you plan to do mostly that, then reconsider the purchase, otherwise I'm sure it will be okay for you.

 

[glosrfc]

Regarding the posting above mine...you'll be hard pushed to purchase a tripod from the major manufacturers/retailers that doesn't have a centre column, so "avoiding one" isn't that practical.

The issue is whether you use it or not. Any tripod will naturally be more unstable if you have the centre column fully extended but it's rarely an issue if the column is only extended a couple of inches, certainly with the top-end manufacturers. Plus, the addition of a column gives you added flexibility should you need it, along with the ability to reverse it should you wish. For example, it can be easier to quickly raise the centre column an inch than fiddle around trying to raise all three legs by an inch and to get everything level again. The additional weight of a column isn't an issue either, in the overall scheme of things.

 

[mrk]

Velbon Ultra Rexi L is one I have used (mate's) and have also bought for myself, it should arrive tomorrow and it's got a huge following from video and photographers out in the field as a very stable yet very compact tripod. Having seen how light and how rigid it is fully extended I don't think there's another tripod close to its price that can beat it.

It doesn't come with a head but you can easily find good heads from various makers. Calumet have professional heads at good prices.

 

[Amp34]

Regarding the posting above mine...you'll be hard pushed to purchase a tripod from the major manufacturers/retailers that doesn't have a centre column, so "avoiding one" isn't that practical.

The issue is whether you use it or not. Any tripod will naturally be more unstable if you have the centre column fully extended but it's rarely an issue if the column is only extended a couple of inches, certainly with the top-end manufacturers. Plus, the addition of a column gives you added flexibility should you need it, along with the ability to reverse it should you wish. For example, it can be easier to quickly raise the centre column an inch than fiddle around trying to raise all three legs by an inch and to get everything level again. The additional weight of a column isn't an issue either, in the overall scheme of things.

Or just remove the centre column entirely, most good manufacturers allow you to attach the head straight to the legs. It has it's benefits and negatives, principally stability and less weight but it does mean you can't get as high if needed. I have one tripod that hasn't had a centre column on since I bought it.

OP the important thing to remember is the best tripod is the one you have with you... You mention the 055 doesn't seem heavy but it may well seem so in a few months, especially when you include the general bulk of it when you want to go walking and take a tripod with you just in case. I have three tripods because I did the standard thing of buying the biggest and "most stable" as recommended and then realised it wasn't any good when left at home...

First tripod was a 055Pro, great, sturdy tripod but pretty bulky and a pain to take anywhere you aren't going by car. I do most of my photography either when travelling or hiking so lugging a 3kg tripod that only just fits into a suitcase and has to go on the outside of a backpack is a pain. It's a great tripod that can carry a lot of weight though so a pretty good studio tripod.

My next tripod was a Giottos GB1050 (I think), weighs about a kg and packs down to about 30cm. I use that when weight is an issue, such as ultralight walking or when wandering around a city. It's very stable (holds a 300 f/4 stabily) and was very cheap (£25). Sounds great, except it's maximum height is 60cm, with it's most stable spread out a bit so about a foot off the ground. Again positives and negatives. Great when shooting in the wilds because you can place it on a rock for added height or get lots of foreground in, not great if there is long grass...

My third tripod was bought because I wanted the extra height and weight holding ability but also something small and light enough to take away with me on trips (foreign or less lightweight walking). I ended up with the Manfrotto 190CX3. Its a great little tripod that gets good height (have to bend over slightly with the centre column out but otherwise generally pretty good), is light and short enough to fit into a small hold bag or on the side of a backpack and most importantly is a sturdy platform. I use it with a D7000 and 17-55 as well as occasionally putting a 120-300. Unless you're looking at specialist wildlife lenses (such as 600 f/4s) you're not going to get much heavier so fine for the average user. While some might suggest it shouldn't be able to take that soft of lens it's well within manufacturers spec and I've never had a problem with it, including while videoing at 600mm.

So the recommendation is don't underestimate bulk and don't expect a single tripod to everything. I use all three for different things but would definitely recommend the 190CX3*. If that's out of budget the aluminium version is cheaper but heavier. Compromises are something you'll have to decide yourself.

*I saved some money and weight by going for the non pro version as I was talking the centre column out anyway. The Pro may be better if you don't plan on doing that.

 

[D.P.]

Regarding the posting above mine...you'll be hard pushed to purchase a tripod from the major manufacturers/retailers that doesn't have a centre column, so "avoiding one" isn't that practical.

The issue is whether you use it or not. Any tripod will naturally be more unstable if you have the centre column fully extended but it's rarely an issue if the column is only extended a couple of inches, certainly with the top-end manufacturers. Plus, the addition of a column gives you added flexibility should you need it, along with the ability to reverse it should you wish. For example, it can be easier to quickly raise the centre column an inch than fiddle around trying to raise all three legs by an inch and to get everything level again. The additional weight of a column isn't an issue either, in the overall scheme of things.

Gitzo systematic series have the centre column as an optional extra, saves 500-700g weight which is very nice. Really Right stuff have many tripods also don't come with a column.

I know other Brands allow the centre column to be removed and replaced with an alu plug, e.g. Manfrotto 055CX but they are hard to buy without the column potentially wasting money..

The Benro CR770T also has so flat top and no centre column.
There are others but between Gitzo and RRS you have all the best tripods in the world, and for so ethnographic that lasts 20+years and is critical for image quality and ease of use I find them worth the investment.

 

[doodah]

Thread revival but I was researching tripods and came across the Giottos MTL9361B, mentioned earlier in the thread.

Has it been discontinued as I can't really find anywhere that sells it. Has there been a successor?

I found a tripod in my previous flat, not sure what make it is, but after doing some night time photography on my recent holiday - it does feel a bit cheap. I get the impression a tripod it something you shouldn't skimp on so thought I would get a proper one now (only just started photography).

 

[Hunders]

I used to have a 9361B and yes, I think it has been discontinued.

I sold it a while back to fund a new Giottos Vitruvian VGR9255 which is excellent.

 

[doodah]

Thank you, I will look into that model. I may weigh my current one at work to see if I am that bothered with carbon fibre models, for £100 more - probably not.

 

[Andrew_McP]

This is as useful a place to confess my sins as any. This week, after many weeks of trying to find a tripod which made sense for me, I threw caution and advice to the wind and spent £50 on this 7Dayshop 'professional' tripod.

http://www.7dayshop.com/7dayshop-tr...or-professional-photo-video-use-includes-case

I went into this with my eyes open and I think I pretty much got what I paid for. It's not lousy, it's not great, but it is light -- which I need as a ageing non-driver with a dodgy back -- and, so far, has managed not to let me down... during testing at home.

The legs are not exactly reassuringly solid, but even with a 70D and 100-400L at full extension the tripod and head hold position nicely; no creep even when angled (though I do have the tripod mount on the lens, which helps).

Ok, the phrase 'rock solid' is not going to be applied here, but for me a tripod is not for long exposures and HDR (much), it's for supporting the weight of my gear during long, often futile sessions waiting for wildlife to appear.

Having said that, the 70D's HDR mode seems happy enough to produce sharp results, but it's using self-correcting algorithms which won't suit serious HDR users.

What else? Free bag's ridiculously bulky because of the padding, and I don't need to advertise my 7Dayshop branding... though neither will I ever pay 20+ quid for the pleasure of a Manfrotto logo on a similar bag, so I can't argue with 'free'.

The quick release plate's a bit on the un-quick side, but that's a trivial complaint and I'll certainly get used to it soon ebough. And... er, oh yes, I'm 5'11 and at full extensiom (ie not the ideal way to use it) the tripod brings the camera viewfinder exactly up to my eye level, making it very comfortable -- I anticipate -- to use for long periods in patient waiting mode.

There's also a generous return policy for a pristine tripod, so there's not a lot to be lost apart from some time and postage if anyone's curious.

Obviously with the best part of 2k's worth of kit to balance on a tripod, saving money should not be the biggest concern, but selecting a tripod is a pain in the backside, and my instincts tend to be in the redsnapper 'why so expensive?' camp, and it was only weight which turned me away from them in the end.

I had been tempted by http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-manfrotto-293c4-carbon-fibre-tripod-and-d3q2-3-way-head/p1534476 but despite the carbon, that's not a light tripod (as portable tripods go) and it's not really high enough for comfort for me. I might have been tempted if I could find more discussion about it, but I couldn't, which makes you wonder why it's cheap and discontinued.

Anyway, a hideously complex and yet theoretically simple product to research. I'm glad I have, perhaps temporarily, solved my indecision. Buy cheap, buy twice may still apply, but my previous £15 tripod has been with me for 15+ years and never let me down. It just wasn't tall enough to suit my increasingly dodgy back.

Hope this helps someone at some point in the future... even if it's only because I add a post in a year's time complaining about how my tripod killed my camera.

 

[mrk]

Heh a mate was showing me the 7dayshop range recently too.

I still stand by the Velbon Rexi-L and Calumet 7049 ball head! Such a good, light yet solid and versatile combination.

 

[Andrew_McP]

Just had a quick look at the Rexi-L and I'd be willing to put a decent bet that it and the 7Day come from the same production line. The legs look identical in every way, even if the head end is of a different design.

 

[mrk]

It appears the bottom feet end and locking sections for the telescope section is similar but the top base is certainly different as are the hinges

Also:

The legs are not exactly reassuringly solid

The Rexi-L is solid through and through! I suppose while the 7dayshop one shares some lower section similarities that's probably where it ends. I rate the Velbon as tough as my old Slik Master Classic all steel tripod, just minus all the weight that thing possessed.

 

[D.P.]

This is as useful a place to confess my sins as any. This week, after many weeks of trying to find a tripod which made sense for me, I threw caution and advice to the wind and spent £50 on this 7Dayshop 'professional' tripod.

http://www.7dayshop.com/7dayshop-tr...or-professional-photo-video-use-includes-case

I went into this with my eyes open and I think I pretty much got what I paid for. It's not lousy, it's not great, but it is light -- which I need as a ageing non-driver with a dodgy back -- and, so far, has managed not to let me down... during testing at home.

The legs are not exactly reassuringly solid, but even with a 70D and 100-400L at full extension the tripod and head hold position nicely; no creep even when angled (though I do have the tripod mount on the lens, which helps).

Ok, the phrase 'rock solid' is not going to be applied here, but for me a tripod is not for long exposures and HDR (much), it's for supporting the weight of my gear during long, often futile sessions waiting for wildlife to appear.

Having said that, the 70D's HDR mode seems happy enough to produce sharp results, but it's using self-correcting algorithms which won't suit serious HDR users.

What else? Free bag's ridiculously bulky because of the padding, and I don't need to advertise my 7Dayshop branding... though neither will I ever pay 20+ quid for the pleasure of a Manfrotto logo on a similar bag, so I can't argue with 'free'.

The quick release plate's a bit on the un-quick side, but that's a trivial complaint and I'll certainly get used to it soon ebough. And... er, oh yes, I'm 5'11 and at full extensiom (ie not the ideal way to use it) the tripod brings the camera viewfinder exactly up to my eye level, making it very comfortable -- I anticipate -- to use for long periods in patient waiting mode.

There's also a generous return policy for a pristine tripod, so there's not a lot to be lost apart from some time and postage if anyone's curious.

Obviously with the best part of 2k's worth of kit to balance on a tripod, saving money should not be the biggest concern, but selecting a tripod is a pain in the backside, and my instincts tend to be in the redsnapper 'why so expensive?' camp, and it was only weight which turned me away from them in the end.

I had been tempted by http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-manfrotto-293c4-carbon-fibre-tripod-and-d3q2-3-way-head/p1534476 but despite the carbon, that's not a light tripod (as portable tripods go) and it's not really high enough for comfort for me. I might have been tempted if I could find more discussion about it, but I couldn't, which makes you wonder why it's cheap and discontinued.

Anyway, a hideously complex and yet theoretically simple product to research. I'm glad I have, perhaps temporarily, solved my indecision. Buy cheap, buy twice may still apply, but my previous £15 tripod has been with me for 15+ years and never let me down. It just wasn't tall enough to suit my increasingly dodgy back.

Hope this helps someone at some point in the future... even if it's only because I add a post in a year's time complaining about how my tripod killed my camera.

Tripod shopping is horrible. I spent around 3 years researching, tying and refusing to pay such outlandish amount of money thing there must be something out there, heck I could make my own CF tripod for 50 quid.

I tested dozens upon dozens, read every review, asked in loads of forums, pleaded with people to tell the truth on whether a500 pound Gitzo or RRS was the only viable options. The results all came back the same sadly and I just refused to give in.

For sure there are cheaper tripods and heads that are quite good depending on your needs but none of them are perfect. For shorter lenses and short exposures then you can get a way with much less but I wanted to use both long lenses and do long exposures.


In the end I realized I have like 10K's worth of camera equipment, getting the best tripod and head would be less than 10% of that total and little different to adding a good lens. More over, that 2K body will be horribly outdated in 10 years time but the 1k tripod + head will be still running strong and giving excellent performance with not much on the market that is any better. Even those lenses will have aged over 10 years, with sharper, better focusing, higher contrast models down the road. The tripod will still be going strong long into the future.

I realized I was pretty foolish to resist paying for a high end tripod when I pay for high end lenses and high end cameras that have a shorter lifespan.


Still annoys me that there are so many tripods that are just insufficient, and then the prices go astronomical for no apparent reasons other than the tripods are actually rock solid. Even then you have to be careful, plenty of the Gitzo tripods are very poor.


Anyway, I preach this all the time and few people on OCUK ever listen. Just look at how much money you have tied up in lenses, cameras, batteries, filters, cards, software, computer, back up , how many cameras you will go through in 20 years and then look at the price of a decent tripod and head which will last you for life.

 

[Andrew_McP]

how many cameras you will go through in 20 years and then look at the price of a decent tripod and head which will last you for life.

That is an absolutely valid argument, and if there was a 'perfect' tripod which did everything we need in one bundle I'd have no problem making a lifetime purchase. In fact I was geared up to do so (though I was never going to be in the £300+ category. I'd rather have glass).

However that tripod doesn't really exist, and the more you spend the harder it is to justify tripods which are 'nearly ideal'. Which is where the endless dithering and inevitable compromise comes from.

Speaking of inevitable compromise, my plans for an early morning test session with my new tripod and a pair of badly lit kingfishers have disappeared after an emergency call from my mother. I'll spend more on rail fare tonight than I did on my tripod. Maybe it's just as well I saved some money.

It's a useful reminder that all these things have to take their place in our lives and wallets. I suspect for the amount of use it'll get my 7Day will probably be absolutely fine.

Famous last words.

 

[D.P.]

I hope you mother is OK.

Life is liek that with expenses. I purchased the D800 instead if the D800 E (the E has no anti-aliasing filter so is sharper) because it was $500 more expensive and I thought that money would be better sent on a lens. A few days later a large stone cracked the winds screen of my car and I spent $400 repairing it, a month later after a long road trip trying to park in the dark I backed into a concrete post and spent another $450 repairing that, due to the stress of that I totally forgot about an offer on furniture that I wanted so I missed the discount and spent another few hundred to get it at full retail. Then I look at the $2000 I pay on mortgage and the $1000 a month on child care soon and I kind of think damn, should have gone with the E model!


I know what you mean about no perfect tripod. What I wanted to ensure was complete stability and easy of use from the head. I compromised on having something that is not that light, not quite tall enough, and doesn't collapse that small. But I can live with thee compromises. Simple physics and mechanics will show you can't make something much lighter relative to the weight of what it must support, and to make something collapsing then you typically compromise on stability, e.g. a 4th telescopic leg section will have to be smaller than the 3rd, so that will be less strong, Something taller will always be less stable than something closer to the ground.

 

[Andrew_McP]

I hope you mother is OK.

I'm sure she'll be fine, but she's a lot less mentally resilient than she used to be before my 'little' brother disappeared from just up the road to the USA. Sometimes no amount of talking on the phone helps reassure her.

I know what you mean about no perfect tripod.

As with everything in a highly developed consumerist society, there are lots of people earning a very good living by separating features out across a pricing spectrum aimed at nudging us up the price/feature slope. Our job is to not let them win. Not too often anyway. :->

FWIW while the 7Day isn't going to win awards for stability at full stretch, I may have been under-selling its stability at default. It's not bad at all then, and with a less chunky zoom on it would no doubt be perfectly respectable.

However without being in a shop and able to compare these things side by side it's very hard to be objective, especially with something like tripods where it's all about the physical attributes. And of course long term use will reveal shortcuts in materials.

All in all this makes buying a camera look easy in comparison, and I never thought I'd say that about anything!