Lightweight backcountry tripod for big prime lenses

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Z

Ztm91

New member
Member's gallery
I recently purchased a Canon 500mm f4 IS II. I am looking for a tripod/head combination that will effectively support the weight of this lens, while also being as light weight as possible for extended trips hiking and camping in the backcountry. Looking for it to be effective for the 500mm and a 16-35 for landscape photography.

I am newer to photography, but used to 7+ day backcountry fly fishing trips so I am familiar with carrying quite a bit of food and gear. Im just trying to keep the weight as manageable as possible.

Thanks!
 
Member's gallery
My lightest tripod for use with a telephoto lens is a Feisol CT-3441T that weighs 2.63 lb and supports a load of 44 lb and my heaviest for still photography is a Feisol CT-3472 that weighs 3.9 lb and supports a 66 lb load. Saving 21 ounces with the traveler tripod is foolish considering the total load one carries in the field. The gimbal head weight is the same as is the lens and camera weight as is the weight of the backpack and its contents and any water battle and binoculars.

A liter of water weighs 2.2 lbs and so that would be the first thing to leave behind to save significant weight. I have 10x25 binos that weigh 12.4 oz and I take those with camera gear instead of my 12x50 ones that weigh 28.7 ounces. The difference is noticeable when they are hanging off my neck.

There are photo backpacks that can weigh 3-4 lbs more than lighter ones like those from Gura Gear for the same cubic inch capacity. I have a LowePro Trekker 600 AW III that weighs 7.3 lbs when empty. I have a similar capacity Gura Gear Bataflae 32L that weighs 4.8 lb or 2.5 lbs less than the LowePro backpack.

The tripod is the last place to worry about its weight being carried into the field. A longer lens creates more image magnification and any shortcomings of the legs an spider assembly are going to be magnified and degrade image quality. Sometimes what is interpreted as lens softness is actually the result of camera and lens movement during the exposure.
 
Member's gallery
ZTM …

My suggestion is a monopod with gimbal. This is what I use for bird photography (500mm; sometimes with 1.4x extender):
  • Gitzo monopod
  • Wimberley MonoGimbal MH-100
  • Arca-Swiss plate (preferably replacement foot)
When connecting, lay the camera with lens on the ground (and safely cushioned on your backpack!) where it cannot move or be dropped. Bring the monopod with gimbal to the lens.

… David
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
David Berry said:
ZTM …

My suggestion is a monopod with gimbal. This is what I use for bird photography (500mm; sometimes with 1.4x extender):
  • Gitzo monopod
  • Wimberley MonoGimbal MH-100
  • Arca-Swiss plate (preferably replacement foot)
When connecting, lay the camera with lens on the ground (and safely cushioned on your backpack!) where it cannot be dropped and bring the monopod with gimbal to it.

… David
Click to expand...
I watched a video on that monoGimbal and that looks like a really good setup. I’ll definitely do some further research into that methodology.
 
Member's gallery
Calson said:
My lightest tripod for use with a telephoto lens is a Feisol CT-3441T that weighs 2.63 lb and supports a load of 44 lb and my heaviest for still photography is a Feisol CT-3472 that weighs 3.9 lb and supports a 66 lb load. Saving 21 ounces with the traveler tripod is foolish considering the total load one carries in the field. The gimbal head weight is the same as is the lens and camera weight as is the weight of the backpack and its contents and any water battle and binoculars.

A liter of water weighs 2.2 lbs and so that would be the first thing to leave behind to save significant weight. I have 10x25 binos that weigh 12.4 oz and I take those with camera gear instead of my 12x50 ones that weigh 28.7 ounces. The difference is noticeable when they are hanging off my neck.

There are photo backpacks that can weigh 3-4 lbs more than lighter ones like those from Gura Gear for the same cubic inch capacity. I have a LowePro Trekker 600 AW III that weighs 7.3 lbs when empty. I have a similar capacity Gura Gear Bataflae 32L that weighs 4.8 lb or 2.5 lbs less than the LowePro backpack.

The tripod is the last place to worry about its weight being carried into the field. A longer lens creates more image magnification and any shortcomings of the legs an spider assembly are going to be magnified and degrade image quality. Sometimes what is interpreted as lens softness is actually the result of camera and lens movement during the exposure.
Click to expand...
I agree that I don’t want to go too light and make the rig unstable. But to also clarify, some of my trips may end up being 5-7 days in the backcountry hiking dozens of miles. With camping gear, food, etc, the pack gets heavy quickly and an extra 1.5lbs here and there makes a difference. Now with that being said, the head is another area of concern. I know many people suggest a gimbal, but most of those come in in the 2.5 to 3lb range and combined with a heavier tripod that ends up with a pretty heavy rig. I’ve been looking at the Acratech long lens head which weighs .89lbs. I have experience on the backcountry side of things but am pretty inexperienced on the photography side of things and with most of these systems being pretty expensive I’m just trying to be as thorough as possible
 
Member's gallery
The first change I would make in your situation is to got to an Olympus MFT kit. The lenses will way half as much and so need far less in the way of a tripod for support. For example the Olympus 300mm f/4 lens provides the view angle of a 600mm f/4 lens and yet weighs only 3.25 lb or less than half that of your 500mm f/4 lens. Olympus has a wide range of prime and zoom lenses, including f/2.8 constant aperture zooms like their 40-150mm f/2.8 with the view angles of a 80-300mm f/2.8 lens on a full frame camera. The Olympus OM-1 and a 300mm f/4 can easily be supported with the Feisol travel tripod that weighs 2.63 lbs.

With a lighter camera and lighter and smaller lens a less robust ball head can be used. I have a Kirk BH-1 and a BH-3 and the BH-3 weighs 75% less but still supports a 15 lb load or more conservatively a 8 lb camera and lens load. I would be careful in selecting a lower capacity ball head as these often lack solid support for heavy lenses in my own experience and I have ended up returning many over the years.
 
Member's gallery
David's monopod suggestion is a very good one IMO. You may want to look at iFootage monopods as an alternative.

For a tripod I recently acquired a 3lbs 57 inch tall Sirui (AM-324) that fits me exactly at 6 ft (with ballhead/gimbal etc). It is sturdy and can go very low as it has no center column. It can handle a load of up to 39 lbs and folds to a little over 20 inches (without ballhead/gimbal).
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
I am someone who has backpacked extensively and knows what is involved to be completely self-sufficient for seven days including food. As a photographer I now have photo backpacks that by the time I get all my gear in there it already weighs as much as I used to carry just for backpacking.

I would be concerned about protecting my camera gear from the elements. Things get pretty grungy after a week living out of a pack and things get shoved and knocked around in a pack. You are going to have to take extra precaution to keep the camera and lens clean and protected. Are you going to have to carry them in a sealed container? Pelican case?

Sure you can always throw another 10 or more lbs of gear and just make do with the extra weight. But I like the suggestion of going for a more compact rig.

A monopod is a good idea, and it can double as a walking stick. But a monopod is not as steady as a tripod and it may not work for long exposure shots.
 
Member's gallery
Ztm91 said:
I watched a video on that monoGimbal and that looks like a really good setup. I’ll definitely do some further research into that methodology.
Click to expand...
If you are looking at a monopod, check out the iFootage range. Best monopod I've ever had.

They are now onto the mk 3 now but I think the mk2 like mine is good enough and is now cheaper. I goes to 180cm too so I can easily shoot upwards. IIRC it can take 22 pounds weight.

eu.ifootagegear.com

iFootage Cobra 2 C180 Monopod

Super lightweight, carbon fiber, four part modular design monopod. Quick release system, adjustable feet and lock and friction control. Extends to a huge 180cm – perfect for when you need to get above the crowd. What you get: 1 x carbon fiber monopod with feet (180cm fully extended)1 x carry...
eu.ifootagegear.com eu.ifootagegear.com
 
Member's gallery
dabhand16 said:
If you are looking at a monopod, check out the iFootage range. Best monopod I've ever had.

They are now onto the mk 3 now but I think the mk2 like mine is good enough and is now cheaper. I goes to 180cm too so I can easily shoot upwards. IIRC it can take 22 pounds weight.

eu.ifootagegear.com

iFootage Cobra 2 C180 Monopod

Super lightweight, carbon fiber, four part modular design monopod. Quick release system, adjustable feet and lock and friction control. Extends to a huge 180cm – perfect for when you need to get above the crowd. What you get: 1 x carbon fiber monopod with feet (180cm fully extended)1 x carry...
eu.ifootagegear.com eu.ifootagegear.com
Click to expand...
If the lever locks and such were an outdoors color (i.e., not a bright red) I'd have purchased this model. When I e-mailed and asked if they planned on offering another color I received no response.

I'm using the Benro Supadupa with a simple tilt head which handles the Sony 600mm GMaster + 1.4x extender with ease. I like having one section with a lever lock for easy smaller adjustments.
 
Member's gallery
Tons of really good information here. I really appreciate everyone’s time and input. I think as people have stated a monopod with some sort of stabilizing base might be the ticket. I’m looking at the Benro MAD49C adventure series 4 monopod with the Wimberley monogimbal. That combination comes out to only 2lbs. If I add a monopod base or small tabletop tripod to even set up on a pack or rock for landscape i could have a kit around 2.5lbs.

As far as carrying the gear I ordered one of the Mr Jan gear carrying systems to try for active use. Additionally will have a couple foam lined dry bags for two lenses and a camera body. I have a variety of packs but most likely for extended trips I will go with my Exo 7200.

​

 
Member's gallery
David Berry said:
Dab (and ZTM) …

The mini-feet would certainly make that monopod usable with the 16–35mm (f/2.8?) wide zoom. Waterfalls, running water, shady woods, panoramas?

… David
Click to expand...

The column can swivel on the foot but does not lock the plane. The feet can also individually 'wrap' on
(say) tree roots and the detach and you can put the head on them and you have a mini tripod.
 
Member's gallery
David Berry said:
I think I follow now: the feet don't actually convert the monopod into a stay-upright-on-its-own tripod (albeit a precarious one). It can still flop over if left unattended?
Click to expand...

Without the feet deployed or removed the monopd will have to be held. There is a friction ball joint at the bottom of the column that can be locked off when the feet are deployed and it will stand upright (see both of the DP Review reviews, mk 2 and mk3) and the mk 3 feet are longer, but I think you need no wind and be able to keep the column vertical. So it is possible for it to stay upright without support.

With the feet detached and the head is removed and fitted to the feet there is no column used.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Another option at 2.8 lb is the Peak Design carbon fiber tripod. It comes with a ball head with ARCA-compatible clamp and I've used it to support the 600 GM. Don't rely on it for maximum stability especially at maximum extension, but it helps keep the camera+lens stable enough for framing the photo and it keeps the weight off my hands. I rely on the camera's Steady Shot for stability.
 
Member's gallery
Ztm91 said:
I recently purchased a Canon 500mm f4 IS II. I am looking for a tripod/head combination that will effectively support the weight of this lens, while also being as light weight as possible for extended trips hiking and camping in the backcountry. Looking for it to be effective for the 500mm and a 16-35 for landscape photography.

I am newer to photography, but used to 7+ day backcountry fly fishing trips so I am familiar with carrying quite a bit of food and gear. Im just trying to keep the weight as manageable as possible.

Thanks!
Click to expand...
I use a RRS TFC-24 mk 2 with a Jobu Jr. 3 Deluxe gimbal. Combined weight is approximately 4.9 lbs. Works well with my Z9/Z8 with the 400mm f2.8 S. It isn’t the tallest tripod out there, but I’m normally trying to get lower and don’t shoot up that often.

I have an Acratech Long Lens Head I use as a monopod head.
 
Member's gallery
Ztm91 said:
Tons of really good information here. I really appreciate everyone’s time and input. I think as people have stated a monopod with some sort of stabilizing base might be the ticket. I’m looking at the Benro MAD49C adventure series 4 monopod with the Wimberley monogimbal. That combination comes out to only 2lbs. If I add a monopod base or small tabletop tripod to even set up on a pack or rock for landscape i could have a kit around 2.5lbs.

As far as carrying the gear I ordered one of the Mr Jan gear carrying systems to try for active use. Additionally will have a couple foam lined dry bags for two lenses and a camera body. I have a variety of packs but most likely for extended trips I will go with my Exo 7200.

​

Click to expand...
I have the benro mad49a with the wimberly mh 100 gimbal head and like it a lot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top