Pros and cons of big heavy tripods (convince me that I need one)

[bleirer]

There's much useful advice, explanations given through this thread. My only addition is to suggest it's well worth reading up about the principles of tripod specifications/materials etc and on the few sources that make rigorous comparisons. This is essential to get beyond the brand advertising, and seine through many options on the market.

A great deal depends on why you are buying a tripod (s) in the first place. Thus not only weight of gear, and focal lengths, but above all, what are your Subjects, and how you photograph, and/or film.... So several factors determine tripod selection, and there's also the quality of the materials, machining, patented features etc, and all these ramp up the costs.

Thom Hogan has "tripod advice" articles buried in his websites.

Above all, the Center Column is essential reading IMHO

The Center Column

Independent Tripod Testing

thecentercolumn.com

That looks like a great resource for objective info.

 

[Tom Reynolds]

I admit to not being a "big-heavy-tripod" person. I have given away all my heavy tripods in favor of cheap lightweight versions that keep my checked luggage light enough. Frankly, I think big-heavy-tripod is old fashioned thinking.

I have on my wall a canvass print of Lake Powell when it still had water in it. It was taken with a D-7200/12-24 on a cheap $30 tripod with a remote shutter. Since then, modern cameras have in-body and in-lens stabilization that make the stability of the camera in a landscape application even more problematical.

For wildlife, big-heavy-tripods are for the 600f4 shooter, not me.

tom

 

[EricBowles]

I still use the aluminum Gitzo tripod I purchased in 1979 and it works as well now as it did then. I have updated the head a few times as my needs changed but the tripod still works as well as it did the day I purchased it. It is heavy and I don't really remember what I paid for it, but I do remember thinking that it was very expensive at the time. What ever the cost was it is probably the best value in photography I have ever had. I do have a smaller carbon fiber tripod that I travel with when weight and size is important.

Purchase a good tripod and head now and you won't have to worry about that piece of equipment for many years.

This is a great example. I still have a Gitzo 3 series alloy tripod I bought used around 2005. I paid $280 for it and it's worth $260 today. I can use it for as long as I want for virtually nothing. It's nearly indestructible. Moving to a newer Gitzo 3 series cost me about $700. It provided similar stability but was carbon fiber (lighter) had improved leg locks and a better hub, packed more easily, and was pretty good. The challenge was the design - I had to have modifications and expensive replacement parts on my tripod while my wife had no issues with the same model. Now I'm using a RRS tripod - and it has a number of improvements along with much better service.

If you are going to get a tripod, get one you are willing to use. The more you use it the better your photos will be - and you'll be happier with the tripod. I don't think $300 buys a comparable tripod to a $1000 model, but at $600-700 you can get something that compares well. Be sure you consider service. Some of the cheap tripods don't really provide any service at all. If you are really interested, you can find a good tripod on some of the Forums. I've seen Gitzo 3 series tripods on Nikonians for $400-600 depending on the model.

 

[gpsman]

This is not a brand comparison discussion so please no specific brand recommendations.

What I'm interested in is why so many top shooters say it is imperative to have a huge expensive tripod. I guess I don't like the cost as I can get a pretty decent lens instead for the same $3000 and I don't like the weight since I have to carry it on a trail, and I don't like the size since I have to find a place in the trunk for it and pay to ship it.

Doesn't a $300 tripod get the same result 90% of the time? If its a calm day and the setup is basic? What is needed to get that final 10%?

I guess I'm willing to spend the money if it really is the magic fairy dust that will change my life, but I'd need convincing.

I did a lot of research on tripods. Primarily because I have Parkinson’s and have trouble holding my 200-500 on the D850. I looked at many tripods and gimbals. Because I’m retired and on a fixed income, I had to go le price. The tripod had to be aluminum since the composites were too expensive for me. I ended up with mafrotto. I like it actually. Well made. I got the shoulder strap for it and fully extended, can carry it and the camera on the the black rapid

 

[gpsman]

I did a lot of research on tripods. Primarily because I have Parkinson’s and have trouble holding my 200-500 on the D850. I looked at many tripods and gimbals. Because I’m retired and on a fixed income, I had to go le price. The tripod had to be aluminum since the composites were too expensive for me. I ended up with mafrotto. I like it actually. Well made. I got the shoulder strap for it and fully extended, can carry it and the camera on the the black rapid on the same shoulder. I can Set up the tripod and pop the camera on as needed. You just make it work.

 

[Whiskeyman]

I purchased my primary tripod used and for a great discount over new and it is functionally perfect. Where I've spent the most money is on different heads: a Wemberley gimbal, a Nodal Ninja panorama head, etc. None of these were purchased new, and I'm perfectly happy with them. Look around for a good used tripod and save yourself some money!

 

[Nimi]

This is a great example. I still have a Gitzo 3 series alloy tripod I bought used around 2005. I paid $280 for it and it's worth $260 today. I can use it for as long as I want for virtually nothing. It's nearly indestructible. Moving to a newer Gitzo 3 series cost me about $700. It provided similar stability but was carbon fiber (lighter) had improved leg locks and a better hub, packed more easily, and was pretty good. The challenge was the design - I had to have modifications and expensive replacement parts on my tripod while my wife had no issues with the same model. Now I'm using a RRS tripod - and it has a number of improvements along with much better service.

If you are going to get a tripod, get one you are willing to use. The more you use it the better your photos will be - and you'll be happier with the tripod. I don't think $300 buys a comparable tripod to a $1000 model, but at $600-700 you can get something that compares well. Be sure you consider service. Some of the cheap tripods don't really provide any service at all. If you are really interested, you can find a good tripod on some of the Forums. I've seen Gitzo 3 series tripods on Nikonians for $400-600 depending on the model.

Great point re serviceability. In the studio I use a 200lb, $4,000 Manfrotto (which owns Gitzo) Super Salon camera stand. A part broke, and it is impossible to get it. Nothing to do with supply chain woes, they're simply not good at this. Contrast that with a broken segment on my RRS (truck ran over it), a call to Utah, an overnight package to me.

I am in the market for a cine tripod, and it won't Manfrotto despite their excellent offering.

 

[Charles Loy]

Great point re serviceability. In the studio I use a 200lb, $4,000 Manfrotto (which owns Gitzo) Super Salon camera stand. A part broke, and it is impossible to get it.

I don't know about the Manfrotto, but I have mentioned this many time on the forum, Gitzo sells the tripods then totally ignores the buyers. Worse support ever. Emails ignored, go to the site and work up an order and it is ignored. I'll never buy another Gitzo anything.
But two thumbs and a leg up to RRS, Arca Swiss and Wimberley and two thumbs up to Benro.

 

[Nimi]

I don't know about the Manfrotto, but I have mentioned this many time on the forum, Gitzo sells the tripods then totally ignores the buyers. Worse support ever. Emails ignored, go to the site and work up an order and it is ignored. I'll never buy another Gitzo anything.
But two thumbs and a leg up to RRS, Arca Swiss and Wimberley and two thumbs up to Benro.

Manfrotto is just as bad although they continue to make great products. I buy them if I can't find an alternate source. And pray it doesn't ever break.

 

[EricBowles]

I don't know about the Manfrotto, but I have mentioned this many time on the forum, Gitzo sells the tripods then totally ignores the buyers. Worse support ever. Emails ignored, go to the site and work up an order and it is ignored. I'll never buy another Gitzo anything.
But two thumbs and a leg up to RRS, Arca Swiss and Wimberley and two thumbs up to Benro.

I had a similar problem with Gitzo. The top of the leg section is a cast alloy material with a wall thinner than the CF tubes. I cracked one several years ago in August. I had no access to a replacement part because the factory was closed for holidays in August. The service available was basically they would replace your tripod with a new one with a small discount. US service was unresponsive - even working through a large dealer. I finally got the part from the UK ( https://www.gitzospares.com/ ).

Service is important, and it's more important as you have more invested. A $300 tripod simply goes on the scrap heap rather than being repaired. A $700-1000 tripod should come with good service in support of the product. You don't want the lack of a $25 part to be the cause of replacing your tripod.

 

[fcotterill]

Fyi
Manfrotto, Gitzo and also Sachtler are owned by Videndum plc, including Vinten

Videndum - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Nimi]

Fyi
Manfrotto, Gitzo and also Sachtler are owned by Videndum plc, including Vinten

Videndum - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Which is why I will probably not get a Sachtler, although it's considered among the best cine tripods. I think Gitzo and Manfrotto are made in the same factory.

 

[tclune]

I have two tripods that I use occasionally: a Slik 700 that cost $100 until recently and an Induro AT413 that is no longer made but cost about $250 when I got it as I recall. Both are aluminum. The Slik is kind of small and on the flimsy side, but is light enough that I don't mind carting it around when I need a tripod in the field (a rare event for me.) The Induro is a lot more substantial. I wouldn't want to hike with it very far, but it is absolutely rock solid when I use it. It's a lot more enjoyable to use if I'm not going too far from car or home. I've had both of these for a number of years and, with my light use, they each are as good as when I first bought them. If I had spent a few thousand dollars on a tripod, I wouldn't use it any more than I do these.

 

[DsD]

I view tripods as investments, unlike other fashionable camera gear that gets superseded by the latest and greatest.

My decisions were mission specific. My 1st serious tripod was a Gitzo 2 CF series in the Nikon D200 day for trail and backpacking use. I wanted more than enough gun but not more weight than necessary.

Next up was a "Heavy" as camera and lens grew, plus the want of a dedicated "out of vehicle" tripod with a gimbal head as standard OP. Lightest weight was NOT my main concern. Simplicity, versatility, stability and vibration dampening were.

Thus, I started looking for a 1 stage cine tripod in aluminum. I wasn't about to spend $1300 at the time for new, though, so I opted to patiently search for used legs. Payoff came via KEH that had a Sachtler DA 100L for an additional 30% off. I snagged it for $600.00. It shipped in Sachtler's hard shipping tube as well. Both were like new (if not new), the polished feet spikes didn't even have any scratches on them! That hard case sells for over $600.00 alone new.

It's not glitzy but very versatile and perfect for my wants/needs; I am thrilled with it. Plus, I believe I can service it if needed with simple hardware.

Is it over-kill being able to support 77#- yes! Is it heavy at 6.4#- yes! Was my "heavy" mission accomplished- yes!

Hope this is helpful.

 

[frdjohns]

I think this article by Thom is an excellent read. It explains why you should spend more for a quality tripod, rather than trying to save a few bucks on something less expensive.

https://www.dslrbodies.com/accessories/other-accessories/tripod-101.html

 

[Chris K]

Just ask yourself: would you honestly trust $5,000-$10,000 in camera gear on a $250 tripod?

For years I used an old 70’s era Velbon pan-tilt. Three leg segments, aluminum, and the legs had a support connecting to the center column. The thing was an absolute tank, and easily handled my 7D+300/2.8+2x. I could see no sharpness difference using MLU or even a remote. Wind didn’t even bother it.

It did weigh a lot….

I think when you’re talking tripods, cost equals height*stability*weight. You can absolutely get cheap, stable tripods, but they’ll be short and/or heavy.

I hate carrying weight, so these days I use the most compact tripod I can, use a timer, and accept that there might be wind conditions where I am going to give up some sharpness. I’d rather strap a 3lbs tripod to my pack with those limitations than have a sharper photo in 20mph winds but have to carry a giant leg set.

 

[EricBowles]

For years I used an old 70’s era Velbon pan-tilt. Three leg segments, aluminum, and the legs had a support connecting to the center column. The thing was an absolute tank, and easily handled my 7D+300/2.8+2x. I could see no sharpness difference using MLU or even a remote. Wind didn’t even bother it.

It did weigh a lot….

I think when you’re talking tripods, cost equals height*stability*weight. You can absolutely get cheap, stable tripods, but they’ll be short and/or heavy.

I hate carrying weight, so these days I use the most compact tripod I can, use a timer, and accept that there might be wind conditions where I am going to give up some sharpness. I’d rather strap a 3lbs tripod to my pack with those limitations than have a sharper photo in 20mph winds but have to carry a giant leg set.

You point out an important distinction when it comes to individual needs.

• If you don't need mobility, you can save a lot with Alloy legs over carbon fiber.
• If you have an expensive, large long lens, you need a very robust tripod - like a Gitzo Series 4 or RRS Series 3 - that supports all the weigh you might have under any conditions.
• For general use, a Gitzo Series 3 / RRS Series 2 is a good all purpose tripod. If your kit is light and won't change, you could move to a Gitzo Series 2 / RRS Series 1.
• Travel tripods and Gitzo series 1 equivalents make compromises unsuitable for general use. In the right place, they are still fine, but excellent technique and potentially weight to add stability may be needed. For me, when a tripod is too light it's a negative.
• If your long lens is often handheld - and cost less than $2000 - you can go with something solid but lighter that would be typically used for landscapes. Likewise if you are using all purpose lenses like a 24-200, you are already giving up some sharpness and might not see any real difference with a cheaper tripod
• Tripod weight ratings are only useful within a single line or brand. There are no standards or CIPA weight ratings.
• You might compromise on tripod capacity if you need a light kit for long distances, but don't consider just the tripod. Compromises are relevant and you need to consider your bag, camera, lenses, tripod head, and even filter kits when choosing a light weight setup. Your weight savings on a tripod is probably less than a pound without major compromises.
• There is nothing wrong with a used tripod. The things last forever. Stick with good brands which can provide customer support if needed. The converse is true - off brand tripods have a lot lower resale and are more likely to suffer with age.

 

[tclune]

Just ask yourself: would you honestly trust $5,000-$10,000 in camera gear on a $250 tripod?

I see this sentiment expressed often on photography fora. It makes no sense to me at all (Of course, I have blithely entrusted my rig to $10 tripods in the past...) IME the real danger with tripods is user error -- rushing to set up without making sure that the legs are properly locked and all firmly planted on solid ground, etc. Unfortunately, stupidity is indifferent to the price you paid for your equipment. There are real benefits that expensive tripods can afford the user, but this one is oversold to my way of thinking.

 

[Abinoone]

I see this sentiment expressed often on photography fora. It makes no sense to me at all (Of course, I have blithely entrusted my rig to $10 tripods in the past...) IME the real danger with tripods is user error -- rushing to set up without making sure that the legs are properly locked and all firmly planted on solid ground, etc. Unfortunately, stupidity is indifferent to the price you paid for your equipment. There are real benefits that expensive tripods can afford the user, but this one is oversold to my way of thinking.

I get your point but just last fall, I was with a small group of photographers in Acadia NP, and watched in horror as one guy donated his whole rig to the briny deep because he had a flimsy tripod.

 

[Calson]

Load capacity ratings are often way wide of the mark with less expensive tripods. I have bought more than a few that when the legs were fully extended and I pressed down on the top plate there was visible leg flexing. Also often the spider connector would allow for torsional flex which is a problem with a big lens.

I don't put a tripod in a travel case but have it either in its own carry case or hand carry it onto a plane or to a car. Easy to make the mistake of buying too short a hard case or too long a tripod. The collapsed lenth limit for me is 22 inches as that allows me to put it crosswise into an overhead compartment on airplanes.

In terms of weight the lightest one I have is the Feisol CT-34412T traveler model that weighs only 2.6 lbs and extends to 68 inches and supports a real world load of 44 lbs. It is going to cost $500 but tripods are one piece of gear that is truly an investment. Regardless of what cameras or lenses you own 20 years from now the tripod you buy today will continue to perform. You can upgrade or change out the head with the same legs. A mistake I have made is paying too little and then needing to upgrade to better legs.

 

[Chris K]

I think rule #1 for any tripod is, don't walk away from a kit you can't afford to lose!

 

[Steve Cooke]

I have to say that $3000 on a tripod is WAAAYYY over the top and certainly not required.

As an example and not naming brands as you request, I have recently purchased my final carbon fibre tripod that is as steady as you could wish for, whatever camera/lens combination you wish to use, will extend to 72" without the head/camera or centre column, for £300 plus another £200 (although I only paid £75 second hand) for a rock solid geared head.

In my experience, a tripod is certainly worth having (and using!!) as I have found my results have improved no end.

 

[joe43]

You point out an important distinction when it comes to individual needs.

• If you don't need mobility, you can save a lot with Alloy legs over carbon fiber.
• If you have an expensive, large long lens, you need a very robust tripod - like a Gitzo Series 4 or RRS Series 3 - that supports all the weigh you might have under any conditions.
• For general use, a Gitzo Series 3 / RRS Series 2 is a good all purpose tripod. If your kit is light and won't change, you could move to a Gitzo Series 2 / RRS Series 1.
• Travel tripods and Gitzo series 1 equivalents make compromises unsuitable for general use. In the right place, they are still fine, but excellent technique and potentially weight to add stability may be needed. For me, when a tripod is too light it's a negative.
• If your long lens is often handheld - and cost less than $2000 - you can go with something solid but lighter that would be typically used for landscapes. Likewise if you are using all purpose lenses like a 24-200, you are already giving up some sharpness and might not see any real difference with a cheaper tripod
• Tripod weight ratings are only useful within a single line or brand. There are no standards or CIPA weight ratings.
• You might compromise on tripod capacity if you need a light kit for long distances, but don't consider just the tripod. Compromises are relevant and you need to consider your bag, camera, lenses, tripod head, and even filter kits when choosing a light weight setup. Your weight savings on a tripod is probably less than a pound without major compromises.
• There is nothing wrong with a used tripod. The things last forever. Stick with good brands which can provide customer support if needed. The converse is true - off brand tripods have a lot lower resale and are more likely to suffer with age.

I agree with Eric. And I will add some additional thoughts. "It all depends"
For shooting from a blind, especially in low morning and evening light, I use a Series 4 tripod with a gimbal head. For normal light, I use a series 3 tripod with aa ball head when I do not need a full gimbal. Foe walking around, I use a monopod with a Wimberley monopod head for lenses with a tripod foot. From my car window, (and other spots too) I use a bean bag. When I was 10-15 years younger I used a Skimmer ground pod with a ball head or gimbal head. When I travel by air, I use a series 2 tripod and ballhead for my Nikon 500mm f5.6 pf lens, the heaviest I would take on a plane. My tele lenses are all primes as I hate using zooms with shifting balance points. I do use zooms for shorter focal lengths like 70-200mm and my Z mount Nikon 100-400mm S lens. When I go to the beach or when I am in water, I use a very old Bogen aluminum 3221 tripod that is easy to take apart and clean.

 

[vandy]

I have an Induro GIT505XXL Grand Series 5 Stealth Carbon Fiber Tripod that I bought 4 years ago that is as heavy as I want to carry when it comes to a tripod, when I want rock steady that is the one I grab. I also have the RRS tripod that Steve recommended that I use most of the time because it is a lot easier to carry. I would never spend 3 grand on a tripod for what I use it for, but that is just me.

 

[Not A Speck Of Cereal]

I have the Mr. Big.

But I use the very small / light carbon fiber for back-packing, typically for landscape work. There's no I'm lugging Mr. Big out there. And yes, especially for daylight, with the tripod on a solid surface, using a remote trigger (not touching the camera to activate it) and well within at least the weight capacity listed by the mfg (actually, I try to get something that's supposed to hold twice that much) and I DO NOT worry about it working well for that.

But I do want Mr. Big along for many other things, thick sold carbon-fiber, no center column, really nice (ahem) ball head that more than holds the capacity, etc. This to me is essential for some work, most obviously time-lapse where you want it to remain fixed and steady. But it's also going to be a lot better at resisting movement and/or vibrations in high-wind scenarios. Shooting a waterfall under a canopy is one thing, but you can never count on having a windless day on an ocean beach. Also, I do a fair amount of landscape pano work with an elaborate pano head. While I know how to do hand-held panos, when I want to do it right and precise, I use the pano head and want Mr. Sturdy for that.

Then there's astro work with a tracker head (and your camera / lens). You kind's need a sturdy set of legs for that.

Mr. Big is now about $1000 (used to be more) and the head was $500. That's significantly less than $3k, but still not $300 either.

Mr. Big is also very tall, almost 80 inches. There are times when that is very handy and something the $300 tripod won't do (even center column extended, which I would never want to do anyway).

Chris

Edit: but my light backpacking tripod is no slouch. It's $400 carbon fiber model with a 22lb payload, and a $400 ball head that's really nice and supports an 18lb payload. the tripod / head weighs only 1.5kg, but it's a sturdy support. I've taken this up a mountain and my hiking friends were fairly impressed at the low weight.