tripod weight rating?

[xtmevolution]

Does the tripod weight rating include when you hang a bag under it for more stability? Like if a tripod has 5KG of weight limit does it mean what's on the top? I want to hang a bag under the tripod for added stability so was wonder if the weight limit is mean for only what's mounted.

[xkaes]

I assume it means the weight of the camera. How much you can "bag" underneath is another matter. I have a Gitzo Reporter Performance, which Gitzo rates as "GOOD" for 4x5 cameras, but I normally hang 25-30 pounds of gear in my bag underneath. I do this regularly because it keeps my gear together and within easy reach, but it also helps with stability -- especially in the wind. Before I took this approach, I would have "stuff" spread out all over the place, and have actually left some things behind by mistake -- fortunately, nothing valuable!

Just check to see if the legs of your tripod bend severely when you "bag" them. You don't want to permanently bend the legs.

[Vaughn]

I had a Gitzo Studex -- overkill for my 2.5 pound 4x5. Down in the Grand Canyon, I hung a couple backpacks on it over night (to keep them away from rodents). In the morning, one of the legs had broken -- at the threads where the metal was thinner. The leg was replaced for free, but it taught me that there are limits!

[xtmevolution]

I had a Gitzo Studex -- overkill for my 2.5 pound 4x5. Down in the Grand Canyon, I hung a couple backpacks on it over night (to keep them away from rodents). In the morning, one of the legs had broken -- at the threads where the metal was thinner. The leg was replaced for free, but it taught me that there are limits!

Oh wow, that must be some huge rodents that would carry away that tripod... :D thanks for the info that the leg can actually break, I guess the tripod manufacturer did not actually specified the bag hang weight for their tripod.

[Vaughn]

On my first solo hike down in the Grand Canyon I had some ground squirrels chew into my pack and carry away all of my food. It was not fun having to go an afternoon/evening without food, then hike 9 miles and up 5000 feet the next day without even a snack. I was fortunate that it was my last night of my hike...going a couple days without food would have gone from 'not fun' to lousy!

[Luis-F-S]

Sounds like you need a more substantial Tripod regardless of the weight rating!

[neil poulsen]

I'm thinking that tripod weight capacity includes weight below and above the platform, plus that of the head.

[Alan Gales]

I think it depends upon the manufacturer too. Some are more conservative in their ratings than others. I think my Ries A100 could hold just about anything. I've read about people changing the oil in their trucks using a Majestic. ;)

I guess most of you remember the Lester Bogen ads?

https://www.google.com/search?q=Lester+Bogan+tripod+ad&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwje_Kewv5DUAhVI92MKHbnMAEkQsAQIIw&biw=1120&bih=641#imgrc=rRZBAPNnXbVDxM:

[Luis-F-S]

Kind of why I have 3 Ries! Best tripod IMHO!

[xkaes]

Kind of why I have 3 Ries! Best tripod IMHO!
To each his own, but I would not say it's the "best" tripod for a backpacker. At SEVEN pounds (without a head), they label the J100 as "extremely light weight" and the perfect choice for the field 4x5. They obviously play in a different field than I do.

I wonder which would be heavier -- the J100 or the suitcase full of cash that I would need to afford it?

[Luis-F-S]

To each his own, but I would not say it's the "best" tripod for a backpacker. At SEVEN pounds, they label the J100 as "extremely light weight" and the perfect choice for the field 4x5. They obviously play in a different field than I do.

I wonder which would be heavier -- the J100 or the suitcase full of cash that I would need to afford it?

The tripod's heavier, $100 bills are light and frankly, you don't need that many to buy the Ries. Besides, I thought this was a LF website, not a Backpacking website. I'd also get the J100-2 instead of the J-100 though and I do have both. Much heavier duty for the weight! L

[Alan Gales]

I wonder which would be heavier -- the J100 or the suitcase full of cash that I would need to afford it?


I paid $350 including shipping on Ebay for my slightly used J100 which included a Ries double tilt head.

You don't want to know what I paid for my A100. After the sale the Ebay Seller even made a comment about how he hoped I knew what a bargain I got. Hey, it's an auction and I can't help it if I'm the only bidder. :)

[Jac@stafford.net]

I paid $350 including shipping on Ebay for my slightly used J100 which included a Ries double tilt head.

My very favorite LF head.

[Leigh]

Tripod weight ratings are based on the design and configuration of the legs.

The legs don't care whether a load is on top or hanging below. It's still a load.

- Leigh

[xkaes]

I thought this was a LF website, not a Backpacking website. L

I guess you somehow missed all the numerous, recent postings dealing with the challenges, i.e., weight, size, etc. that backpackers, who also happen to be large format photographers (or is that large format photographers who happen to be backpackers?), face. Yes, and for some of us, that includes cost.

Oh, and congratulations on your deep pockets.

[Luis-F-S]

Oh, and congratulations on your deep pockets.

I'm a firm believer that you get what you pay for! I bought my first Ries in 1982, I didn't buy all three last month!

[Luis-F-S]

While we're talking Ries, has anyone had extra leafs added to an A200 head? I have one I bought a couple of years back but since I'm using it on my V11, I thought it might be good to make it a little sturdier without having to spring for an A250-2 head since I don't have deep pockets! I called Debbie and she said it's doable.

[xkaes]

I'm a firm believer that you get what you pay for!

You must be referring to all those Leica 35mm users that paid $1,200 in 1977 for a Elmar 80-200mm zoom that was made by Minolta -- which was selling it for $400. Or maybe you are referring to the proud owners of the expensive Leica R3 and R4 SLRs that were rebadged Minolta XE-7 and XD-11 SLRs -- selling for about 1/8th the price. Or the numerous Contax users who paid thousands more for Tomioka-made Yashica lenses. Here's what someone on a Yashica discussion forum recently said:

"You are right about Contax users dismissing Yashica lenses at the time (I'm talking 1970s-late 80s). To my shame I was one of them; it hurts to think just how much money I could have saved if I had not been so wedded to Zeiss' glass - I spent over £9400 on Zeiss lenses from 1977 to 1984 - that's around £43000 in today's money."

I could go on, but right now I'm too busy -- trying to sell a bridge in Brooklyn. Any interest?

[Luis-F-S]

Leicas, that makes those itty bitty negatives, right? If I wanted to spend some big bucks on a lens I'd get a 35" Artar in Copal! The only Leica I've bought was an M4 and an M6! By the way, did John Roebling have anything to do with that bridge in Brooklyn?

[BrianShaw]

I'm thinking that tripod weight capacity includes weight below and above the platform, plus that of the head.

This has been my understanding also. What does not get divulged is the margin on those ratings.

[Luis-F-S]

This has been my understanding also. What does not get divulged is the margin on those ratings.

That's been my understanding also Brian, the point I was trying to make is that everyone wants a nice "light" tripod to go hiking with their 4x5. To me, a light tripod is not going to steady a camera as well as a "real tripod". I'll take my Ries any day! Does anyone have experience with the A200 head mod?

[Jim Andrada]

I have CF Gitzo Traveler with an FLM head. Great. light weight, perfectly fine for my Technika, my 5 x 7 Agfa-Ansco or even my 8 x 10 Seneca. And it fits in my carry on bag. Wouldn't even try it for my 8 x 10 Linhof Kardan-bi, but then again I'd need a pack mule to carry the camera itself more than 20 feet from the car.

[xkaes]

I have CF Gitzo Traveler with an FLM head. Great. light weight, perfectly fine for my Technika, my 5 x 7 Agfa-Ansco or even my 8 x 10 Seneca. And it fits in my carry on bag. Wouldn't even try it for my 8 x 10 Linhof Kardan-bi, but then again I'd need a pack mule to carry the camera itself more than 20 feet from the car.

Hey, if William Henry Jackson could do it, over 100 years ago, with 16x20 glass plates to boot, what's stopping you?

165502

[BrianShaw]

Didn't Jackson have mules AND "porters"?

[mdarnton]

On my tripods, all of which have center columns, the most suspicious point to me is the column to head connection. If one ever breaks, I'm pretty sure that's where it will happen. Most of the rest is overbuilt and understressed.

[Charlie Strack]

To me, the concepts of "good" and "inexpensive" are mutually exclusive when it comes to tripods. There was an episode of "How It's Made" that showed the construction of a tripod, and with all the steps invovled, it's easy to see why they are so expensive.

[Jac@stafford.net]

On my tripods, all of which have center columns, the most suspicious point to me is the column to head connection. If one ever breaks, I'm pretty sure that's where it will happen. Most of the rest is overbuilt and understressed.

Yes, and for better or worse I have tried to replace all columns with a flat platform for the head, even on a preposterous Zone VI tripod, using a 1/4" aluminum replacement I had contracted to be made. I am very happy now with a Feisol tripod with their flat replacement for a column.

Maybe I should post a picture of the atrocious Zone VI tripod.

[Pfsor]

Tripod weight ratings are based on the design and configuration of the legs.

The legs don't care whether a load is on top or hanging below. It's still a load.

- Leigh

That's my understanding too. It would be illogical to think otherwise.

[xkaes]

To me, the concepts of "good" and "inexpensive" are mutually exclusive when it comes to tripods.

To me, the concepts of "good" and "expensive" are not mutually inclusive when it comes to tripods.

[AuditorOne]

You must be referring to all those Leica 35mm users that paid $1,200 in 1977 for a Elmar 80-200mm zoom that was made by Minolta -- which was selling it for $400. Or maybe you are referring to the proud owners of the expensive Leica R3 and R4 SLRs that were rebadged Minolta XE-7 and XD-11 SLRs -- selling for about 1/8th the price. Or the numerous Contax users who paid thousands more for Tomioka-made Yashica lenses. Here's what someone on a Yashica discussion forum recently said:

"You are right about Contax users dismissing Yashica lenses at the time (I'm talking 1970s-late 80s). To my shame I was one of them; it hurts to think just how much money I could have saved if I had not been so wedded to Zeiss' glass - I spent over £9400 on Zeiss lenses from 1977 to 1984 - that's around £43000 in today's money."

I could go on, but right now I'm too busy -- trying to sell a bridge in Brooklyn. Any interest?

Hey! You take care of your money and I'll take care of mine, ok?

I saved it and I'll spend it on exactly what my wife wants!!!

:D

[jim10219]

In my experience, most tripods will hold a lot more weight than their rating suggests. But that doesn't mean they hold the weight well. They'll often get unsteady if you overload them, especially if you're extending the center column. They may also have issues with the legs flexing in a stiff wind. On heads, sometimes they'll hold a good bit more weight over their rating so long as the weight is centered over them. If you unbalance them too much, they can drift. Usually, exceeding the weight rating a little bit is okay, especially if the extra weight is hung below the tripod. Those ratings tend to be a bit conservative. However, any time you exceed the recommended limits, you're taking a chance. I'd suggest testing it out ahead of time and slowly adding weight, making sure nothing looks out of sort. Definitely don't push your luck too far. You can ruin one in less than a second.

When I went to Hawaii, I took a tripod that was rated about 5lbs below my camera with my heaviest lens. My regular large format tripod was too big to take with me on a plane, and I didn't want to buy a new one, so I brought my tiny DSLR tripod. It worked fine, though I often used it without the head and just attached the camera directly to the tripod. I also never extended the center column and in stiff wind didn't extend the legs all of the way. It remained stable enough for 15 second exposures in the stiff wind coming off the beach. So you can certainly exceed a tripod manufacturer's recommended limits, but expect compromises when you do.

[xtmevolution]

I see some tripod come with shorter center column, what is that for really? to reduce the weight by swap with the longer center column?

[Leigh]

Shorter center columns enhance stability.

Or more accurately, longer columns degrade stability.

That's particularly important with LF cameras which present significant surface area to the wind.

- Leigh

[xkaes]

I see some tripod come with shorter center column, what is that for really? to reduce the weight by swap with the longer center column?

One reason is for use with tripods that have very flexible legs. For example, The Gitzo Performance tripods have legs that extend basically flat -- out to the side by 80-85 degrees. This gets the camera very close to the ground, but the normal center post is too long to allow that. All you do is remove the normal post and stick in the appropriate Gitzo short post (about 6 inches long).