what support is good for my Wisner 11x14?

[William Whitaker]

If you've been using a Gitzo head, is it safe for us to assume, then, that you are using Gitzo legs? If so, then a Ries A-250 head by itself is not going to help you much because there is no way to mount it to the Gitzo legs without losing your ability to pan. You'd be better off to go ahead and get the Ries A100 tripod to support it.

I had a Wisner 11x14 camera myself at one time and used it atop an A100/A250 combination. The large platform of the A250 is good for supporting the large base of the camera. Further, the large crown of the tripod forms a very rigid support for the weight of the head and camera, not to mention torsional forces from wind acting on the bellows. I now have a Wisner 14x17 and am using an early version of the A100 with the early Photoplane head and that works superbly (as long as I don't have to carry it very far.)



This shows the early Ries supporting my 12x20 (a similar load to the 14x17). The extra piece between the camera bed and the tripod head is a "tray" I made specifically for this combination which helps to distribute the load and provides alignment guidance for mounting the camera. Load distribution is very important with a large camera for obvious reasons. Generous supporting surfaces help support not only weight, but also prevent unwanted motion (such as the camera's tendency to rotate on the tripod head). I think the Ries tripods are the way to go for your application. But I'm a little biased, perhaps. There are some other solutions out there. YMMV, as usual.

[William Whitaker]

What Mr. Lux said!

[lab black]

I have used both the Ries and the Majestic with a geared head. Either one will work. I think that Will has a good point in using a shelf or plate to distribute the weight. I have a Majestic with geared head that has a custom plate that I use for ULF. The geared head is quite useful. I also use a Ries for my 8x10 camera. The Majestic may be slightly less expensive on the used market. One cautionary note is that with the Majestic geared head, they do and can wear out and so I would suggest that the head be inspected for any play, before it is purchased.

[Oren Grad]

You're going to have ~30 pounds waving around. Ries A100-2/A250-2.

[Ginette]

I have a Cambo 3D Gearhead-SCH Listed to 55 lbs actually in the For Sale http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ead.php?111404
I have also a Manfrotto 400 but listed only to 22lbs but look more solid than that to my sense, in this topic http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ead.php?111403

[William Whitaker]

I have a Fiberbilt case for my Ries. Looks like this: http://www.amazon.com/Fiberbilt-P-50.../dp/B00012ABEC. Makes carrying the tripod much easier, although still quite a load. But then you weren't going backpacking anyway, were you?

It's amazing how much a Crown #4 tripod will hold. In fact, Agfa used to market a tripod which was like an even beefier version of the Crown #4. Larger and taller, it is a very capable tripod; they show up occasionally on Ebay. I've used mine with 7x17. I'd wager it would be fine for your 11x14. Still knocked down like the Crown into three legs and the round top (about 6" across). Don't know what you'd use for a head. The old Crown clapboard style heads were wonderfully simple, but I've never gotten one to work right; the camera screw always gets in the way of it sitting level. I used that Agfa tripod without a head. Of course, with a 7x17 I wasn't concerned so much with tilting the camera down. Merely adjusting the tripod legs was enough. The camera panned just fine against the felt covering atop the tripod. I don't have a photo now, but if you're still looking in a couple of months, I'll have access to that stuff.

[John Powers]

I use a Reis A100 tripod and A250 double tilt head under a Phillips 7x17 that is only 12 pounds. There have been many threads and posts about tripods and heads. I simply prefer the rigidity, the big mounting base, the lack of vibration and the ease of use of the Reis. Besides they are very good looking. Some might call it over kill for such a light and rigid camera, but it feels good to me. I carry the camera mounted on the tripod in the back of a SUV. In most cases I can just pull them out together and set up. When I need to move some distance I use a three wheeled baby jogger with 20" wheels and 100# shock absorbers.

John

[Leonard Robertson]

[QUOTE=
It's amazing how much a Crown #4 tripod will hold. In fact, Agfa used to market a tripod which was like an even beefier version of the Crown #4. Larger and taller, it is a very capable tripod; they show up occasionally on Ebay. I've used mine with 7x17. I'd wager it would be fine for your 11x14. Still knocked down like the Crown into three legs and the round top (about 6" across). Don't know what you'd use for a head. The old Crown clapboard style heads were wonderfully simple, but I've never gotten one to work right; the camera screw always gets in the way of it sitting level. I used that Agfa tripod without a head. Of course, with a 7x17 I wasn't concerned so much with tilting the camera down. Merely adjusting the tripod legs was enough. The camera panned just fine against the felt covering atop the tripod. I don't have a photo now, but if you're still looking in a couple of months, I'll have access to that stuff.[/QUOTE]
I'm not familiar with an Agfa version of the Crown tripod, but EKC/Folmer made a larger-than-#4 Crown they called the "Professional Tripod" From the 1935-1936 Eastman Professional Photographic Apparatus catalog, the specs on it are:
Length closed, 24 1/2 inches; extended, 5 feet; weight, 11 1/4 pounds; diameter of top, 11 1/2 inches; Price.....$22.00
The specs for the Crown No. 4 are Length closed 20 in.; Extended 5 1/2 ft.; Weight 90oz.; Diameter of top 6 1/2 in.; Price...$13.50

The Professional legs were the leg set for the #10 Cirkut camera. I got a set of these legs when I bought a gearhead for a #10 Cirkut. My set doesn't have any markings as to manufacturer or model. I've never seen one of the 11 1/2" diameter tops. I imagine it to be a larger version of the #4 Crown top, but I don't really know. A George Murphy Photographic Materials catalog from 1931 shows the Professional Tripod and says it is "For 14X17 or smaller cameras". EKC/Folmer also made extra-tall leg sets styled like the Crown legs. If you search "Cirkut" on eBay there is a set of 13 foot ones currently listed.

Len

[William Whitaker]

Agfa called their Crown-look-a-like tripod a "Utility Tripod" and it is listed on page 14 of their 1941 catalog which can be seen on Cameraeccentric.com. Would love to see one of the EKC/Folmer "Professional tripods" you speak of, Len. I'd wager my 14x17 would do fine on the Agfa. I'll have to try it sometime. The 7 1/2" top would provide a pretty sound foundation for that camera. While it's a bit complicated to detach and fold the legs, it's not nearly so heavy as the Ries and folded, it travels well. Even so, I don't think I'd trade the Ries for anything right now.

[Leonard Robertson]

Will - Thanks for posting the link to the Agfa catalog. I've seen it before, but I didn't think to look at the tripods there. Cameraeccentric has a 1927 Eastman Professional catalog which shows the Crowns and Professional on page 28. I need to dig out some Crown #4 legs and compare to the Professional. As I recall, the Professional legs don't seem vastly bigger than the #4s.

The obvious drawback to the Professional is that it isn't very tall. Not a real problem on level ground, but out in the field it is nice to be able to extend one leg downhill. Years ago I saw a Seattle Cirkut photographer who made leg extensions for his Professional Tripod in order to get the Cirkut up high to shoot groups of people (when shooting down on a group it helps show all the faces in the back rows). Having just one leg extension for a Crown tripod would be handy for downhill situations.

Len