If carbon is so expensive and weight is such a premium issue one would have thought to make a universal tripod by making the legs detachable...you'd get the stability to put an 8x10 on a less-than-2-pound. Point is I'm interested in buying something very light on my surgically-fused spine yet continue shooting with the medium format up to 8x10. I don't want to spend over $1,000 on two separate tripods and will do it if I have to. And I definitely don't want to make a fool of myself by spending double on a make with a G in the name if the qualilty of another is equal (come on already, haven't physicists and engineers had enough time to solve the mundane complexities of tripods yet? time to move on to more interesting problems). For example, there is a make with an F in the name that is half that price but no head to head reviews. Wonder why not. Seriously, why not (please respond if you know of the url that I keep missing in my internet searches)
They say when everyone is agreeing no one is thinking so it bothers me when I walk into camera shops they point me toward that make (you all know which I'm talking about...the one with the goobledygook numbering system that is almost uniterpretable from year to year) and don't explain the diff between the Rolls and the Ford.
So, does anyone know if you can take a heavier, stable tripod, remove enough legs sections to make it packable and portable for backpack or travel and turn it into something you could prop on a rock/table top and still use effectivey for large format. (Hopefully this is a reversable process and preferably NOT done with a hacksaw)
Why didn't I think of that?