Lightest and most compact tripod for minimal 4x5 kit

[Corran]

I hate to make a tripod thread, but, I wouldn't mind having some suggestions. There are too many tripods out there, new and old, to research everything.

I'm planning on buying a carbon fiber tripod with my tax return this year. I'm wanting to really pare down the weight from my 055XPROB legs and 3037 kit I have (or 3039 for the 8x10). Upon really thinking about it, I don't need more than 7-8 pounds of load capacity. My Chamonix 45n-1 is not even 3 pounds and my largest typical hiking lens is less than 1 pound. So even fully loaded with a 6x12 back and filters or whatever I might barely hit 5 pounds. Why carry a 7 pound tripod/head?! That said, if I can get a set of legs that have a higher load capacity for not much more weight, I might go for that. I do sometimes hike with my Linhof, which adds a few pounds, not to mention a Zone VI 8x10 - but on the other hand I already have tripods that can handle those so not a big deal.

So yeah, I'm looking for a super-lightweight set of legs and a decent head. The head I'm most stuck at. I do not want a ballhead. I can't stand them. I want a 3-way head with a good range of motion. Honestly I'm almost leaning towards an old Linhof 3-way leveling head, because it's not terribly much heavier than most heads I'm looking at and is more compact without all the handles. Also been looking at the Manfrotto 460MG.

Finding a used one for cheaper than new is always nice so probably looking at standard brands that can be found on the used market easily.

Thanks

[Michael E]

I don't know about the lightest tripod around, but a Manfrotto 190 should work fine with any 4x5" field camera. Its weight is words apart from your 55.

[Bill_1856]

Feisol CT3441S = 2.2# + Linhof 3663 = 1.77# = 3.97#. I'm sure that someone lies just a little bit, so say 4+#.

[BradS]

You might consider the Manfrotto/Bogen 3025 head (maybe a new model number now). It is a very simple, compact and light weight 3-way head. I have one on a Manfrotto 190 as my "light weight" tripod. Frankly, the 190 (aluminum version) is not really light weight at all but it is somewhat lighter than the 055, which I also have. I've often thought that I "needed" a set of carbon fiber legs but, then when I look at the prices, I am quite happy with the 190/3025 combination.

[Daniel Stone]

I recently purchased an Induro CT214 as a travel-friendly(still need to put it in the checked bag to keep the weight down) tripod to support my Alpenhause 4x5 conversion. I've got an Acratech GP ballhead on it, and I have to say that it's a sweet combo! Not the tallest(for me, but I'm 6'4"), but it's tall enough for most applications I'll need it for.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/655205-REG/Induro_471_214_Carbon_8X_CT214_Tripod.html

And that combo is quite lightweight(under 5lbs total), but still very sturdy.

-Dan

[Doremus Scudder]

You might consider the Manfrotto/Bogen 3025 head (maybe a new model number now). It is a very simple, compact and light weight 3-way head. I have one on a Manfrotto 190 as my "light weight" tripod. Frankly, the 190 (aluminum version) is not really light weight at all but it is somewhat lighter than the 055, which I also have. I've often thought that I "needed" a set of carbon fiber legs but, then when I look at the prices, I am quite happy with the 190/3025 combination.

I second the 3205 head, or as it is now called, the 056 3D Junior Head (see: http://www.amazon.com/Manfrotto-056-Junior-Camera-Head/dp/B001A1TMR0 ). It is by no means "junior" and supports my Wistas and Woodman cameras with lenses up to 300mm with no problem. I've even used it in a pinch with the Zone VI (4th generation Ritter camera) and a 450mm lens (but wouldn't do that a lot...)

The head works as a regular pan/tilt head, but only has knobs, not handles, reducing its weight. Its platform and joints are as big as many larger heads with handles. One advantage is that you can easily loosen more knobs than one to be able to adjust in two planes simultaneously. With all three loose, it functions like a ball head; I use it mostly one at a time, but occasionally like both pan and tilt loose. FWIW, I own two of these.

As for tripods: much depends on how high you need to be. I haven't got around to trying out carbon fiber tripods, but have heard some things about cheaper ones not being that rugged or durable. My Manfrotto 3205 is aluminum but weighs under 5lbs and, with the legs not quite extended, will get me just over 5ft of height (with head, of course). Here are the specs:

Manfrotto 3205 Tripod Legs Tripods
Aluminum construction
Max height: 58.3 inches
Collapsed length: 22.6 inches
Supports 11.00 lb (4.99 kg)
Four leg angle settings
All-terrain retractable spiked feet in rust-free stainless steel
Center column with an innovative three-faced design

I wouldn't want a shorter one. Lighter would be better, but I've used mine (I have two) for everything from an rock pick to a walking stick to a brake when sliding down a snowy slope and, except for replacing a few knobs and leg locks now and then, they are still going.

Best,

Doremus

[Rollinhofuji]

Hi Bryan,

I can even suggest a Feisol CT3301, it holds my Technikardan and MT 3000 quite well. Downpoint is its height, not really enough for me. But quite compact and rigid enough for most work, if your work carefully (I prefer my new Linhof 003333 for superb rigidity).
The Linhof 003663 looks a bit fat on the Feisol.

See if you can get a Mamiya AW701 head (see http://www.mamiya.co.jp/home/camera/eng/products/tripod/index.html). It is cheap, ultra-lightweight, and locks super-tight. Downpoint is the bad dampening, especially when compared to the Linhof head. The latter one is very smooth, which helps much when operating a 4x5.

Definitely this setup is far superiour to my Manfrotto 190 legs with 804RC2 head, and much lighter.

Best regards,
Jan

P.S.: The Mamiya head locks almost perfectly, it practically does not affect framing at all. In this discipline, it is on par (perhaps even better) with the Linhof 003663 I borrowed, but the Linhof is at least 30 years old.

[Drew Bedo]

Ask yourself: How much am I willing to give up in terms of size and stability to lighten the load?

At the bottom end is hand-held LF as in the press cameras, Polaroud conversions, Hobo, Photoman and Wanderlust.Tripod weight becomes zero.

When it comes to supporting the camera there are a large number of clamps with ballheads out there.No legs and you need a tree or something.

A minimal DIY would be a ballhead screwed to a board. Holds it steady bot only sis inches high.

GFor tripods, there are any number of desk-top tripods that are strong enough but light because they are short.

A friend has a compact tripod that started out as a full size Bogan, He cut off the legs leaving only 3/4 of the top section. It holds his Deardorff 8x10.


Living in a large city (Houston), maybe I'm spoiled by availability. I would go down to a camera shop with my gear and see what suits the need. I realize that not everyone can do that.

[Corran]

Thanks guys for the suggestions. I think I'm going to go with a Linhof 3663 or the Jr.3D from Manfrotto. I kind of like having no handles. I tend to forget to lock down handles when I have them only slightly unlocked, to allow some dampening, and then as soon as I put the holder in, whoop there it moves.

Will look into the Fiesol and other legs. The Manfrotto 190 price looks real nice but it's still a 4lb tripod, more than I want on the legs.

I'm 6' so yes height is a bit of a concern - 5' would be nice.

Edit: Drew - good points, but no I don't have any place to go try out tripods. Also, the scenery here is a little different than a lot of folks shoot - I tend to hike out quite far. Monday I hiked 5 miles, but with just some 35mm gear for fun. That's not even much. I've gone much further in a day, but with the big tripod and 4x5 I usually don't have nearly as much endurance. I'm looking ahead towards some trips where I may be doing 10+ miles in a day. Or at least as much as I can.

[Drew Bedo]

Bryan, I admire your energy and stamina. Many years ago I did things like that. Climbed Long's Peak twice in the summer of 1970. Did two weeks on the Applalachian Trail a year or two later. I understand the weight issues.

Nowadays I usually transport my gear on a set of luggage wheels or a golf bag cart. Weight is still a factor and my compact Wista sits on a little CF tripod with a magnesium ballhead.

As Kipling put it: "Something's hidden—go and find it!"

[Corran]

Did two weeks on the Applalachian Trail a year or two later.

Nice! I'm more of a day hiker but I'm looking around at some simple tents and such. One of my life-goals is to go as far as I am able on the Appalachian. I have been on many parts of it, in local/state parks. I need to get my butt in gear though if I want to do it. My personal best was somewhere between 15 and 20 miles in one day, but with just a plastic-fantastic DSLR and one lens.

[jeroldharter]

Can't beat Feisol for its combination of weight, stability, quality, and price. I have had 3 different sizes and they are all excellent.

If you really want light, the pan-tilt head is a killer though.

[jeroldharter]

Nice! I'm more of a day hiker but I'm looking around at some simple tents and such. One of my life-goals is to go as far as I am able on the Appalachian. I have been on many parts of it, in local/state parks. I need to get my butt in gear though if I want to do it. My personal best was somewhere between 15 and 20 miles in one day, but with just a plastic-fantastic DSLR and one lens.

For lightweight hiking when trees are around, a hammock like the Warbonnet Blackbird is the way to go. Very comfortable sleeping, off the ground, dry, cooler than a tent in the summer, no need for a level tent pad. Just find two trees about 15 feet apart and you are set.

[Corran]

Thanks Jerold. Haven't even begun to think about tents and such but good suggestions, I'll look into that hammock.

[Drew Bedo]

OK . . .My backpacking experience is 35-40 years old now so keep that in mind . . .The state of the art cutting edge gear was a Kelty external frame pack and a Svea stove.Goose Down was IT. There was no synthetic "Holofill" or fleece to be had.

One thing I haave done was to use a heavy mil "tube tent" with a nylon string hammock (nad YES you gotta have TREES). Put up the hammock with a tight line over it to support the tube. Its a short duration bivouac set up as the tent will deteriorate with use.

Keeps you off the ground and the pack has to stay outside in its own weather cover and maybe hung to one of the trees.Eliminates the bulk of a sleeping pad. Of course there are other minimalist shelter options.

And now we get back out of The Way-Back Machine...If weight and bulk are serious issues (and it sounds like they are) look at a Gowland Pocket View. It is a small and light weight minimalist 4x4 monorail camera . . .with full movements.

[Corran]

I'm a long way from trying some sort of "ultralight" expedition (I have read some of that thread going on now in another part of the forum). Just looking at some of my gear and thinking "what can I do here to lighten the load?" Hence the CF tripod.

I figure for ultralight my Chamonix, 90mm f/6.8 Angulon, 150mm f/9 G-Claron, and maybe a 210mm f/9 Kowa would come in at about 5 pounds total. A few holders and maybe boxes/changing bag, add another few pounds, and then the tripod. 15lbs maybe? I often hike with a large backpack that weighs up to 40lbs, so I can comfortably spend 20-30lbs for the essential backpacking gear.

But that's all in the future. Small steps. Gotta work towards that goal, but for now, day hikes and 15lbs or less for a full 4x5 kit is my hope, rather than pushing past 30lbs as I do now. Then I'm more mobile and can make more images.

Just booked 4 days in the Smokies for vacationing later this month :).

[Rolfe Tessem]

Along with the recommendations already made, check out the Induro CT214. I recently went to these legs along with an Acratech head and couldn't be happier. I'm using it for everything from 35mm through 4x5. If you don't want a ballhead, there are plenty of three way heads available. This is one that is both inexpensive and lightweight. It would be fine for a Chamonix.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=velbon+ph-157q&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ta

[Lenny Eiger]

Hmmm, is Gitzo heavier than all the others, for some reason? I love the way they figured out how to make it easier to unlock the legs. You only need a very small tripod for a lightweight camera like that...

One tripod lasts for many years...

Lenny

[Corran]

I'm still looking at several of the models suggested here, and others, and it does seem that the Gitzo models are almost universally heavier and more expensive. Doubt I'm getting one of those.

[Lenny Eiger]

Actually, I just compared my 2530 (that I use with my Ebony 4x5) with a comparable, 3 section Feisol, and they were almost exactly the same. The Gitzo may be more expensive, but they have the locking/unlocking leg things which now having them, I can't imagine doing without.. They are more expensive, to be sure... I bought mine 10-12 years ago and have been able to amortize the cost.... for a good long while... If you can find a great camera store that has both you can can see whether any of this matters... there's nothing like holding it in your hand.

The only thing I would add is that 3 section tripod legs are much more stable than 4 section... The extra length can be annoying while traveling, but its been worth it to me...

Lenny

[Ari]

I can suggest a travel tripod from FLM, which is also the same re-branded Leica travel tripod.

Something like this 3-section tall tripod: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/999189-REG/flm_32_26_905_cp26_l3s_carbon_fiber_tripod.html
or this 4-section compact tripod: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=cp26-s4s&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search=

Lots of good features, but I'm not sure what is your price range.

[jose angel]

I'm still looking at several of the models suggested here, and others, and it does seem that the Gitzo models are almost universally heavier and more expensive. Doubt I'm getting one of those.
Personally, and after being in your very same situation (but some time ago), I found that weight it`s not all in a tripod... but is the durability and functionality of the locks, the quality of the parts, etc.

If you want the lightest, simply buy a smallish CF quality tripod, despite of manufacturer`s recommendations. Even a series 0, or 1 from Gitzo will easily carry your setup. If you remove the central column, the weight will be easily under 2 pounds (cannot remember precisely). The problem here is that this tripods are too short... so if you want a taller one, go up in the list and check for the smallest tripod that suit your height requirements (column aside). But weight will be then higher, it`s irremediable.
If you choose this route, think that central columns are simply useless in this sizes for such camera size&weights. I`d remove it, even thought to save weight only.

But this tripod (concept) is almost useless for everything, except for extremely light hiking requirements (or to hold a hot shoe flash unit!). They are bad even for a P&S digicam. I made two of them, first with an aluminum one, later with an even smaller CF one. They work holding the camera, nothing else. Don`t expect to have the camera absolutely steady under a winter storm... but will the camera be more steady on a bit bigger tripod?

Anyway, if you want a bit of versatility, I`d say you need a bigger, heavier thing. What`s the limit? Three, four pounds? Three and a half? Four and a quarter? There is no right answer here.

The "general consensus" along the years has been (maybe) a series 2 CF as a lightweight for your setup. Others prefer a series 3 CF. Excuse me, I mention Gitzos because are the ones I know; before them, I used to have Manfrottos, but switched to Gitzos and never looked back.

Four vs. three sections; four sections are a pain to open, but three section tripods are sometimes too large when closed for some. Personally (I have used both), for my smallest&radical lightweight CF one I prefer three sections, for my previous small portable one, four sections, and for my bigger ones I by far prefer three sections... but series 3 tripods are maybe too large (closed) to be backpacked. Mine is taller than the series 2, which is still fine for backpacking.

About heads... after many (many!) heads, I have never found the "perfect" one. I simply hate ball heads, they are a pain to use, but they are the lightest, it`s a fact. And personal preferences are important here... FWIW, my current favorite for my <2lbs tripod is one of the latest ball heads from Gitzo (!), a very small one. It`s ridiculously light, with a hollow -oversized- ball, surprisingly smooth and cheap. I have it modified to accept A-S plates. I can check the model if you like.

For a most versatile tripod, and still very lightweight (say, a series 2), an Arca Swiss P0, also modified. I dislike the locking feel, but it`s amongst the lightest, so strong for the weight, with a lower profile than other ball heads and enjoy panning at top, so it`s my most used one in the field for some years ago.

[Corran]

Thank you for your detailed thoughts Jose.

I'm a consummate cheapskate so I'm scouring eBay and other places for my eventual purchase...will update the thread when that happens.

[Ari]

I'm a consummate cheapskate so I'm scouring eBay and other places for my eventual purchase...will update the thread when that happens.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001D60LG8/?tag=kenrockwellcom

[Corran]

Yes I know about the Dolica. I was thinking of getting one for the occasional 35mm usage. I'm 100% sure it's not going to hold up to constant usage like the better-made stuff. But maybe I'm wrong.

[lfpf]

If you're looking for minimal hardware, then consider a monopod or bipod. Also, if zero weight/zero bulk is attractive, consider supporting the camera on your knees. While not the proverbial block of concrete, it's better than handheld and all work surprisingly well. No kidding: bring a couple yards of parachute cord and make a ring, for your knees, from your rain jacket or poncho. Result, hands free balanced camera on knees. "Click" and on to the next. You might enjoy the surprise of no tripod.

[Drew Wiley]

Penny wise, pound foolish .... A tripod that costs less than a box of 4x5 film generally means you wasted your money on the film in the first place, since it is likely
a lot of shots will be blurred by vibration.

[Corran]

Sorry Drew but that's BS.

[ROL]

Lightest can be argued many ways, but compact = 4 leg sections + center tube. I don't see any way around that for a tripod of sufficient height to work comfortably. That's what fits on my camera pack without snagging.

[Drew Wiley]

I threw away the center column (actually stored it away, in case I ever need the tripod for non-VC use). Otherwise, a four-section Gitzo CF makes a nice backpacking or airline carry-on tripod for 4x5. I have a 4-section bigger CF for 8x10, though it won't fit into a legal carry-on. Otherwise, I prefer Ries for general use.
And you do get what you pay for. Cheap tripods with ballheads are about like trying to shoot with a view camera suspended from bunji cords.

[greenbank]

Have you considered a 2-way (video) head? E.g. the Manfrotto 700RC2 - rated max load 2.5kg, weight 0.52kg (and there are no doubt plenty of others out there). If you want absolute maximum weight saving, a small video head might be the way to go.

[HeinrichVoelkel]

I'm using a Feisol 3301 for my Technika. Best tripod I owned. Stable and very good quality. Buy it and be done.

[angusparker]

The Benro carbon fiber tripods are very good and light. Coupled with a RRS BH25 a dream combo. I have two of their fold flat travel tripods but they don't make them anymore.

[tgtaylor]

I use a Gitzo GT 0540 (1.7lbs) with a Gitzo G1177M head with a Wimberely QR plate for traveling/hiking with 35mm, 645, and Toyo 45CF (3.7 lbs + 8ozs with 150mm Rodenstock lens which folds up with camera). Also use a LowePro 350 AW Runner backpack to carry everything. Took an F6 and 645NII and 7 lens in the 350 LowePro on SW Airlines to Boston and back last couple of weeks. It's carry-on and stows easily in the overhead except you have to remove the tripod to fit.

Thomas