One Tripod to Rule Them All?

[dodphotography]

Well, I am now in a pickle... I have small tripods, I have large tripods. I'd like ONE.

I am now using a Bogen 3236, it's massively heavy!

I am shooting with a Wista 45DXII and am looking to purchase a modern 8x10 in the future. I'd like to consolidate and purchase a tripod with a future camera in mind.

The modern cameras I am looking at are the Ritter 8x10 and Chamonix models, both come in at 6.5 and 8.5lbs respectively. I think with that lightweight of a set up I think I could make one tripod fit both.

Do you have any suggestions.

Dan

[Drew Bedo]

Sure: Give it a try.

One of the joys of photography is collecting tripods and heads.

[IanG]

You usually need small & large tripods. There could be circumstances when you'll be out with the 5x4 and need a smaller light-weight tripod, particularly if back-packing.

My larger tripods Slik and Manfrotto are quite capable of holding my Agfa Ansco 10x8 cameras and are reasonably portable, however I have a small Slik Sprint which fits inside a small backpack which I use when out with my Super Graphic particularly in areas where I might not be able to use a tripod.

Ian

[dodphotography]

Ian, my issue now is shooting at eye level. I have a real small Gitzo from way back in the day whose legs are shot so I can only shoot on the first level. Size and weight isn't a huge deal since I'm used to a 20 lb tripod.

[Vaughn]

Ries J Series. If you are considering wood as an option. Plenty of words posted about wood vs metal vs carbon fiber, so I'll give that a rest. At 8 pounds, I do not know how that compares with your 3236. The H Series is basically the same pod but a smaller crown (2" instead of 4.25' dia).

I have the A100, great for heavier 8x10's and larger, so I think the J100 might be a better fit for the lighter 4x5 and the lighter weight 8x10's.

http://www.riestripod.com/products/tripods

[DrTang]

One Tripod? Heresy!!!

[dodphotography]

Lol limited funds boys and girls, need one to make up for all the rest!

[dodphotography]

Pref a lighter metal! Carbon is nice but I think gitzo carbon is a tad outside the budget

[EOTS]

I'm using a Gitzo 5541LS Carbon with RRS BH55
Ball head.
Very stable but also not very compact or ultraleightweight ...
I'm using it as a walking stick :-)

For 8x10 use I prefer a 3-way pan/tilt like gitzo g1570.

Best,
Martin

[Alan Gales]

I use a Ries J100, like Vaughn recommends, with my 8.7 pound Wehman 8x10. It works great!

[ScottPhotoCo]

Check this out: http://www.mefoto.com/products/globetrotter.aspx

Seriously. I picked one up (the carbon fiber) and it really has surprised me. Replace the head and you have a great, small and solid set-up for less than a lot of other brands legs alone. I am quite happy with this purchase.

Tim
www.ScottPhoto.co

[Drew Bedo]

Whatever tripod you settle on as "The One"; don't get rid of the others! I regret having sold-off most of the other tripods I haver ever owned.

[Daniel Stone]

Buy once, cry once

Buy the best you can afford, even if you have to save a bit more.
You don't have to buy a Gitzo to get a high quality carbon fiber tripod these days.
I just picked up an Induro tripod, and for the price, I'd say it's really nice. You can always buy a slightly used Gitzo if you want an Italian stallion in your kit.

-Dan

[dodphotography]

I loved the series 2 and 3 Gitzo basalt ... What kind of other brands would stack up in that category? I've never seen an Induro other than on Bh. My shop doesn't carry that brand.

[dodphotography]

I should say I want to be able to shoot my wista at eye level. I have smaller tripods that work well but I'm basically on my knees composing and shooting. Gets old, real fast

[Tin Can]

Italian? Yes it appears the French company has Italian branches, but?

I prefer to think they are French.


Buy once, cry once

Buy the best you can afford, even if you have to save a bit more.
You don't have to buy a Gitzo to get a high quality carbon fiber tripod these days.
I just picked up an Induro tripod, and for the price, I'd say it's really nice. You can always buy a slightly used Gitzo if you want an Italian stallion in your kit.

-Dan

[Mark Stahlke]

Gitzo 1228. If you think that's not enough tripod for a light weight 8x10 then get a Gitzo 1327.

[Roger Thoms]

Hey I'm with Vaughn and Alan, get a Ries J-100. I have a A-100 for my Eastman Kodak 2D 8x10 and bought my girlfriend a J-100 for her Burke & James 5x7 which weighs about 8 lbs. You know what she keeps telling me, " I love my tripod". We are very happy with our Ries tripods. Now for my 4x5 I have a Gitzo 1228 which also serves well for my smaller formats. The Gitzo is light and very compact so it compliments the Ries tripod nicely So I would re-think your one tripod quest, and maybe have two tripods.

Roger

[John Kasaian]

Italian? Yes it appears the French company has Italian branches, but?

I prefer to think they are French.
I thought Gitzos were crackers.

[William Whitaker]

Right now I've got 5 different tripods plus a studio stand. I've owned many more tripods than that and there are probably still more lurking in my closets. There is no such thing as having "one tripod" unless you have "one camera". And even then you're running a risk.

[Taija71A]

____

Gitzo tripods were of course originally manufactured in France... But after the company was bought by Vitec Group plc in 1992 -- All of the manufacturing was eventually moved to Italy.


GITZO Factory:

via Camp Lonc, 34
Z.I. Villapaiera
32032 Feltre - Belluno
Italy


http://www.gitzo.com/about+Gitzo/where+we+are/Where+We+Are/3660939

--
Best regards,

-Tim.
_________

[MntManx]

I use a Ries A100 for 8x10, 5x7, & 4x5, the head is a oneway tilt Ries. For 2-1/4 and 35mm I use really right stuff tvc-33, carbon legs, with a leveling base that is a clamp allowing quick exchanging between different heads depending on the shoot. RRS started with making plates and clamps around 1990.

[Drew Wiley]

I like Ries wooden tripods whenever realistic. Sometimes the extra mass or weight is a real benefit, especially in the wind or on muddy ground. But I also have carbon
fiber tripods when keeping weight down is the priority, like extended backpacking.

[Tin Can]

Everything I have Gitzo is far older than that. I do like that B&H stocks new tripod screws for Gitzo. I just bought one.

Also picked up a couple Majestic tripod screws direct. I prefer my Majestic to anything.


____

Gitzo tripods were of course originally manufactured in France... But after the company was bought by Vitec Group plc in 1992 -- All of the manufacturing was eventually moved to Italy.


GITZO Factory:

via Camp Lonc, 34
Z.I. Villapaiera
32032 Feltre - Belluno
Italy


http://www.gitzo.com/about+Gitzo/where+we+are/Where+We+Are/3660939

--
Best regards,

-Tim.
_________

[Daniel Stone]

Italian? Yes it appears the French company has Italian branches, but?

I prefer to think they are French.

They're now owned by Manfrotto/Bogen, and made in Italy:
http://www.photographyblog.com/articles_manfrotto_factory_tour.php

Hence "Italian stallion", despite their heritage as a French company

-Dan

[Curt]

I have a Gitzo Gigantism with a No5 head. It'll hold a 20x24 camera ten feet in the air. I'm thinking about getting the Gitsaladder to go with it!

Seriously my Gitzo Studex would be perfect anywhere, it's only limited by weight, its own weight. There is a German manufacturer that makes a large line of tripods. They are made of Ash and are of the highest standards. The name is Berlebach. I have two and can find no fault with them.

I suppose I'll get a Ries some time after my rosewood 11x14 is finished. They can make a tripod in Rosewood to match.

For travel I'm looking for a 12" folded model that will extend to six feet and support a lightweight 8x10.

[Taija71A]

They're now owned by Manfrotto/Bogen, and made in Italy... -Dan

____

Correction.
Gitzo is now owned... By the VITEC GROUP plc (*As are Manfrotto and many other Companies).

_________

[Drew Bedo]

Right now I've got 5 different tripods plus a studio stand. I've owned many more tripods than that and there are probably still more lurking in my closets. There is no such thing as having "one tripod" unless you have "one camera". And even then you're running a risk.

One of the joys of photography is collecting tripods.

[Drew Bedo]

Buy once, cry once

Buy the best you can afford, even if you have to save a bit more.
You don't have to buy a Gitzo to get a high quality carbon fiber tripod these days.
I
-Dan

Sure: good gear is a good idea. I do not usually buy new at retail though. Good gear will las so often I buy previously owned itemst. Craig's List and the FS/WTB forum here are great places to shop.

But I have this recurring bad dream where I have passed away and my wife sells all my stuff for what I told her I psid for it!

[Taija71A]

... But I have this recurring bad dream where I have passed away and my wife sells all my stuff for what I told her I paid for it!

____

+100 :)

________

[Peter De Smidt]

You might try one of the Feisol's. Ari, who's active here, is the Canadian distributor, and he's very helpful. If I were in the market for a new tripod, I'd give them a serious look.

I have a Zone VI Standard, a massive wooden pod that I use with 8x10. I also have 2! Gitzo tele-studexes. A 1990s version would be a very stable and moderately priced option, although they're really overkill for 4x5 field camera use. I also have a Gitzo series three, which is just right for 4x5, but it might not be enough for 8x10. Finally, I have a Gitzo 1227 carbon fiber for travel. It's pretty good for up to a light 4x5, but I wouldn't use it for 8x10. For the big cameras, a heavy tripod is a good thing.

[dodphotography]

You might try one of the Feisol's. Ari, who's active here, is the Canadian distributor, and he's very helpful. If I were in the market for a new tripod, I'd give them a serious look.

I have a Zone VI Standard, a massive wooden pod that I use with 8x10. I also have 2! Gitzo tele-studexes. A 1990s version would be a very stable and moderately priced option, although they're really overkill for 4x5 field camera use. I also have a Gitzo series three, which is just right for 4x5, but it might not be enough for 8x10. Finally, I have a Gitzo 1227 carbon fiber for travel. It's pretty good for up to a light 4x5, but I wouldn't use it for 8x10. For the big cameras, a heavy tripod is a good thing.

The only 8x10 camera I would even consider are the Chamonix or Ritter. Canham is too much, Ebony I'd need to sell a kidney. The Chamonix and Ritters are well under 10LBS so I couldn't see a Series 3 not being able to handle the load. Although, 650 bucks is a sh*tload of cash for a tripod. At least in my world.

[Peter De Smidt]

But they've been made forever. My series 3 is from the early 90s, just after they stopped using rivets. It works just as well as newer ones that I've used.

[dodphotography]

But they've been made forever. My series 3 is from the early 90s, just after they stopped using rivets. It works just as well as newer ones that I've used.

No doubt on the quality and long term nature of the gitzo but the price still stings up front.

[BradS]

One tripod!?!?! Gawd, that would be nice. I've collected...lets see (looks under bed) six! But, if really pressed, I think I could make due with just the Manfrotto 3021 legs and 3047 3-way head. It's really too heavy for long hikes but it has held up the 8x10 Deardorff, a 4x5 Nagaoka and a bunch of others in between.

Incidently, the 3021/3047 was the only tripod I had when I started LF. At some point, I realized I was leaving the LF kit at home because I didn't want to lug the tripod...that's when I got the smaller, lighter Manfrotto 3001/3025...and on and on.

[Peter De Smidt]

Buy used. For example: http://www.keh.com/camera/Tripods-Tripods-Legs/1/sku-TR439990088200?r=FE

[Liquid Artist]

It's overkill but I use a Linhof 3323 most of the time. In a way it's a smart decision since I'm often hiking where I could easily encounter a cougar, bear, moose, or even a bison and I could either club them with it. Or set it up, stand on it out of their reach and photograph them trying to reach me.
Either way the wildlife wouldn't have a chance of even getting close to me.



But I have this recurring bad dream where I have passed away and my wife sells all my stuff for what I told her I paid for it!
That is what I am doing wrong, I am actually honest about what I'm spending on camera gear. No wonder she's always mad at me.
I have a lot to learn before we actually get married this summer.

[Ari]

You might try one of the Feisol's. Ari, who's active here, is the Canadian distributor, and he's very helpful. If I were in the market for a new tripod, I'd give them a serious look.

Thanks, Peter, but I caught that. :)

Feisol makes some very good tripods, and I am the distributor for FLM tripods and ball heads in North America.
I bought one of FLM's CP30-series tripods, and I liked it so much, I became the distributor (no joke).

For my height (5'9"), the CP30-S3S is perfect, and easily supports my Toyo 810M, which is 16lbs of metal.
Less vertically-challenged folks would prefer one of the taller pods available, or an XL.

I only have the one tripod, it gets used for everything, and is light and small enough to take anywhere or carry by hand all day.

Prices are not quite at Gitzo's level, but still cost more than Chinese-made tripods; the 10-year warranty soothes your battered pocketbook.

[Peter De Smidt]

Oops! Sorry Ari! FLM....

[Ari]

Oops! Sorry Ari! FLM....

No problem; at least you didn't say I was the Manfrotto distributor. :)

[Peter De Smidt]

It could've been even worse. I might said "Giottos", and then Bob S. would've come after both of us!

[Ari]

Ooh, close call indeed!

[Tin Can]

Stop talking about tripods, it makes me want another. Then I looked at KEH and gads, good deals!

I really want a Gitzo Cremaillere 3, I'm a total gear head!

[jose angel]

One tripod doesn`t fit all, never. (Tripod heads aside!)

If you want a good one, it must be big and heavy. Lightweight tripods are nice, but for photography`s sake, heavier ones are best.
But if you want a practical one, it must be portable, so with a "reasonable" size and weight. Or maybe you simply want a tripod "to hold" the camera?

So, what are you willing to give up?

Maybe a good sized, quality CF one is the best solution... if you use the hook under the center column or head in order to increase its mass.

[Liquid Artist]

.. if you use the hook under the center column or head in order to increase its mass.
That is one thing I repeatedly see people messing up with by just hanging their camera bag or something similar on.
Any little breeze can start the item swinging, which will cause the tripod to vibrant contributing to a softer photo.
I've seen other photographers recommend putting a loop around the hook and stepping through the loop to hold it down. I can not speak for others, but my foot isn't the most sturdy and I am sure still causes movement.
If anything I would recommend securing this hook straight to the ground with a stake of some kind. Even this isn't ideal since any breaze can still cause the string to vibrant like a guitar string contributing to softer photos
In my opinion the best solution around this is still a heavy, sturdy tripod. Even then there is still no guarantee you will get nice sharp photos.

[Michael Cienfuegos]

My Majestic is heavy. As a matter of fact, it is beyond heavy. I'm not about to take that thing out of the house though, it takes up all the back seat.

[Alan Gales]

My Majestic is heavy. As a matter of fact, it is beyond heavy. I'm not about to take that thing out of the house though, it takes up all the back seat.

I know the feeling. My Ries A100 stays at home and the J100 goes out.

[Ari]

One tripod doesn`t fit all, never. (Tripod heads aside!)

I beg to differ; I use my one tripod for 6x7 up to 8x10, and if I shot 11x14 or micro 4/3, I would use the same tripod.


If you want a good one, it must be big and heavy. Lightweight tripods are nice, but for photography`s sake, heavier ones are best.

I disagree again; there are many viable, light-ish tripods on the market that do a very good job of holding heavier gear very securely.


Maybe a good sized, quality CF one is the best solution... if you use the hook under the center column or head in order to increase its mass.

Agree there; these days, the best compromise on weight, stability and price seems to be CF.

[dodphotography]

I beg to differ; I use my one tripod for 6x7 up to 8x10, and if I shot 11x14 or micro 4/3, I would use the same tripod.



I disagree again; there are many viable, light-ish tripods on the market that do a very good job of holding heavier gear very securely.



Agree there

Ari, what are you using for a combination?

Thanks

[Ari]

I use an FLM CP30-S3S tripod with a CB-58FT ball head, also FLM.
The combination has proven to be cost-effective (in the long run), lightweight (2,3 kg for tripod and head) and sturdy (8x10 camera).

[DrTang]

whelp..if I was FORCED..gunpoint maybe..to pick just one

and my 8x10 was a reasonable weight (unlike green monster)... I would look for a medium heavy twin shank Linhof ..or

and this is a bit crazy.. a Bolex aluminium tripod with a 1047 3way head -light, sturdy, cheap enough and it holds my linhof 5x7 tech easily - which weights a lot. The drawback is it doesn't get really low

[jose angel]

I beg to differ; I use my one tripod for 6x7 up to 8x10, and if I shot 11x14 or micro 4/3, I would use the same tripod.



I disagree again; there are many viable, light-ish tripods on the market that do a very good job of holding heavier gear very securely.



Agree there; these days, the best compromise on weight, stability and price seems to be CF.
Not my opinion. A light weight tripod is a bad option by definition. The best tripod is a breakwater concrete block with a 3/8" thread on it, but it cannot be carried... so there are tripods instead.

As mentioned above, light tripods are nice, but they are compromise solutions because we don`t want to carry heavy loads. The best tripod or camera base should be free of any transmission, so the bigger the mass the better.

And I agree with you about one tripod fits all... whenever it is big enough for the biggest load. A small lightweight tripod could be a choice for the 4/3, but obviously not for an old wooden 11x14.

I think it`s not only about just holding securely... it must be a solid base, free of any vibration transmission. Those who only want something "to hold" the camera, for sure will be fine with any quality tripod (and head, obviously). This is the reason I asked the OP if he is just looking for this, or if he really want a good base.

FWIW, I settled with Gitzo tripods (some french, some italian, they both look identical), my older ones are aluminum which I consider simply better for the camera. But again, better to go out for a shoot with a lighter tripod than to stay at home because the load to carry is unbearable.

If I had to choose one from my tripods to take for the rest of my life in a desert island (not likely), I`d like to have a series 5 aluminum one with me, but it really is a pain to carry. So I`d take a series 3 CF from Gitzo, in three leg sections, no center column. But I don`t shoot 11x14"... outdoors, I use to shoot up to 4x5" with lightweight cameras (sporadically, 5x7").

[goamules]

I use a Camera Equipment Co. Jr (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?93168-Camera-Equipment-Co-Tripods-anyone-use&p=915972&viewfull=1#post915972)for my 8x10 and sometimes other cameras, down to 5x7.
I use a Crown No. 4 when I have to walk far, it's much lighter but less sturdy and less tilt.
I use a Craig's Thalhammer for 4x5, but sometimes the above.
I use a Crown No. 2 for 4x5 and smaller when I want wood.
I use a cheapo aluminum "tripod" with all the plastic cranks and leg locks when I want super light, for 35mm and small digital.

I cannot imagine using the same tripod for every task.

[analoguey]

Not my opinion. A light weight tripod is a bad option by definition. The best tripod is a breakwater concrete block with a 3/8" thread on it, but it cannot be carried... so there are tripods instead.

As mentioned above, light tripods are nice, but they are compromise solutions because we don`t want to carry heavy loads. The best tripod or camera base should be free of any transmission, so the bigger the mass the better.


In his book series, Ansel talks about how his heavy tripod had just the right resonance with the ground and would transmit vibrations, despite it's weight.

Stability and transmission has less to do with the mass and more to do with how the weight's distributed / resonance freq.

[gevalia]

I've got 1 tripod, a Gitzo carbon fibre that I use for 4x5, 6x6, 645, 617, and digital. Has served me will with an arca swiss ballhead. You do have to rig a little weight between the legs if you're standing in a river or in a bit of wind though. And my hiking is limited to about 12 hours so not sure how it fares on backcountry hikes.

[Taija71A]

... Stability and transmission has less to do with the mass and more to do with how the weight's distributed / resonance freq.

____

Speaking of 'Resonant Fequency' (The natural frequency or frequencies of any physical system or object at which it will vibrate if physically disturbed)... The material used in the Legs of a Tripod (i.e. Aluminum, Carbon Fiber, Maple, Ash etc.) can greatly affect the Attenuation and/or Transmission of Resonant Frequencies.

My personal opinion (*From a vibration point of view)... Is that a Wood tripod is usually -- More 'suitable' than a Metal tripod.

http://www.berlebach.de/anleitungen/91.pdf

--
All of the Photographers on the forum who are are also interested in High End Audio ('Audiophiles')... Are well aware of Resonant Frequencies and their effects.

__________

[analoguey]

Hmm. Indeed. Also with my experience of a medium weight tripod has been that it's not a very stable one (holds the weight unsteady)

Curious. Why would you say wood's better than metal? Afaik both resonate w a good range-else musical instruments would be with different material?

[Tin Can]

OK. Who has the heaviest tripod and head combo?

Not counting studio stands or truck rigs.

I will weigh my monster later today and post with picture.

May as well have the absolute lightest also, but I have nothing to compete there.

[Vaughn]

OK. Who has the heaviest tripod and head combo? ...

The A100 and A250 head (Ries), according to the website, comes in at about 17 pounds...perhaps a few more ounces over that.

I carry it almost fully extended for better balance, more comfortable to carry over a shoulder (no knobs resting on my shoulders) and easier to set on the ground while hiking to take the weight off my knees when stepping up or down.

[Bob Salomon]

OK. Who has the heaviest tripod and head combo?

Not counting studio stands or truck rigs.

I will weigh my monster later today and post with picture.

May as well have the absolute lightest also, but I have nothing to compete there.

Linhof 003323 Heavy Duty Pro tripod with the Large Geared Center Post and the 003669 Profi 3 Universal Pan/Tilt Head = 31.4 lbs.

If you use the 003672 Precision Micro Cradle Head then you would add another 3 pounds.

[Taija71A]

Curious. Why would you say wood's better than metal? Afaik both resonate w a good range-else musical instruments would be with different material?

____

@analoguey:

I am unable to PM you with a 'detailed' answer to your question.
However, to get you started...


http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/archive/index.php/t-48200.html


But of course... What makes for a 'great' Musical Instrument doesn't necessarily 'transmit' (*No pun intended) into what makes for a great Tripod. They are two totally different animals to speak of... And are thus designed accordingly!
--
However, from 'time to time'... Some LF Cameras are mistaken for musical Accordions!!! :D

_________

[David A. Goldfarb]

I've gone from having several tripods and a studio stand to two, and the main move was to get a Gitzo GT5540LS legset (purchased new), which I usually use with an Arca-Swiss B2 head (purchased used and refurbished by Precision Camera Works), and I have a few options regarding the center column. I saw the legset at PhotoPlus one year and knew that would let me clear out a lot of other gear, because my "big" tripod could be about the same weight as what I'd previously considered a "medium" tripod. Eventually I added a Feisol CT-3441S travel tripod, which I usually use with a Linhof Ballhead 1, for when I want something really light and compact for travel. I've felt pretty much set for tripods now for several years with just those two.

If your biggest camera is going to be a lightweight 8x10", I'd save up for a carbon-fiber Gitzo 3-series and the head of your choice.

[dodphotography]

I've gone from having several tripods and a studio stand to two, and the main move was to get a Gitzo GT5540LS legset (purchased new), which I usually use with an Arca-Swiss B2 head (purchased used and refurbished by Precision Camera Works), and I have a few options regarding the center column. I saw the legset at PhotoPlus one year and knew that would let me clear out a lot of other gear, because my "big" tripod could be about the same weight as what I'd previously considered a "medium" tripod. Eventually I added a Feisol CT-3441S travel tripod, which I usually use with a Linhof Ballhead 1, for when I want something really light and compact for travel. I've felt pretty much set for tripods now for several years with just those two.

If your biggest camera is going to be a lightweight 8x10", I'd save up for a carbon-fiber Gitzo 3-series and the head of your choice.


I'm leaning to a Basalt series 3... Would you spring the extra cash for the CF in the same series?

[Tin Can]

Bob beat me to it. I have a 50's Linhof Heavy Duty Pro tripod, it's the same as the current model he listed, but I can add the matching Deluxe Geared Dolly, the 24" Extension Column and a really large Heavy Duty Levelling Pan/Tilt Head, to push the total weight much higher. I only move this by van.


Linhof 003323 Heavy Duty Pro tripod with the Large Geared Center Post and the 003669 Profi 3 Universal Pan/Tilt Head = 31.4 lbs.

If you use the 003672 Precision Micro Cradle Head then you would add another 3 pounds.

[NancyP]

Good grief! There are OTHER sufferers of tripoditis... but I only have three tripods, one monopod so far, so I am a not too far advanced case. Bear in mind, all were purchased for DSLRs and compacts. The biggest Feisol CT3472 gets the most use, equipped with an Arca-Swiss Z1. I have a mini-Feisol CT4432 with Arca-Swiss p0 for light duty and a Manfrotto 055 (my first legset) with Manfrotto 410 geared head. So, 3# to 8# range. Monopod, 2# with heavy-duty Custom Brackets tilt head (overkill, but I use it for a 400mm f/5.6 lens). Hanging weight from the hook works in non-windy situations. The Manfrotto vibrates in wind, the carbon fiber legsets don't vibrate noticeably.

I noticed an article on the main page on how to adapt a surveyor's tripod.

[Curt]

Today I looked at the Feisol CT-3441S for travel. Is it worth getting the Feisol head or adding a different one on? I have two Linhof ball heads, one is small and the other is larger.

[David A. Goldfarb]

Today I looked at the Feisol CT-3441S for travel. Is it worth getting the Feisol head or adding a different one on? I have two Linhof ball heads, one is small and the other is larger.

I have a small Linhof ballhead that I like (Ballhead 1 with the 49mm base), so I didn't get the Feisol head, but an advantage of the Feisol head is that it's small enough to stay on the tripod with the legs reversed, and the Linhof 1 doesn't quite do that (the knobs get in the way of the legs closing fully), at least not with the 1.5" Kirk QR clamp that I use on it, but maybe it would fit without the clamp (or maybe the smallest Linhof Ballhead 01 closes inside). One thing I didn't care for on the CT-3441S is the telescoping column, because the extra telescoping joint is a source of instability and the camera can unintentionally pan more easily with the additional joint, so I cut it off, keeping just the large tube and epoxying the extra base plate at the open end of the tube, and I can still hang the camera upside down if I want or I can change columns by unscrewing the other end. I also have the short column, but this doesn't allow for any vertical movement, so my modified medium-length solid column suits my needs perfectly.

If the head that you have is too large, what I do is simply remove it when I want to put my tripod in a suitcase with the legs reversed for travel, and leave it attached when I'm out photographing, in which case I'll want the legs in the non-reversed position anyway, with the tripod on a strap or strapped to my bag. With the legs reversed, the tripod folds to 19", and with the legs not reversed and my Linhof ballhead attached, it's 23", which is still pretty small.

[Curt]

Thank you David, the larger Linhof ball head that is the two inch base diameter model. The smaller one is a straight, non tapered, model and is definitely a light weight head. Do you used your lightweight 8x10 on that tripod? Gowland I believe if I remember correctly. Lastly, I am curious about carryon or check in with that tripod model. I have always put tripods in my checked luggage. With the Feisol costing around half a grand it becomes more of a value decision. My luggage is TravelPro, the larger one has a diagonal of 22" and the smaller has a diagonal that is 17+". Actually both meet carry on requirements. On my last trip overseas I bought a Slik Sprint Pro II which came with a SNH-100DQ ball head and integral QR. The camera I used with it is the Fujinon GA645Zi. That worked very well. With the head off the tripod is 16 1/4" in length. It has four sections but the flip levers make it quick. Anything larger than medium format would be risky. The center column is 14" I use it at 6" for a good height.

[David A. Goldfarb]

I've used the 8x10" Gowland on that tripod with lenses 12" and shorter, a 12" rail, and a standard Acratech ballhead, which is bigger than the Linhof Ballhead 1.

I've checked that tripod and I've been able to carry it on, but you never know with different airports.

[William Whitaker]

Try a Saltzman.

[Tin Can]

I want to. I have a Saltzman head, but the tripods are kinda rare and often in bad shape.


Try a Saltzman.

[Jody_S]

All right, I read through all 9 pages of that other thread from 2009. I have several heavy-duty Al tripods, and an old wooden surveyor's tripod that looks really cool but weighs twice as much as the Manfrotto I normally use. I'm considering putting a Linhof head on it and giving it a whirl.

For those concerned about 'resonance'; I assume you mean the tendency of the tripod to 'ring' when struck, indicating that it is resonating at a given, normally quite high for Al, frequency, and this may be a problem during exposure with, say, my #3 Copal. Of course said Copal is mounted on a wooden camera, in my case, so that vibration is damped before it ever gets through the head and into the tripod legs. However, assuming said tripod legs are resonating from some other source, couldn't the vibration be damped with a judicious application of a tube-sock style sandbag (which weighs less, combined with the Manfrotto, than the wooden tripod)? I've seen the suggestion of hanging it from the center column; this will certainly give better stability in windy conditions. But for resonance, I would think it should be wrapped around the top of the 3 legs. These, being in contact with a damping material (the sandbag), will not be able to resonate. Sort of like a bell stops ringing when you touch it with your finger.

I have used an 800mm lens quite a lot with a 35mm camera; I got better results with a 3-way tripod head if I left one axis loose, and didn't fix the rotating tripod collar on the lens. I also left the pan function of the head loose. I could then follow my subject with one hand on the camera body (finger on the shutter button), and one hand on the focus knob; I was free to do 360s, all angles, and in normal, daylight conditions, I did not have a problem with vibrations or fuzzy pictures (1/30 and faster). When I tried locking everything down, for a fixed subject, things sometimes got worse. I interpret this to mean that my free-follow shots were damped by me having 2 hands on the gear.

Obviously this is not possible with a view camera for long exposures (I do sometimes try to stabilize the camera in windy conditions by holding the top of the tripod, or putting a finger on the rear standard and pulling down a little, or both if the shutter has a self-timer), but I'm wondering if other damping methods might be more effective than a heavy, expensive wooden tripod. Specifically, judicious use of a small sandbag, and for long lenses someone posted the suggestion of using a bungee cord tying the front of the camera to the rear, passing through the tripod legs. I'm looking for a lightweight bungee with a slip-knot type adjustment (like a tent cord), that will allow me to control the tension.

I don't know if I can even evaluate the difference this might make, as I don't have a drum scanner and I don't print to large dimensions. The only reason I was considering trying a wooden tripod is because it's sitting beside me, in pieces, and I've just refinished it in a beautiful polished shellac.

[cdavis324]

Hanging anything from the center column is a bad idea - especially outside - a sandbag turns the center column into a pendulum. I do lots of long exposures, and find that a sandbag draped over each leg where it hits the ground is best. It keeps the tripod fully in contact with the ground, and the weight on each leg reduces vibrations. It also keeps those of us who are clumsy from kicking the tripod leg and having to recompose! It's not a good solution for shooting too far from the car by yourself, though... 3 15-20lb sandbags add up quickly. They do make sandbags you can fill yourself, so you could fill them when it's time to shoot, and empty before you pack up.

Instead of hanging a sandbag from the bottom of the center column, try draping a bag over the top plate of the tripod... It puts more weight on the legs, and doesn't cause the pendulum effect. Or the heavier tripod would work, too!


All right, I read through all 9 pages of that other thread from 2009. I have several heavy-duty Al tripods, and an old wooden surveyor's tripod that looks really cool but weighs twice as much as the Manfrotto I normally use. I'm considering putting a Linhof head on it and giving it a whirl.

For those concerned about 'resonance'; I assume you mean the tendency of the tripod to 'ring' when struck, indicating that it is resonating at a given, normally quite high for Al, frequency, and this may be a problem during exposure with, say, my #3 Copal. Of course said Copal is mounted on a wooden camera, in my case, so that vibration is damped before it ever gets through the head and into the tripod legs. However, assuming said tripod legs are resonating from some other source, couldn't the vibration be damped with a judicious application of a tube-sock style sandbag (which weighs less, combined with the Manfrotto, than the wooden tripod)? I've seen the suggestion of hanging it from the center column; this will certainly give better stability in windy conditions. But for resonance, I would think it should be wrapped around the top of the 3 legs. These, being in contact with a damping material (the sandbag), will not be able to resonate. Sort of like a bell stops ringing when you touch it with your finger.

I have used an 800mm lens quite a lot with a 35mm camera; I got better results with a 3-way tripod head if I left one axis loose, and didn't fix the rotating tripod collar on the lens. I also left the pan function of the head loose. I could then follow my subject with one hand on the camera body (finger on the shutter button), and one hand on the focus knob; I was free to do 360s, all angles, and in normal, daylight conditions, I did not have a problem with vibrations or fuzzy pictures (1/30 and faster). When I tried locking everything down, for a fixed subject, things sometimes got worse. I interpret this to mean that my free-follow shots were damped by me having 2 hands on the gear.

Obviously this is not possible with a view camera for long exposures (I do sometimes try to stabilize the camera in windy conditions by holding the top of the tripod, or putting a finger on the rear standard and pulling down a little, or both if the shutter has a self-timer), but I'm wondering if other damping methods might be more effective than a heavy, expensive wooden tripod. Specifically, judicious use of a small sandbag, and for long lenses someone posted the suggestion of using a bungee cord tying the front of the camera to the rear, passing through the tripod legs. I'm looking for a lightweight bungee with a slip-knot type adjustment (like a tent cord), that will allow me to control the tension.

I don't know if I can even evaluate the difference this might make, as I don't have a drum scanner and I don't print to large dimensions. The only reason I was considering trying a wooden tripod is because it's sitting beside me, in pieces, and I've just refinished it in a beautiful polished shellac.

[jose angel]

To those who think that resonance is all about tripods and tripod materials, and it`s not about weight:

What are you isolating? The tripod from the camera? The camera from the tripod? The camera from the environment?

If you just place a heavier tripod (quality tripod, I mean) over the ground, we expect it to be as steady as possible. Do you think the "resonance" of a lighter tripod (say CF) will isolate it from the wind? I tend to think that a heavier tripod will be better for that... have you read the "Three Little Piggies" tale? By the way, how much a good wooden tripod weight, in comparison to a an aluminum or CF one?

If you knock the camera, will a lighter tripod avoid transmitting the vibrations? I don`t think so. But it`s true that some materials will transmit "knocking camera" vibes better than others, but... the thing to isolate is the camera, not the tripod.

Well, some tripod manufacturers have to give some "easy to diger" reasons to sell their expensive carbon, basalt or wood tripods... the aluminum tripod market already has too much competition, you know.
Funny that wooden tripods are better for wood tripod manufacturers, as CF tripods are better for CF manufacturers, etc. What about cheap plastic damping properties? Looks like there are also ball heads with better transmission properties that others... (tests are obviously published by the manufacturer, too).

To avoid the camera transmitting vibrations to the tripod is another topic (maybe more theoretical than practical, I think). If camera vibes are high enough to be transmitted to the tripod (!), and they actually need special materials to be dampened (!), it`s another topic, and here vibration transmission properties really count. And here maybe you also need a stronger (thus heavier) model.

I wonder about the type of transmission from a large format wooden camera with a leaf shutter, that may be different to the one on a high pixel count DSLR, or in a RZ, or in a telescope...are all the same, vibrations wise? I think not.

What have more transmission, wood of aluminum? I`d say that wood, looking at musicians. But it`s not as easy, there are long and short wave frequencies, as mentioned, that`s another topic. What you prefer, a high frequency, long duration or a low frequency, short duration vibration?

When I look for a tripod I want it to be as steady and strong as possible, and to avoid vibes produced by wind, or by an accidental touch, and with a reasonable capability of producing sharp images. Portability is a factor, too. That`s all. But it`s nice to have all this variety, and all this literature about tripods, thought.

[Halide]

I can recommend either a Ries or a Gitzo CF. I used aluminum bogens through the 80s and 90s - but upgraded to the well made Gitzo aluminum and later to a Gitzo CF. A couple weeks ago I came across a new "old stock" Ries J100-2. A local camera shop considered it a white elephant and sold it to me for $450. One of the lower leg threaded knobs was bent (still functioned) but I bought a new clamp assembly with from Ries for $55. Which is a good reason for using a Ries - you can get parts for it quite easily. I had been shopping for a J-100 because I needed a tripod with a 35" folded length. (a good fit for my height and still fit in my truck) The J100-2 has a 40" folded length with double leg clamps and a stouter lower leg assembly- (a stiffer tripod). SO I carefully removed 5" off of the bottoms of the upper and lower leg assemblies, sanded and re-finished the reworked legs and re assembled the unit. I am very happy with the Ries. It fits me well - will last a long time and can be worked on (if necessary) with simple tools. I built a custom rack for the Ries in my truck - I use my truck to do a lot of 4 wheeling and need something to hold it in place when out driving rough and unimproved mountain roads. I attached a few pics of the finished work. Almost all of my tripods have been previously owned. You just have to be a patient, smart shopper to get the tripod that works for you. (keep in mind that most casual photographers buy a nice new tripod for their nice new cameras, but rarely use them - so when they go up for sale - most are pretty clean. I use the Gitzo CF when I go out on extended hikes, But the Ries is my new primary tripod.

[Halide]

Here are a couple images the of the reworked lower and upper leg assemblies.

[Luis-F-S]

Ries J100 or A100 if you want something heavier. They just can't be beat, I have one of each! The J100 is probably sufficient.

[Leigh]

My Majestic is heavy. As a matter of fact, it is beyond heavy.
I'm not about to take that thing out of the house though, it takes up all the back seat.
Yep, Majestic tripods are heavy. They're designed to really work, not to be wall flowers.

Back seat solution... get a van like I have.

I use my two Majestics for everything from 8x10 down to 35mm.
They hold the camera in place, period. No cajoling or hand wringing.

I also use the pair to support my car during an oil change.
They don't realize they're supporting anything. :p

- Leigh

[Tin Can]

I second that,

I have a pile of tripods, but my favorite for everything is an older grey Majestic with the really good Majestic gear head. It's actually a lighter weight model than my really heavy duty twin leg black Majestic. I trust them both, unlike some of the newer fancier tripods.

The 6x7 Majestic head plate is great for all LF cameras, I also put a HD Horseman QR on it for MF. It's a good platform. pun intended



Yep, Majestic tripods are heavy. They're designed to really work, not to be wall flowers.

Back seat solution... get a van like I have.

I use my two Majestics for everything from 8x10 down to 35mm.
They hold the camera in place, period. No cajoling or hand wringing.

I also use the pair to support my car during an oil change.
They don't realize they're supporting anything. :p

- Leigh

[Leszek Vogt]

117118

I'm quite sure this is a ridiculous notion for the tripod, but this lovely beast (survey type) would easily support 11x14 and larger. For anything else (5x7 and smaller) I would not hesitate to use my 2.6lbs CF Feisol 3371 - for taller frame person. Rubber footsies take care of the resonance business. Anyway, I already carry enough stuff into the field to worry about the weight of the tripod. If I was to use a tripod (only) near a vehicle I'd go for quality wooden one such as Ries, Berlebach, Wolf or older quality mot. pic. tripods. Unfortunately, even a solid middle column is never sturdy enough for me. My 2 centavos.

Les

[Jac@stafford.net]

By far, the most stable tripod I have is a converted wooden surveyors tripod (http://www.digoliardi.net/skc1.jpg). They are very reasonably priced today, but largely replaced much lighter fiberglass equivalents. I will be converting this one (http://www.tigersupplies.com/Products/Dutch-Hill-Heavy-Duty-Tripod__GT2000A-1.aspx) in late July.

I have these astronomers vibration dampeners (http://www.celestron.com/browse-shop/astronomy/accessories/other-accessories/vsp-(vibration-suppression-pads)) but have yet to test them, but will post the results if there is interest. I use a vibration measuring instrument as part of the test. My confidence in their utility for photography is rather low, but we shall see.

This is one of the vibration suppression pads disassembled. (http://www.digoliardi.net/vibration-suppression-pads.jpg) Close to actual size.

[analoguey]

Yep, Majestic tripods are heavy. They're designed to really work, not to be wall flowers.

Back seat solution... get a van like I have.

I use my two Majestics for everything from 8x10 down to 35mm.
They hold the camera in place, period. No cajoling or hand wringing.

I also use the pair to support my car during an oil change.
They don't realize they're supporting anything. :p

- Leigh

One hardly sees them though? ( I mean even on sale)
How do they compare vis-a-vis a surveyor's tripod? (aluminium with metal shoe)

[Leigh]

They are likewise aluminum with metal shoes.

I've never seen a surveyor's tripod, so I can't make a comparison. Perhaps others can.

The Majestic is still being made. B&H shows 20 different tripod models plus accessories.

I think they never had the advertising budget of the larger tripod manufacturers.

- Leigh

[HMG]

By far, the most stable tripod I have is a converted wooden surveyors tripod (http://www.digoliardi.net/skc1.jpg). They are very reasonably priced today, but largely replaced much lighter fiberglass equivalents. I will be converting this one (http://www.tigersupplies.com/Products/Dutch-Hill-Heavy-Duty-Tripod__GT2000A-1.aspx) in late July.

Do you replace the center screw or adapt it in some way (to mount a head)? And do you leave the feet (spikes) as is?

[Tin Can]

Leigh,

Word to wise. Order direct for Majestic. Some obscure parts are no longer available.

Adorama and B&H listings are incorrect for stock of Majestic.

Just call the factory on the phone, it's a ma and pa business. I plan to visit them soon.

I really like the 'Chicago' cast emboss on the older heads.

I buy anything old or new made in Chicago.



They are likewise aluminum with metal shoes.

I've never seen a surveyor's tripod, so I can't make a comparison. Perhaps others can.

The Majestic is still being made. B&H shows 20 different tripod models plus accessories.

I think they never had the advertising budget of the larger tripod manufacturers.
\
- Leigh

[Leigh]

Thanks, Randy.

I have two complete tripods plus accessories and replacement parts, so I doubt I'll need any more.

But I do appreciate the suggestion. I too buy US-made when available, or do without.

I was born just outside of Chicago.

- Leigh

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I built two Walnut tripods. One with a Majestic head for the 8x20 and one with a 1570M Gitzo head for the 11x14 and 14x17! My 8x10 sits on a small Ries. Light weight? What is that?

[analoguey]

Do you replace the center screw or adapt it in some way (to mount a head)? And do you leave the feet (spikes) as is?

I met the manufacturer of the tripods here - family owned operation -and they said they'd just make an adapter to fit like the 1/4 or 3/8" screw.
Quite ingenious actually. It allows wider placement of the camera /head.

[Jac@stafford.net]

Do you replace the center screw or adapt it in some way (to mount a head)? And do you leave the feet (spikes) as is?

A machinist made a beautiful thick aluminum plate with 3/8" screw mount that fit the top. I should have a picture somewhere and will post it if found. Aluminum is not really necessary. It is a quick fabrication from wood for anyone with a saw.

The spiked feet are 3/8" screw mounted. I later replaced them with simple short bolts with rubber caps available at Ace Hardware for a few dollars.
.

[Jac@stafford.net]

Found a lot of affordable tripods here: https://engineerwarehouse.com/collections/elevating-tripods

A good start. Next point to the many conversions from survey tripods to our LF applications and it will be complete. I will try to photograph my own.

[William Whitaker]

For a long time I have been an advocate of Ries tripods for LF and ULF. But they are undeniably heavy. Even just walking with my 5x7 field camera and a Ries J100, that tripod wore me down quickly despite being a "smaller" Ries, and I began to regret bringing it. And as far as the A100, it is a beast when it comes to operating anywhere beyond the rear bumper of my car.

Interesting that this thread popped up this afternoon in my 'new posts' list as I received just now the FLM CP38-L4 II that I ordered a few weeks back. It is an impressive bit of kit and looks as though it will be a valuable addition to my collection of tripods. I ordered it to essentially replace my Ries A100 as it allows use of a 100mm half-ball. And since my main use of the A100 is to support my 12x20 camera, that half-ball can act as a leveling head since for that format I'm most concerned with a level horizon and no fancy moves.

I do also have a Gitzo G1548 Mk2 which I have used in the past mostly with a Sinar Norma (5x7 and 8x10). That Gitzo is a fine tripod, but the FLM will probably relegate it to the closet for now. I am impressed with the fit and finish of the FLM as well as its functionality. And Ari, the North American distributor for FLM and who is a member here, is great to work with. If you have questions, he's the guy to contact.

I look forward to working more with the CP 38 later this week and can report more on it then. I'm not familiar with FLM's other offerings, but I'm confident that they're every bit as nice as the CP 38.

Good luck in your search. If you can get away with just one tripod, you're doing much better than the rest of us!

[Drew Wiley]

Aluminum survey tripods are vibration prone, and elevating columns make them even worse. Serious survey tripods were once made of maple hardwood, but are now mainly fiberglass-clad lighter wood. I should know - I sold all kinds of em, as well as the instruments that went atop em. Consider any such aluminum product made in China equivalent to contracting Ebola. You'll regret it. Spending a little more for the real deal like Ries is well worth it. Otherwise, it's easy to convert a survey tripod. You remove the 5/8-11 turn knob and install a 3/8-16 one. Most survey tripods have the advantage of a true platform top to which you can directly bolt your view camera. Then learn to adjust the aim using legs alone, just like surveyors did it for decades atop remote mtn summits. It's easy with practice, and will save you the weight and risk of wobliness of redundant tripod heads. Carbon fiber tripods are a somewhat different topic. I use those too, when lighter weight is a priority.

[Peter De Smidt]

Unless you want to take a picture with the camera pointed down....or up quite a ways, such photographing a building that on a hill from the side of the hill. Sure, you might be able to point the camera in the right direction, but then you will limit how high it can go.

[Tin Can]

I received the same tripod and half ball today also.

It's set up in my studio with a Kessler Crane QR https://store.kesslercrane.com/kwik-release-receiver-only-mg1001.html with https://store.kesslercrane.com/kwik-stand-xl.html which works perfectly together with my Seneca 11X14.

I also like how easy on my hands the leg clamps are compared to a once borrowed Gitzo 5.

The big tubes feel better too.



Like Will, I need a tripod I carry more than 10 feet.


For a long time I have been an advocate of Ries tripods for LF and ULF. But they are undeniably heavy. Even just walking with my 5x7 field camera and a Ries J100, that tripod wore me down quickly despite being a "smaller" Ries, and I began to regret bringing it. And as far as the A100, it is a beast when it comes to operating anywhere beyond the rear bumper of my car.

Interesting that this thread popped up this afternoon in my 'new posts' list as I received just now the FLM CP38-L4 II that I ordered a few weeks back. It is an impressive bit of kit and looks as though it will be a valuable addition to my collection of tripods. I ordered it to essentially replace my Ries A100 as it allows use of a 100mm half-ball. And since my main use of the A100 is to support my 12x20 camera, that half-ball can act as a leveling head since for that format I'm most concerned with a level horizon and no fancy moves.

I do also have a Gitzo G1548 Mk2 which I have used in the past mostly with a Sinar Norma (5x7 and 8x10). That Gitzo is a fine tripod, but the FLM will probably relegate it to the closet for now. I am impressed with the fit and finish of the FLM as well as its functionality. And Ari, the North American distributor for FLM and who is a member here, is great to work with. If you have questions, he's the guy to contact.

I look forward to working more with the CP 38 later this week and can report more on it then. I'm not familiar with FLM's other offerings, but I'm confident that they're every bit as nice as the CP 38.

Good luck in your search. If you can get away with just one tripod, you're doing much better than the rest of us!

[Drew Wiley]

Peter, all you need is a supplementary solid threaded L-bracket if you want to point straight down etc - a fraction of the wt of a head, and much more stable. I've been doing this for decades, often on extreme terrain. Even with small cameras like MF, along with CF tripods, I resort to an L-bracket when backpacking or airline carry-on weight is a priority.

[Jim Noel]

i thought everyone had at least three, all wood of course.

[Roger Thoms]

i thought everyone had at least three, all wood of course.

Three wood tripods here, just assumed that’s the norm.

Roger

[William Whitaker]

Tha's why they're called "tri"-pods, Right?

[Jim Jones]

If you really need widely different camera formats, you need different tripods. Choose your cameras well, and choose your tripods even more carefully; they should outlast your cameras.

[Tin Can]

Tripods do last long. I have all I ever bought which is only 22 years. Before that I always shot handheld 35mm.

I guess I have 9 or more 'Try'-pods...

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48716867036_8306645ba0_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2hdWFio)Try-pod (https://flic.kr/p/2hdWFio) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr