Light Tripods: The Weak Link?

[pepeguitarra]

I have a very light 4x5 (2 pounds), therefore, I got a very light tripod. As a result, I have a system that shakes terrible when inserting and removing the film holder, which causes lost of focus and annoys me like crazy. But, that is not directly related to my question. My question is: with a regular field camera (around 5 pounds) plus the lens, plus the bellows extension and a not-so light tripod, I feel sometimes that the 1/4-inch screwed to the bottom of my camera is not enough to hold a torque created by a momentum of the heavy weight of the lens. Now that I am waiting for my 8x10, I would like to make sure I have enough support. I noticed that the camera comes with two holes to connect the tripod quick release plate: 1/4" and 3/8". Can I get a plate with two screws to at least have the camera supported by two screws? Will one 3/8" be enough for 8x10?, where and how you get those? I saw one "fluid" tripod head for video camera with a 3/8" screw, can I use that? I appreciate your advice. Pepe

[jp]

Either size screw can hold the bigger camera fine. What becomes important is the flat real estate size atop the tripod. A tiny little cheap tripod has no more space atop it than the qr plate. A big tripod has a helipad for the camera to balance on. Some sort of non-slick surface I think helps too. The cheap tripods adjustments don't hold weight very steady either.

[Two23]

My experience is the same as above.


Kent in SD

[Alan Gales]

I agree with jp. I favor the Ries double tilt heads for my 8x10. They are more like platforms than tripod heads. You can buy either screw size or both from Ries. They swap out really quick if you have multiple cameras like I do. They are not cheap and are on the heavy side. Of course everything is a trade off with large format.

https://www.riestripod.com/products-2/heads

If you know our Drew Wiley, he doesn't even use a head on his Ries tripod. Ultimate rigidity! ;)

[jim10219]

Some heads can be fitted with larger QR plates to give you more stability. I've seen several Arca Swiss style plates for sale that are both wider and longer than the ones most tripod heads are supplied with, if your head uses Arca style plates.

But that only helps if the tripod and head are sturdy, but you're experiencing wobble from the plate. Sometimes with large format, I'll remove the head and mount my camera directly to the tripod. It's easier to get away with on cameras like my Sinar F1 where it has a 3/8" hole to begin with and plenty of movements to compensate for the lack of a head.

[Jac@stafford.net]

1/4" is okay if you have a broad platform. That said I use mostly 3/8" because I acquired them when I disbelieved 1/4" could be stable, and before having a Ries head.

In my modest experience a center column is the weak point. I never use one.

[Alan9940]

What jp said...

I use a Ries A100 with the original single-tilt head for my 8x10 when working near the car and a surveyor's style carbon fiber tripod with Gitzo G1570m head when hiking any decent distance. If you go with an Arca style head (the Arca Cube is quite solid), you might want to consider this:

https://store.kesslercrane.com/kwik-stand-xl.html

[Drew Wiley]

Wow. I like that description, jp, a "helipad". But like Alan pointed out, I not only omit any tripod head with view cameras, but any kind of QR plate too, so that the maximum surface area of the camera base will be directly bolted to the entire "helipad" tripod platform. It really doesn't take any longer to set up, once you're accustomed to it. Tripod legs themselves should not have any apparent torsion or wobble. I use two sizes of Ries wooden tripods, as well as two sizes of rigid carbon fiber tripods, depending on the format as well as duration of travel. I prefer the "real deal" Ries for most day work, but not for backpacking a hundred miles!

[rdeloe]

I do not love the old style quick release PL plates used on the Manfrotto 410 head. The whole arrangement is painful in comparison to the smaller Arca plates I have. However... the one thing those PL plates have going for them is a lot of surface area, and a very strong mechanism to lock into. (Of course you can get all kinds of bigger Arca plates too.)

[Daniel Unkefer]

Julius Shulman used a Tiltall adapted with a very large heavy rectangular mounting plate. Anybody with a home workshop could build this. Worked with his 8x10" Norma :)

[Greg Y]

I'm a fan of the Ries double-tilt head.....built to last multiple lifetimes. That's what i use to support my Deardorff 5x7.....that head and an old set of Ries Hollywood legs.

[Drew Wiley]

Monorails like Sinar are easier to balance on a tripod than a big flatbed camera, which has more "dumbbell wobble" potential, with torque vectors not only front to back, but side to side. The Sinar rail clamp also eliminates most of the need for any kind of tripod head or quick release mechanism, although the older Norma rail clamp does not allow you to just drop in the rail from above. But I actually prefer it for being lower profile and more slip resistant than their later options.

[Robert Opheim]

I have gone to double smaller tripods for longer exposures and longer bellows extensions. As an experiment - I put a construction lazer on top of my Technikardan and my Calumet C-1. At separate times both were mounted on a 400 series aluminum tripod with a PL5 head. tapping the each of the cameras - showed vibration for up to 8 or 10 seconds (this is without using the center column). I repeated this experiment with a wood Professional Junior cine tripod - still vibrations to 6 or 8 seconds. I tried an extension arm off of the tripod leg to the camera - very little vibration dampening decrease. Lastly, I put a 300 series Gitzo tripod at the front standard of each camera mounted on the 400 series Gitzo tripod and the vibrations were stopped. Through my experiment I surmised that the camera movement was caused by: weight and the connection of the tripod head to the tripod where it is thin. Even with the Professional Junior (which is a heavy duty head) there was some movement. A single tripod alone is always a cantilever. Two tripods even smaller ones are more like a truss.

[rdeloe]

On my Toyo rail camera, a monopod as the second source of stability helps when I'm using long lenses. I have a spare rail clamp for my D45M. Mounted on a light carbon fibre tripod, the extra weight isn't too bad. There's still side-to-side wobble potential at the monopod end, so it's not ideal -- but still better than just one tripod when the long rail is used.


I have gone to double smaller tripods for longer exposures and longer bellows extensions. As an experiment - I put a construction lazer on top of my Technikardan and my Calumet C-1. At separate times both were mounted on a 400 series aluminum tripod with a PL5 head. tapping the each of the cameras - showed vibration for up to 8 or 10 seconds (this is without using the center column). I repeated this experiment with a wood Professional Junior cine tripod - still vibrations to 6 or 8 seconds. I tried an extension arm off of the tripod leg to the camera - very little vibration dampening decrease. Lastly, I put a 300 series Gitzo tripod at the front standard of each camera mounted on the 400 series Gitzo tripod and the vibrations were stopped. Through my experiment I surmised that the camera movement was caused by: weight and the connection of the tripod head to the tripod where it is thin. Even with the Professional Junior (which is a heavy duty head) there was some movement. A single tripod alone is always a cantilever. Two tripods even smaller ones are more like a truss.

[aaronnate]

I'm a former mechanic. That 1/4 20 SS bolt is capable of holding much more torque than any camera can exert no matter how much it is wracked out and what lens is on the front. The camera will fail before the bolt.

[Peter De Smidt]

I do like using two tripod screws, as there's no chance of the camera twisting.

Here's what I do with my 4x5 field: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-jXeJtw_24

If you're camera has two holes with enough space, you can put on two screws, and slide them both into the slot. That's what I used to do with my Kodak D2. I made a custom platform with two threaded inserts.

[Jac@stafford.net]

[... snip good article ...] tapping the each of the cameras - showed vibration for up to 8 or 10 seconds (this is without using the center column). [... please see article ...] Through my experiment I surmised that the camera movement was caused by: weight and the connection of the tripod head to the tripod where it is thin. [...]

First, thank you for the real-life trial. Tapping the camera certainly introduces a serious case for vibration, however we are largely concerned with the effect of shutter vibration, ground vibration and wind, the later two which can be persistent.

Aside: I wonder if anyone has luck with tripod leg vibration pads (http://www.digoliardi.net/vibration-suppression-pads.jpg). I have not.

[Leszek Vogt]

Pepe, you can get a larger helipad (as per Jason) from Smallrig....something like 6x3 inches. Also, Randy put up a link for a larger baseplate that I like, tho I'm unable to find it. Oh, one could easily manuf one of these pancake plates, even with crude tools :p

As to tripods, the more reasonable it gets the more wiggly and unstable. No doubt Gitzo or RRS are able to fulfill your wishes: as always at a price.

Funny, saw a real nice mot. pic tripod (all wood) with a bowl and it went for $100 (Sacramento on epay). Yes, hefty but it would support 11x14 easily. Have I had the time away from my current project, I'd rip down there to pick it up. Missed out!

Les

[Jac@stafford.net]

My most steady tripod (http://www.digoliardi.net/skc/skc1.jpg). I don't think most would like to hike with it.

[Matt Stage]

FWIW, I tried several combinations and my camera was always shaky. Worse, I found that tripod heads with a single bolt that never tighten down enough to prevent the camera from twisting and gouging the bottom of the camera. That said, I shoot an 8x10 Burke and James Commercial View (until Saturday...). I use a Kessler Crane Kwik mount system. It works very well and the camera is rock solid on it -- also it mounts in seconds and you always know it is secure. (By comparison, the Manfrotto hex head quick release system seemed to never hold together and the camera was fell out too many times.) That is on top of a older Ries A series Tripod and a Gitzo 1570 head. I am happy with this combo and it holds my custom 14x17 just as solidly. I also use the Kessler Crane Kwik Receiver on my studio stand, where it is just as solid and convenient, and much heavier.

[Vaughn]

I have a 2.5 lb 4x5 (weight w/ lens). I tried a light carbon fiber pod, but the camera moved all over the place with the slightest pressure, movement of the darkcloth, etc. I prefer to use an old Gitzo Reporter -- twice the weight of the camera/lens, not including the head.

Seems like most large tripod heads come with both size screws (often double-ended), with most tripods having the 3/8" screw to connect the head to the pod.

Video heads are not designed to tilt side-to-side, so if you set the pod up level, that should be no problem. I used one on a 4x5 that had a revolving back -- I would get it close to level with the tripod and then level the scene by rotating the back.

[Peter Collins]

I have a Chamonix 45N-2 which is 1550 grams--3.4 lb. I have a small carbon fiber tripod that weighs 2+ lb. The tripod has a hook at the bottom of the center shaft. I have a mesh bag and I put rocks in it and put it on the hook. Rocks are usually plentiful outdoors. Indoors, not so, but also, breezes, not so.

Yes, I have to be very careful inserting film holders. Yes, I have messed up that step, and had to go under the cloth to reposition the camera--but focus itself is usually still okay. Yes, I have to be careful about breezes and the vibrations they can cause.

But rocks and a firm calm hand on the tripod head produce sharp shots for me.

I use this setup because I am an elder photographer. I have observed that elders often get away with shortcuts in much of life. That's my excuse. And my full kit in a Pelican clone is 18 lb, and for this elder, that is enough! 50 yards to the shoot is enough! I keep switching hands.

True Confessions

[cowanw]

The Luland LD-115P Head seems to have a top I have been imagining for years. You can even get at the knob under a 8x10 bed and the knob doesn't interfere with the camera bed.

[Peter De Smidt]

Yeah, the Luland heads look terrific.

[rdeloe]

Another Chinese presumable knock-off that's worth a look is the Benro GD3WH Precision Geared Head. Looks an awful lot like a Manfrotto 410... Somehow Benro managed to get the weight down a bit. A big plus is it's not using those Manfrotto 410PL QR plates.

[Peter De Smidt]

Yeah, I dislike Manfrotto quick releases. I replaced the clamp on my 410 with one from Hejnar. It allows direct use of standard Arca plates.

[Drew Wiley]

Tapping the camera shouldn't induce any vibration, especially the kind that takes awhile to settle down. Otherwise, you've got a system which is just too lightly built to be realistic for your format. And aaronate ... yes, a decent ss bolt should take a fair amount of torque without snapping. But it's a new era, that of "outsourcing", and all kinds of bolts nowadays break even with a simple thumb turn. And I've seen alleged stainless steel tarnish within half an hour due to simple ketchup or lemon juice acidity. So I don't take anything for granted, but check out every bit of hardware that comes with gear nowadays, and if necessary replace the screws and bolts etc with trustworthy alloy. You're a former mechanic, and I'm someone who not only once sold to mechanics, but in another role afterwards worked for a company that sold millions of dollars worth of stainless fasteners to various trades every year. You gotta be darn specific these days or you get bait and switch junk. For most of us, a supplier like McMaster is excellent because they give real specs in their web catalog, with distinct explanations of the various alloys. Go to a hardware store, and you take your chances; most offer nothing but junk, if they offer true stainless at all, and the people that work in those places rarely know the facts, or even care.

[Duolab123]

Tapping the camera shouldn't induce any vibration, especially the kind that takes awhile to settle down. Otherwise, you've got a system which is just too lightly built to be realistic for your format. And aaronate ... yes, a decent ss bolt should take a fair amount of torque without snapping. But it's a new era, that of "outsourcing", and all kinds of bolts nowadays break even with a simple thumb turn. And I've seen alleged stainless steel tarnish within half an hour due to simple ketchup or lemon juice acidity. So I don't take anything for granted, but check out every bit of hardware that comes with gear nowadays, and if necessary replace the screws and bolts etc with trustworthy alloy. You're a former mechanic, and I'm someone who not only once sold to mechanics, but in another role afterwards worked for a company that sold millions of dollars worth of stainless fasteners to various trades every year. You gotta be darn specific these days or you get bait and switch junk. For most of us, a supplier like McMaster is excellent because they give real specs in their web catalog, with distinct explanations of the various alloys. Go to a hardware store, and you take your chances; most offer nothing but junk, if they offer true stainless at all, and the people that work in those places rarely know the facts, or even care.

This is where I buy fasteners. As you say, you don't know what you get most hardware places. These guys started as a family owned hardware store that supplied a lot of hardware to saltwater boaters. They have everything, and you can buy any quantity you want.

https://www.boltdepot.com

[mdarnton]

Two comments:

There seems to be a lot of confidence that the problem is the mounting platform. I disagree. I think the most likely spot for problems is the thinnest spot in the system the farthest from the weight. On most systems this would be either around the pivots of the head or the top of the elevating post, if there is one. The mounting plate is larger than either of these spots, the camera has less leverage on the system there, and the mounting of even a small plate is usually quite secure and short in height, leading to more stability than elsewhere.

Second, I recently discovered that the stiffness of my system was immediately revealed shooting movies with my digital camera and a 200 mm lens. It's a good test because you can see in live view how bad the situation really is. Same head and plate on a different tripod resulted in radically different results. People here say wood is good and in this case the wood tripod did win by a long shot. So maybe we can add flexing in the legs as a big factor, too.

[Jim Noel]

I use an Otto tripod along with either an Otto 2 way head, or a Baco head. On each of these is mounted a Horseman quick mount. Tht Horseman is approximately 3.5" square and very strong. Each of my cameras from 4x5 to 7x17 is mounted to a Horseman plate. This is the strongest quick mount I have ever encountered other than those for movies.

[Peter De Smidt]

Michael makes some great points. Another way is to test is to rubber band a small laser pointer to the lens. The movement of the dot will show vibration.

[Robert Opheim]

Jac tapping the camera and waiting to me is similar to the time it takes to: pull the slide out, cock the shutter and release it etc.

[Jim Noel]

I have never heard a good reason for metal tripod legs. Wood is superior because it does not vibrate, be uncomfortably hot to carry in the sun, or the reverse in cold weather.

[Bob Salomon]

I have never heard a good reason for metal tripod legs. Wood is superior because it does not vibrate, be uncomfortably hot to carry in the sun, or the reverse in cold weather.

Wood guitars, violins, violas, etc. wood certainly does vibrate. Properly constructed metal tripods will not vibrate any more then many wood tripods.

I forgot, piano soundboards are also primarily wood, usually spruce.

[Tin Can]

Of course Linhof offers both. Prices have come down.

Wood (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1314339-REG/linhof_3324_heavy_duty_pro_tripod.html/?ap=y&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIwdKVmefh4QIVW7XACh2DVgArEAQYASABEgLX_PD_BwE&lsft=BI%3A514&smp=Y)

Not Wood (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/31648-REG/Linhof_003323_Heavy_Duty_Pro_Tripod.html/?ap=y&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI1oH2rOjh4QIVmEwNCh0m1QZGEAQYASABEgJwtPD_BwE&lsft=BI%3A514&smp=Y)

I have both and the wood one is heavier, but I cannot detect any working difference.

I bought used and you need a few accessories to use either. Special camera to tripod head interface.

Linhof also made extensions and a very nice Dolly.


Wood guitars, violins, violas, etc. wood certainly does vibrate. Properly constructed metal tripods will not vibrate any more then many wood tripods.

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

Wood guitars, violins, violas, etc. wood certainly does vibrate. Properly constructed metal tripods will not vibrate any more then many wood tripods.

I forgot, piano soundboards are also primarily wood, usually spruce.

I agree completely with Bob Salomon.

I want to add, with a smaller bit of personal experience, that wooden legs cannot be "telescoped" together because they have to be massive. That means that you will have to double or triple the volume and weight to get an extensible leg. This is also a reason why wooden tripods cannot fold very little, IMHO.

I owned a Berlebach 8032 (?), for a long time, with three sections, that means 5 leg parts railed together. I didn't use it in the end. It was too "precious". And too heavy. It wasn't very stable because of the three sections. I made some tests with a laser pen. It's weight was about 2,8 kg.

Then I looked for a two-section tripod. But the 8022 wasn't small at all. And not very high. So I changed the Berlebach against a complete Bronica EC-TL2 with three lenses and three film holders and a new Sekonic L308s. The swiss vendor had glowing eyes, because of the brand "Berlebach". - I stay with Gitzo. I was in France, last weekend. The tiny Gitzo Gilux Sport Performance (Alu) from the flea market, with its Gitzo GH2730 head (Hejnar Arca mod) was sturdy enough to hold the 4x5.

Regards

[Vaughn]

One advantage of a wood tripod has over metal and carbon fiber, is that wood tends to bend and take blows, then return to its original shape...it takes more to permanently deform wood (it breaks, of course, at that point).

Not a big deal for studio and car-based photographers, but I spend more time off-trail than on the trail (if there are trails), and have taken many falls where the pod hits the rocks, with me on top of it. I use the tripod as a climbing assist to get to and return from places that otherwise I could not have gotten to. And my Ries just keeps working...rock-steady...amazing.

PS -- for my small cameras (4x5 and 5x7) I do use a metal tripod -- an old Gitzo Reporter Performance.

[Pere Casals]

To get rid about urban legends on tripods, just place a cheap toy laser pointer in the front standard and see what the spot does far away.

This will teach is the tripod is weak, when wind moves the thing and the time we should wait before we shot after we insert the holder.

It also will tell if the camera points to the same direction after inserting the holder, this is important if we make a tilt/swing it makes move the plane of focus in the scene, a tripod can be "elastic", but it has to return to the same position after inserting the holder.

[mdarnton]

Wood guitars, violins, violas, etc. wood certainly does vibrate. Properly constructed metal tripods will not vibrate any more then many wood tripods.

I forgot, piano soundboards are also primarily wood, usually spruce.

All wood is not the same and it's a serious mistake to believe that they are. You will not find any ash violins, guitars, violas, pianos, etc., and there's a reason for that. You will, however find, I believe, that wood tripods are almost exclusively made of woods that no violin maker in his right mind would touch with a ten-foot pole.

[Kiwi7475]

Of course Linhof offers both. Prices have come down.

Wood (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1314339-REG/linhof_3324_heavy_duty_pro_tripod.html/?ap=y&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIwdKVmefh4QIVW7XACh2DVgArEAQYASABEgLX_PD_BwE&lsft=BI%3A514&smp=Y)

Not Wood (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/31648-REG/Linhof_003323_Heavy_Duty_Pro_Tripod.html/?ap=y&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI1oH2rOjh4QIVmEwNCh0m1QZGEAQYASABEgJwtPD_BwE&lsft=BI%3A514&smp=Y)

I have both and the wood one is heavier, but I cannot detect any working difference.

I bought used and you need a few accessories to use either. Special camera to tripod head interface.

Linhof also made extensions and a very nice Dolly.

Wow those prices are ridiculous! (Or maybe I’m a cheapo ;-)

[Bob Salomon]

All wood is not the same and it's a serious mistake to believe that they are. You will not find any ash violins, guitars, violas, pianos, etc., and there's a reason for that. You will, however find, I believe, that wood tripods are almost exclusively made of woods that no violin maker in his right mind would touch with a ten-foot pole.

And all metals are not the same as are all shapes that aluminum tripod legs may take!

Take a good close look at the leg of a Linhof Light Weight Pro tripod.
First, the leg material is duralumin, an aircraft grade aluminum.
Then the front face of the leg is arced, it is not flat and it is not circular shaped, it then bends on each edge for added strength and rigidity. Any vibration, if any, is dampened out much faster then legs of any material, in any shape of similar or heavier weight.

[Tin Can]

Most of us have a good number of tripods.

No point in selling any as shipping is now too high.

My first real tripod was a Benbo No1 made in England (http://www.patersonphotographic.com/product/classic-benbo-tripod-no-1/). Really goofy to use, but can be configured almost infinitely.

Probably bought it as they use 'whist' in the instructions.

[Bob Salomon]

All wood is not the same and it's a serious mistake to believe that they are. You will not find any ash violins, guitars, violas, pianos, etc., and there's a reason for that. You will, however find, I believe, that wood tripods are almost exclusively made of woods that no violin maker in his right mind would touch with a ten-foot pole.

You had best google for tonewoods. You will find that ash is a hardwood used for electric guitars. Ries states on their web site that most of their tripods are made from tonewoods.

Berlebach uses ash.

[Peter De Smidt]

Is not hard maple used in string instruments? Ok, so it’s not the sound board, but wood does vibrate.

[Pere Casals]

Any material vibrates... Another thing is how the vibration is damped in a material.

Damping usually would be better in a wood tripod than in a metallic one.

[mdarnton]

I just want to comment that all I said was that I did a direct comparison between two similar sized and weighted tripods, with the same head and plate, one metal and one wood. I would welcome others to do similar comparisons. Then we would have real data rather than a bunch of opinions based on what people think should happen.

[Bob Salomon]

I just want to comment that all I said was that I did a direct comparison between two similar sized and weighted tripods, with the same head and plate,one metal and one wood. I would welcome others to do similar comparisons. Then we would have real data rather than a bunch of opinions based on what people think should happen.

Since I marketed Linhof, Berlebach, Novoflex, Giottos Bilora, and Rollei tripods whose legs were made of duralumin, aluminum, ash, carbon fiber, basalt. I have had some experience comparing these. In my studio I had also used the largest Davis Sanford, Majestic, Star D, Tiltall, and some others whose names I can’t remember after all these years.

I sold tripods to major telescope manufacturers, including Questar and TeleVue.

I have seen tests of tripod vibrations ranging from Questar placing an 8” scope on various tripods on a concrete pad and having a 300lb + employee jump up and down on the pad and timing how long vibration remained in the scope. To raising tripods to the same height, with or without the column, placing a half full shot glass (water) and tapping a leg lightly and seeing how long the water moved in the glass. To Leica Magazine taping graph paper to a wall and a laser pointer on the tripod legs, pointing to the center of the graph paper, and photographing the movement of the laser beam after a small weight, tied to a string, was released to tap the leg with the pointer. To Berlebach printing the results of vibration testing by TUV on the back page of their brochure (it may be posted on their web site).

I have seen Berlebach win, Giottos win, Linhof win, that means, that depending how you test a wood, a round tube aluminum or carbon or basalt, a profile shaped aluminum can all win.

So, unless I was following action like sports or wildlife, I wait a few seconds for vibrations to settle out, even when hanging a weight beneath the tripod, before taking the picture.

If you use any tripod properly you will always get the best results, this also means that you should leave a loop in a cable release to eliminate vibration that you can transmit to the lens by having a pulled taut cable release.

[Bob Salomon]

Wow those prices are ridiculous! (Or maybe I’m a cheapo ;-)

Those two tripods could substitute as lowly columns! They have tremendous weight capacity!

Art museums used to use very heavy IR TV cameras to inspect old paintings to see what, if anything, was under the visible image. I sold many of these museums the Heavy Duty Pro tripod, the metal version Randy linked to, with a Linhof dolly, the Linhof Large Geared Column and a custom 18” long Linhof focusing stage to allow the camera to be moved left to right over the 18” length.

The reason this system was chosen was that when moving the camera up and down via the column the camera could not move left to right and when using the stage to move the camera left to right there could be no up and down motion. And, of course, no vibration while handling these very heavy cameras, especially as the column was cranked up or down or the camera moved left to right on the focusing stage.

There are other uses for what is taken as photographic purposes then what most assume, one other use for some of the Linhof tripods and larger geared and goniometric heads was fo4 positioning large things accurately, like radar antennas. Some of these items had to be able to withstand being buried in sand for months!

[Tin Can]

I will add, that when I was in a wheelchair amd sleeping on a folding Zero Gravity chair, I used my Linhof Heavy Duty Tripod with the very heavy 8X10 Color Kardon it came with as a way to transfer from one to the other.

Using a huge camera for counter balance motivated me to change chairs.

It did not move and gave me hope for another day.

I no longer need either chair and very glad of it!

[Greg]

Also have owned both, wood and not wood. Even though the wood one was a bit heavier, subjectively, much preferred carrying it over my shoulder. Think I once read that Questar recommended the not wood model, but maybe the wood model just wasn't considered by them. Used metal ones can be had for under $300 if you're patient and willing to wait till one comes along. Shipping costs can be exorbitant... On one of the ones I acquired, the seller added in $100 for shipping and handling! But because his "buy-it-now" price was under $200, in the end it was still a great a bargain. Bob's? quote of louping the shutter release cord to prevent vibration was one of the first things that I learned at RIT when taking their LF class.

[Drew Wiley]

Bob - Ries tripods are made of maple, though at one point they did briefly offer a custom option. They're NOT ash. Ash was traditional used for things like shovel handles due to its strong linear grain; but it doesn't shape well. Nowadays shovel and axe handles are mostly either fiberglass of worthless SE Asian ramin wood, which might superficially resemble ash, but is about as strong as wet ramen noodles. Good domestic hardwood is getting scarce, although certain types of maple and oak are still abundant. Maple is a lot more moisture resistant than ash. And, for better or worse, it's heavier too. Sheer bully mass can be very helpful under a view camera. When I need to go lighter, I switch to carbon fiber. Aluminum? Yeah, I did that too. Good Gitzo stuff. Real nice in the mountains with no gloves on! - kinda personalizes your gear when some frozen skin is left stuck on it.

[mdarnton]

Is not hard maple used in string instruments? Ok, so it’s not the sound board, but wood does vibrate.

Sorry, I thought I'd responded. The tonal wood in pianos, guitars, violins, etc, is the spruce top. You can more or less consider the box wood to just be a filter. Other woods are used as tops for special purposes, but aren't the usual. Of the body woods, Brazillian rosewood and mahogany have more musical aspect than many of the others. There aren't any ash xylophones, as far as I know.

Aren't most tripods these days made from ash or similar? I though maple was more a 1920s thing, because it was available.

[Bob Salomon]

Bob - Ries tripods are made of maple, though at one point they did briefly offer a custom option. They're NOT ash. Ash was traditional used for things like shovel handles due to its strong linear grain; but it doesn't shape well. Nowadays shovel and axe handles are mostly either fiberglass of worthless SE Asian ramin wood, which might superficially resemble ash, but is about as strong as wet ramen noodles. Good domestic hardwood is getting scarce, although certain types of maple and oak are still abundant. Maple is a lot more moisture resistant than ash. And, for better or worse, it's heavier too. Sheer bully mass can be very helpful under a view camera. When I need to go lighter, I switch to carbon fiber. Aluminum? Yeah, I did that too. Good Gitzo stuff. Real nice in the mountains with no gloves on! - kinda personalizes your gear when some frozen skin is left stuck on it.

I thought I said that the Reis web site says that they use tonewoods. I said that Berlebach uses ash wood.

[Bob Salomon]

Also have owned both, wood and not wood. Even though the wood one was a bit heavier, subjectively, much preferred carrying it over my shoulder. Think I once read that Questar recommended the not wood model, but maybe the wood model just wasn't considered by them. Used metal ones can be had for under $300 if you're patient and willing to wait till one comes along. Shipping costs can be exorbitant... On one of the ones I acquired, the seller added in $100 for shipping and handling! But because his "buy-it-now" price was under $200, in the end it was still a great a bargain. Bob's? quote of louping the shutter release cord to prevent vibration was one of the first things that I learned at RIT when taking their LF class.

When Questar bought the tripods Linhof hadn’t made wood ones for decades. The one that they list now is a rebirth of a very old design of the Heavy Duty Pro.
The tripods that they bought for resale from us was the metal Heavy Duty Pro and the very light and compact ProfiPort. Also an aluminum tripod.

[Drew Wiley]

I have seen ash used for old mid-quality survey tripods. When it gets wet, sliding joints can lock up or literally freeze. Ries has figured out how to minimize that risk. Even long after the so-so finish wears off, the maple leg sections generally slide even wet. Meanwhile survey tripods have generally become fiberglass-clad poplar (or clad ramin if imported). Ash without beetle holes is getting scarce anyway, and never was ideal except for simplified profiles like round or oval. Maple is much easier to shape, though as every woodworker knows, easily burn marks if it isn't moving quickly past the shaper or jointer knives. Maple is a vast resource, especially in Siberia. A great deal of it is turned into cabinet plywood.

[Bob Salomon]

I have seen ash used for old mid-quality survey tripods. When it gets wet, sliding joints can lock up or literally freeze. Ries has figured out how to minimize that risk. Even long after the so-so finish wears off, the maple leg sections generally slide even wet. Meanwhile survey tripods have generally become fiberglass-clad poplar (or clad ramin if imported). Ash without beetle holes is getting scarce anyway, and never was ideal except for simplified profiles like round or oval. Maple is much easier to shape, though as every woodworker knows, easily burn marks if it isn't moving quickly past the shaper or jointer knives. Maple is a vast resource, especially in Siberia. A great deal of it is turned into cabinet plywood.

Berlebach uses aged ash that they harvest themselves. Since they are the oldest tripod manufacturer of wood tripods today, 120 years old, they seem to have pretty well perfected how to do it with ash.

[Drew Wiley]

Just like camera and musical instrument makers carefully select woods like mahogany then slow cure it for twenty years or more before machining, ordinary hardwoods like cherry, ash, and maple also need tender loving care if they are destined for a high-quality purpose. But if you're making hammers and need lots and lots of hickory, or making shovels and rakes and need strong ash, them days is over. Just ain't enough of it left. And in fact, no true pattern-grade mahogany still exists unless it's either been hoarded or repurposed. The future is in composite laminates.

[Jac@stafford.net]

I have seen tests of tripod vibrations ranging from Questar placing an 8” scope on various tripods on a concrete pad and having a 300lb + employee jump up and down on the pad and timing how long vibration remained in the scope.

This is great stuff. Celestial observers were a target market for tripod foot pads intended to absorb ground vibration (http://www.digoliardi.net/vibration-suppression-pads.jpg). Any experience with such?

The orange part is the shock absorbent, an almost creepy, still almost firm gelatinous substance.

[Bob Salomon]

This is great stuff. Celestial observers were a market target of tripod leg vibration suppressors like this one disassembled (I have seen tests of tripod vibrations ranging from Questar placing an 8” scope on various tripods on a concrete pad and having a 300lb + employee jump up and down on the pad and timing how long vibration remained in the scope.).

Has anyone tried them?

Can’t open that link.

[Jac@stafford.net]

Can’t open that link.

My fault, Bob. Please try again.

[Bob Salomon]

My fault, Bob. Please try again.

Still not, on Safari.

Are you referring to weighted metal dampers?

[Jac@stafford.net]

Can’t open that link.

190353

I hope this works.


Are you referring to weighted metal dampers?

No, but that sounds interesting!

[Mark Crabtree]

The Century 12 foot tripods commonly used with Cirkut and Banquet Cameras seem to me to be ash.

http://www.piercevaubel.com/cam/catalogs/1909ekcproflp737.htm

Kodak was always very detailed in their description of the Crown tripods (cherry), but I haven't found a source so far that gives much detail on the big Century. I've owned a number of them and used one for almost all of my commercial #10 Cirkut photos and it is a both disconcerting and amazing tripod. Folds to about 58 inches, not light, but very reasonable for the capability. It is kind of springy, but settles down and seems to do what people claim for wood. I shot pictures of very large groups of cars with their owners and just large groups of people; you wanted to be able to sharply see every face or you'd loose a potential sale. Usually shooting about 1/8 second with a massive rotating camera.

Not proving anything beyond the use of what I believe was ash, and that a lot of the old makers had this stuff figured out. I think the flexibility of ash was needed, or at least an asset, due to the size and length of the pieces.

Edited to fix silly mistakes from posting too late at night.

[JMO]

If you buy new the prices are indeed high, but these Linhof HD Pro tripods do become available in VG to EXC condition here or on eBay from time to time. I scored a Linhof HD Pro with geared column in really nice condition a couple of years ago, and then a nice Maxwell head to put on it. This combination is ultra strong, sturdy and stable. Importantly, Linhof still makes replacement feet pads for their tripods.


First, thank you for the real-life trial. Tapping the camera certainly introduces a serious case for vibration, however we are largely concerned with the effect of shutter vibration, ground vibration and wind, the later two which can be persistent.

Aside: I wonder if anyone has luck with tripod leg vibration pads (http://www.digoliardi.net/vibration-suppression-pads.jpg). I have not.


Wow those prices are ridiculous! (Or maybe I’m a cheapo ;-)

[Vaughn]

...Ries has figured out how to minimize that risk. Even long after the so-so finish wears off, the maple leg sections generally slide even wet. ...

I recently took a little fall into a creek...a semi-controlled fall where the Ries ended up underwater and I was on all fours in about a foot or two of water with the 11x14, lens and holders on my back in a pack. I can affirm that the legs of the Ries actually moved smoother wet than dry. And yes, the finish has worn off.

Before I got the Ries, I found a Magestic at a yard sale (w/ gearhead) for $25. I had to take the head apart and hammer the worm-gear straight. A very sturdy tripod and head for the 8x10. But the bloody thing has so many knobs that it is difficult/painful to carry it over my shoulder -- always a knob jabbing into my shoulder.