Gitzo 1227/1257 vs. 1325

[Sheldon N]

Ok, so I've finally decided that I need to break down and get myself a real tripod. (I know, a real tripod is a wooden one, but bear with me :) )

I've been following the "incorrect" path of purchasing/upgrading/purchasing/upgrading and I hope that I've come to the end of it now. I started with a Quantaray tripod, then a Bogen 3001, and most recently a Feisol CT-3301N carbon fiber. However, I'm still noticing camera shake in some of my shots, especially in long exposures in windy situations or when I've had the tripod legs in water. So, it's time to break the bank and get a Gitzo carbon fiber.

Current gear is a Wista DX wood field 4x5, 90/150/240mm light lens kit, Hasselblad 500cm with 80mm, and 35mm Canon SLR gear with no lenses longer than 200mm. Right now I think that the only camera that the tripod has a hard time with is the 4x5. I have a Kirk BH-3 ballhead, which I'm going to stick with for now. I know that there are bigger/better options, but upgrading the head isn't in the budget at this point.

My priorities in the past have been towards lighter weight over stability, especially for hiking situations. However, I'm not doing any super long hikes or overnight stays, so I'm sure I could add a pound or two to my pack to gain some much needed stability.

So, the two choices in my mind are:

1) Gitzo 1227/1257 with replacement Kirk or Markins base (no center column) or
2) Gitzo 1325

Either would be my only tripod, would be paired with the BH-3, and they are roughly comparable in cost. So it really boils down to whichever one I want to choose.

My list of pros and cons...

Gitzo 1227/1257
+ Lighter
+ Shorter when folded
+ Better match with the BH-3 cosmetically
- Less Stable?
- Shorter at full extension
- Will I want to upgrade again?

Gitzo 1325
+ More Stable
+ Full height eye level use
+ Better from an upgrade path perspective: can take a bigger ballhead
+ Never need another tripod?
- Difficult to use BH-3 controls due to large flat mounting plate?
- Does a little ballhead on a big tripod look silly?
- Longer when folded
- Heavier by over 1lb
- Larger diameter when folded (more awkward to pack)
- No hook to hang a bag from

So, I guess I have a couple questions...

1) How likely am I to notice an improvement in image quality between the two tripods when shooting 4x5 in sub-optimal conditions?

2) Given that the ballhead is a Kirk BH-3, am I going to lose any of the advantage of the 1325 over the 1227/1257? In other words, does the ballhead become the weakest link in the chain?

3) Is the added size/weight of the 1325 worth it?

Any other thoughts and inputs are welcome. I'm really just trying to talk this one through and use you guys as a sounding board.

Thanks! :)

[Jack Flesher]

The BH3 is pretty small for 4x5 IMO and pretty small for the 1325... I use one on a 1228 for my lightweight travel pod. I think the 1227 is going to be marginal for your Wista/240 set -- but it is lighter and easier to carry. My primary field tripod is the 1325 with an Arca B2 on it and shoot DSLR through 8x10 with that. If I could only have one tripod, it would be the 1325, but YMMV.

[Eric Leppanen]

...I'm not doing any super long hikes or overnight stays, so I'm sure I could add a pound or two to my pack to gain some much needed stability. I think you've pretty much answered your own question here.

A tripod like the 1227/1257 prioritizes lightweight and small size over stability. It will work fine in benign conditions with no wind, but once the wind kicks up it will start bucking like a bronco unless you take serious countermeasures (weigh the tripod down, use a wind screen, etc.). I use my 1227 only when I know I will be working in conditions conducive to its limitations. This class of tripod is not a general-purpose support solution for 4x5.

My 1325 is far more stable and is suitable for a wide variety of photographic conditions. In heavy winds I sometimes wish I had something heavier, but overall it is a good balance between stability and usability (a 15xx series tripod would just get too heavy for general use, at least for me). My 1325 is my general-purpose tripod for all my camera systems, from 35mm to 8x10.

I have never used the BH-3 ballhead, but I suggest you use the BH-3 plus 1325 for now, then upgrade to a sturdier ballhead down the road as funds become available. On an interim basis the BH-3 plus 1325 will certainly be better than what you currently have, and once you upgrade the ballhead you'll be set for life!

[Brian Ellis]

"I started with a Quantaray tripod, then a Bogen 3001, and most recently a Feisol CT-3301N carbon fiber. However, I'm still noticing camera shake in some of my shots, especially in long exposures in windy situations or when I've had the tripod legs in water. So, it's time to break the bank and get a Gitzo carbon fiber."

I own a Feisol (not sure if it's the same model you own, I forget the model designation of mine but it cost about $240) with the RRS BH3 head. I also own a Gitzo 1325 with a Bogen 310 geared head. I don't think you'll notice any difference between your Feisol and the 1325 in terms of stability, at least I haven't. Bellows flap, Readyload envelope flap, and moving foliage are the big problems for me in wind and the tripod doesn't help with any of those things . So if you encounter windy conditions a lot I think bringing an umbrella or something similar along to block the wind (or buying a seriously heavy wood tripd) will do more good than replacing one carbon fiber tripod with another.

My 1325 stays home since I got the Feisol except when I need the geared head for architecture. Apart from similar stability the Feisol collars are easier to use than the Gitzo and the leg wraps that come with it are nice in the cold (and the price is a whole lot nicer). But in terms of stability if there's a difference between them it hasn't shown up yet for me, both seem to do a very good job.

[Sheldon N]

I own a Feisol (not sure if it's the same model you own, I forget the model designation of mine but it cost about $240) with the RRS BH3 head. I also own a Gitzo 1325 with a Bogen 310 geared head. I don't think you'll notice any difference between your Feisol and the 1325 in terms of stability, at least I haven't.

Is the Feisol you own comparable in size/weight to the Gitzo 1325? My Feisol is a featherweight compared to other tripods. I have the three section model, similar in size to a 1227, but even lighter. I use it without a center column, just the flat plate that is included. The weight of the tripod without head is right around 2.8 lbs, very light. I think the light weight has been part of my problem.

I'd be curious to hear what model of Feisol you have. If it's the same one I do, I'm very surprised to hear that you find a 2.8lb Feisol to be as stable as a 4.5 lb Gitzo.

The other thought I have is that perhaps mine is a little more worn in than yours. I've found that my tripod has loosened up with time slightly.

[Eric Leppanen]

At 1.2 kg, the Feisol CT-3301N is even lighter than the Gitzo 1227 (1.54kg), and costs $170 purchased direct from Feisol. The larger Feisol CT-3371 (2.2 kg) appears to be in the same class as the Gitzo 1325 (2.04 kg), and costs $319 purchased direct. I'm getting this info from the Feisol web site http://www.feisol.com/english/feisolen.htm. Given the depreciation of the U.S. dollar over the last several years, it would seem likely that Brian's Feisol (originally purchased for $240) is most likely the 3-segment CT-3371 or 4-segment CT-3471. This would also explain why Brian didn't see any advantage with his 1325 versus his Feisol. Does this analysis hold water, Brian?

I was unaware of Feisol, and their products look quite interesting. Sheldon, if you have otherwise been happy with your CT-3301N, maybe you could go with a CT-3371 and save yourself quite a bit of money?

[Sheldon N]

I think that Brian likely has the smaller version of the tripod. The Feisol 3371 or 3471 have only been available for about 6-8 months, and have always cost more than $300. Given that Brian's cost less, he probably has the 3301 or 3401 with a center column.

I did consider the larger Feisol as a possibility but ruled it out for a couple reasons. It is heavier than the 1325 (4.8lbs vs. 4.5lbs), and a little longer as well. The other thing is the quality of the crown/leg interface. On my 3301 when you swing the leg out until it hits the internal stop it gives a little at the end point. This flex makes it hard to get a firm footing when planting the tripod, since the legs want to splay out then spring back inwards. The legs also have a little bit of flex as well which contributes to the same symptom. My gut tells me that if I bought the 3371 it would be an improvement, but I'd still be wanting a Gitzo in 6 months.

Yes, the Feisol products are quite interesting and I think they are a great value. I have just a bit of frustration trying to use their ultralight tripod with a 4x5 when the conditions are tough. I couldn't ask for a better setup for my 35mm or MF gear.

However, my gut is telling me that maybe I just need to end up with a 1325 and an Arca Swiss B1 - but then my back objects. :)

[Sheldon N]

One other option I just thought of is the new Gtizo GT2530 tripod.

It looks like a replacement for the 1257 series of tripods. What's interesting about it is that they have now incorporated a design where you can swap out the center column for an included flat plate. They have also upped the weight capacity specs to 26.5 lbs, the same as the 1325. From what I've read elsewhere, this is supposedly related to increased torsional stability.

Do you think that the rigidity of the tripod is more important than the mass of the tripod?

[Dave_B]

Sheldon:
I suggest the Gitzo 1325 and the Bogen 405 head. Together they are heavy but very solid. If you get this combination your children will use them long after you are gone and you will never again wonder if it was the tripod that cost you a sharp image. The Bogen is a little overkill for 35mm or MF but for LF it is a dream to use.
Cheers,
Dave B.

[Peter Lewin]

Let's keep the waters a little muddy by mentioning the Bogen rep's response to my similar question at the PhotoPlus Expro. In the same quandary as the original poster, I was comparing the new replacements for the 1257 and 1325. (I'll use the old numbers simply because we're all familiar with them.) The "1257" was listed as 3.2 lbs, the "1325" at 3.8 lbs, so I asked whether the the "1325" wouldn't be the better choice for my Canham DLC45 since it was only .6 lbs heavier, but a more robust tripod. He recommended the "1257", since by removing the center column it would weigh 2.7 lbs, still be eye-level for my 4x5, still have the hook (even in the center-post-less setup) if I wanted to hang a weight under it, and would be sufficiently stable. Playing the "famous photographer for example" card, he mentioned that Nicholas Nixon uses a 12-series Gitzo for his 8x10, so I would have no concern with a 4x5. So (unless I change my mind in the coming months) I will wait until Jan/Feb when the new models become available, and stay with the "new 1257." (I have noticed that many of the posters who prefer the 1325 also have 8x10 cameras in addition to 4x5, which would impact their tripod choice; I also felt that since he was recommending the less-expensive model, the Bogen rep was giving me an honest recommendation.)

[Brian Ellis]

Hi Sheldon - The Feisol I have is very light, has no center column, has three leg sections, and is rated at 15 lbs as I recall. I use a Linhof Master Technika on it which with lens and film holder is about 7 lbs, which is somewhat heavier than your Wista and perhaps the added weight helps some with the stability. I also don't generally photograph in strong winds, the kind that would make the flag stick on a golf course bend. Problems with shutter speeds, dark cloth flapping all around, bellows flapping, etc. just make that very little fun for me. If that's the kind of wind you're talking about then maybe the 1325 would be a better choice.

I just don't see you gaining that much by going from one carbon fiber tripod to another if stability in wind is your main concern and you don't take long hikes. But all this is just opinion and I certainly have no vested interest in what you buy so good luck, if you end up with the 1325 I'm sure you'll like it, it's a very nice tripod.

[naturephoto1]

Hi Sheldon,

I have used my original Gitzo 1228, equivalent to the 1325, and now a 1257LVL with my Linhof Technikardan 45S. You do have to take some care with the 1228/1227/1257/1257LVL tripods with the camera. I too have removed the center columns to my tripods which saves some weight and adds somewhat to the stability. You can as mentioned add weight (as mentioned) to the hook at the end of the tripod bottom. Just remember to have the weight suspended to rest on the ground, you do not want to have the weight swing. The weight will give the effect of extra mass to the tripod.

Back in 1996 in took the attached photo of a moonset shot: Moonset, Hallett Peak in Rocky Mountain National Park. The phot was taken with the Linhof Technikardan 45S and the Nikon 500 T ED lens on an Arca B1 Ball on the original Gitzo 1228. Exposure was 1/8 of sec at f32 with rear tilt to maintain focus. The photo was taken between gusts of wind on Fujichrome Provia 100. Any longer exposure and the moon would have moved through the image.

Bogen/Gitzo was so surprised with the results of the image, that they have used the image at Photo Plus and it is one of 5 images in their corporate offices in Ramsey, NJ. By the way, the 50" long copy of the photo is almost as sharp as the 24" long image.

Rich

[Harley Goldman]

I have the 1127 and the 1325. The 1325 is far more stable. It is also much taller. I find the 1127, which is very close in height to the 1227, to be too short. I bought a long bungee cord for the 1127. I hook it to the center column hook, wrap it around my boot and step down. The tripod gets extremely solid. However, unless I am hiking a long way or travelling by air, the 1325 comes out every time. It is a far nicer tripod to use in all ways.

[Sheldon N]

Well, it looks like I just scored a good deal on a Gitzo 1325 and Markins M20 combo.

I'll let you all know what I think when it arrives.

Thanks for the input!

[naturephoto1]

Hi Sheldon,

I think that you should like the combination. I have the 1325 (or equivalent) when I have replaced the center column with the flat plate. Additionally I have the Markins M20 mounted on my Gitzo 1257LVL. It is much smaller and much lighter (with equal holding power) than my Arca B1 which is mounted on my 1325 equivalent. Because I have the L (left) rather than the R (regular or right version of the Markins- same set-up as the Arca B1) (my prefered orientation) and due to its much smaller size, reduced weight, and smoothness of operation (I would say about equal to the Arca B1) it is my favorite ball head. However, I purchased the Markins M20 without their QR and got the Kirk 2 1/2" Arca type quick release with the bubble level which I preferred.

Good luck and enjoy the combination. But if you decide that you need the smaller and lighter tripod for long hikes and backpacking consider the 1257/1257LVL tripods.

Rich

[Sheldon N]

Well, the Gitzo 1325 and Markins M20 Ballhead arrived from Fedex today! I paid $715 (including shipping) so I feel that I definitely got my money's worth.

Impressions:

There is a definite weight and bulk penalty for the Gitzo/M20 combo vs. the Feisol/BH-3. The diameter of the crown on the Gitzo makes it a bit more bulky to pack. The weight difference is not huge, but it is noticeable (3.9lbs vs. 5.75lbs). The length difference is fairly substantial as well. The Feisol/BH-3 when folded is as long as the Gitzo all by itself.

I am going to second guess my decision when hiking more than a couple miles. :)

Operation of the Feisol is noticeably quicker than with the Gitzo. They both have the same style twist locks, but the Feisol locks are a bit easier to spin and have a better sense of either being completely locked or completely free. There is also less air resistance with the Feisol when extending or compressing a leg section, so this can be done much more quickly than with the Gitzo. The Gitzo locks and legs do have a better build quality and fit and finish to them.

The full height of the Gitzo is very nice. I'm just over 6', and with a camera mounted it's actually almost too tall. The Feisol is almost a foot shorter when fully extended. No more hunching over a ground glass for me! :)

The ballheads are both very nice. The Markins has a bit better fit and finish, and locks a little bit more solidly (primarily due to the larger diameter shaft connecting to the clamping plate). The tension control and lock knob work a little differently on the two, but both are of good design. The Markins is the better head, but the Kirk BH-3 holds up well all things considered.

Overall stability of the Gitzo/M20 combo is definetely better than the Feisol/BH-3. At full extension on both tripods with a Wista DX and Fuji 240mm focused close (near full extension) there is noticeably less vibration and resonance with the Gitzo when either the camera or tripod legs are tapped. This can be seen on either the ground glass or on the front standard itself. However, it's not a drastic difference. My impression is that on solid footing on a day with decent weather, there is not going to be any real difference in the end result image quality between the two tripods. However, in those situations where the wind is blowing and the tripod legs are in a stream I know that buying the Gitzo is going to pay dividends.

Anyhow, I am still impressed with how good of a tripod for the money the Feisol is. It is more than useable with a light 4x5 camera if you are selective about what conditions you shoot in. The Kirk BH-3 is also a great value and a nice head.

If I had the budget, I would keep the Feisol/BH-3 and use it on longer hikes, and for all my 35mm and MF shooting. However, I can only afford one tripod for everything, so the Gitzo is it.

Anyone interested in a Feisol or a Kirk BH-3? :)