Thinking about an ultralight Series 0 Gitzo tripod, a couple of questions.

[tgtaylor]

The GT 0540 works fine with my Toyo 45CF. Of course the CF weighs in at a little under 4lbs with the normal lens attached and it is usually not necessary to weigh down the center column at all. I've never tried it with the AX. After all, if I'm looking to save weight by carrying the GT0540 instead of the Manfrotto 441 or Gitzo G1348 I surely wouldn't pack a six lb camera.

CF + 150mm lens + GT0540 + G1177M = ~ 6.4lbs!

Thomas

[fuegocito]

yeah, small compact lenses like angulon and geronars wrapped in socks, grafmatic or mido film holders, what is the name of that super compact/small spotmeter?...Personally I would go for one of those non folding SW type field cameras for faster setup and take downs

A lot of wt can be saved in the camera kit itself - bubble wrap around lenses, and the
4x5 wrapped in the down jacket, plus a plastic bag of course, so no need of an extra
padded case. Choosing more compact lenses like Fujinon A's, C's or Nikkor M's rather
than traditional plasmats.

[engl]

I'm in a similar situation, looking for a traveling pod, and have pretty much decided to go with a Feisol. They use much larger diameter tubes for lower sections than Gitzo 1 series which should make a major difference, especially in leg lock stability. They also make that nice 3441T, tall enough to be used comfortably without extending the center column, while still having a one for those times it is needed.

Gitzo use thicker tubes though so I'd expect them to be more rugged.

[Drew Wiley]

My Gitzo was the first carbon fiber "Mountaineer" model on the market and has held up
well under backcountry conditions. I removed the center column and inserted a mounting screw system in order to eliminate the need for a tripod head. It works quite well for either a folder 4X5, monorail, or even my 6x7. The Feisol I recently purchased does indeed have thinner tube walls than the Gitzo, so might not take as much abuse per se, but is better designed in the sense it is more stable in relation to its overall weight. The top section is wider, with the hinge knuckles splayed out to the side rather than below the top. And the center cylinder up on top can be interchanged quite easily, making this tripod ideal for the kind of conversion I have just described. It folds up to a little bigger diameter than a comparable Gitzo. I bought the optional stainless steel spikes, which only add a little extra weight but are invaluable on slippery surfaces. A nice system.

[Juergen Sattler]

Check out the lightest Feisol tripod - it should work for you better than the Gitzo "0" series. I own the Gitzo for hiking and my DSLR - it works OK for that purpose, but I would never put my LF camera on that thing. The Feisol on the other hand should do the trick - a friend of mine owns one and I was quite impressed.

[tgtaylor]

I just looked at the Feisol and for my use and camera the Gitzo is better.

1. The Gitzo w/1177M head is significantly lighter than the Feisol w/head: 2.38 lbs vs 3.11 lbs.

2. Although I don't own the Feisol, it's the opinion of the posters above that the Gitzo's legs are of a thicker construction and the tripod likely to be more durable than the Feisol. This is important because neither of these tripods are "cheap" and, IMO, for that kind of dough it better last a lifetime. Incidentally the purchase price of the Gitzo and head came to the same as that of the Feisol: At the time Gitzo was advertising a rebate of $50 on the purchase of a tripod and $100 if a tripod and ball-head were purchased together. Since I purchased both together, I received a check from the distributor for $100 within 30 days of my purchase. Combined with free shipping from B&H that brought my final cost down to $500.

3. Although the Feisol system is rated for a greater load than the Gitzo's (22/33lbs vs 11/8.92 lbs rsp), that is meaningless considering the weight of my camera with attached lens is a tad under 4 lbs!

4. The Feisol does have a higher max height without using the center column (50.39 inches vs 46.5 inches) but that height difference of 4 inches is really insignificant. If anything 4 inches closer to the ground would improve stability - especially if a slight breeze is blowing which is usually the case. More important is the 2 inch folded length difference (16.93 vs 18.9) favoring the Feisol. But both of these tripods are extremely compact and the additional 2 inches in folded length is insignificant.

5. The diameter of the Gitzo's base plate is 2-5/16" vs 2 inches for the Feisol. I don't use a QR so taking that attachment off the Feisol may increase its diameter as well as lightening its total weight.

In summary, for me the main advantages of the Gitzo is its durability and lighter weight.

Thomas

[Bill Burk]

Hey Drew,
Back when I did minimalist backpacking, I would carry a Star-D in a home-made Gore-Tex case. It makes my left shoulder ache with sympathetic pain just remembering.

In 1981 in Dusy basin, a guy asked me to take a picture of him and his buddy with his camera. He started to show me where to press the shutter release when his buddy said "look... I think he knows how to use it".

I really miss having to find something to climb on so I could look through the viewfinder.

There are people who carry super-ultra-light to extremes. But you only have to take a few of their ideas into your own packing to get your pack down to 35 pounds - even with an LF camera and all the attendant gear.

[jeroldharter]

I have a small Gitzo (not carbon fiber) and it is too light. It is too light for a Pentax 67 let alone a Toyo. 4x5. The Feisol would be a better choice.

[Drew Wiley]

Hi Bill - I've done it all, including spending nights in the high country with no sleeping
bag or tent at all. That's how the Indians did it. I remember one cowboy who would just roll up in his stinky saddle blanket. As kids we'd disappear into the peaks and
canyons for days or even weeks at a time and live off the land. At most, I'd carry a
poncho. Since those days I've actually had tents shattered by ice rime, camped in
hurricane force winds atop summits, deliberately gone into blizzards for the hell of it.
Now that I'm getting old and lazy I've reverted to more of a human mule mode, packing
a few amenities, but rarely 90 lbs anymore - more like 75. Had a climbing buddy in my
early years who liked to eat well ... we'd do maybe 22 miles and 6000 ft of grade, and
he'd have at least two cast iron skillets in the pack, a full size axe, a ham, a slab of
bacon, several cantaloupe, zucchini, etc. Got a kick last year when a couple of young
fellows postholed over the high Muir Trail passes early season with going lightweight.
They were soaked and utterly miserable and had to hike out midway. My hiking buddy
(who had just given up on his ultralight tent and brought a Bibler too - good thing, it
was snowing and sleeting like crazy at 10,000)- well, he made the memorable remark
about the wild look in thier eyes, that they'd ceased being humans and had become
marmots.

[Michael Gordon]

For what it's worth, my Feisol CT-3342 lasted only a little over two years. I've had three epoxy welds fail on three different leg joints (complete failure while in the field; two happened at once!), and one of the leg stops on the head assembly completely ground away. Additionally, many of the plastic collar stops on each leg have broken and caused major stickiness (they've subsequently been replaced). Finally, one of the upper leg tubes has developed a long crack in the CF that was not caused by misuse.

If you use your tripod a lot, you might consider spending more $$ to get better gear (Gitzo). This being said, Kerry Thalmann at Really Big Cameras has provided superb support for my Feisol problems.