Beginners Tripod

JJ_SO

Sirui, ThreeLeggedThings, Induro and RRRS were the most interesting "interpretations" of Gitzo's principle I learnt after deciding for Gitzo - again, after 25 years I got me a second and third Gitzo. Getting spare parts after 20 years impressed me, that's why I stuck to Gitzo. And a well stocked Gitzo/Manfrotto shop in cycling distance, while the Sirui/Induro dealers are 3 hours train travel to and back from. I like to see and touch before I buy where I could see and touch.

The only thing I regret with Gitzo is not deciding for the "Ocean" series. Other tripods getting seawater (and sea-sand ) into their fixing elements are usually not so difficult to clean.But if that design "flaw" of Gitzo and it's copies doesn't bother you and the transport size is alright, I'd say there's nothing wrong with Sirui. Their QR-plates are inexpensive and also dedicated to various camera-bodies which I find a good thing.

Parke1953

JJ_SO. Thanks for the heads up on the dedicated QR plates, found them and if I get this tripod and head I will get the plate for my D800. Looked at one today seems solid and the Ball Head is very smooth.

JJ_SO

I know the brand for about two years now. First I thought "ah look, another copying of Gitzo". Never really tried them or worked with it. Your post made me research a bit and I found the website of the Chinese manufacturer. Gitzo's not the only brand they copied from, also Cullman and Manfrotto and for the ball-heads I could not recognize the origin of. 11 years ago they were only an idea, an opportunity, now they are celebrating 10 years and I think they teached all the original manufacturers already a hard lesson. Not only copying but also improving and this on a high level of quality.

Still, I'm glad I bought European products (although I can't be sure these days how many parts of them are Made in China) but today I would be very tempted to buy a good tripod and a very good lens for the same price as only one Gitzo.

This gave me some thoughts about economical future which would be completetly off-topic, but thanks anyway for that impulse.

BabaGanoush

@TTJ: JJ_SO - you need to revisit your physics. It is the force on the fulcrum point (i.e. ball joint) and the forces at work pulling against the friction. The forces at work at a 45° angle are higher than at 90°.

Actually, JJ_SO is correct to object. I think you are confusing "force" with "torque". The force of gravity on the camera + lens is given by the weight of the two and is the same regardless of the orientation wrt the tripod head. What changes with orientation is the torque, r F sine (THETA), where r is the length of the lever arm (of the ball head, say), F is the bearing weight (of the camera and lens), and THETA is the angle of the lever arm (i.e., the radius of curvature to the camera-lens) measured wrt the vertical. When the camera-lens is mounted horizontally (in landscape position) on top of the head, THETA=0 and the torque vanishes; when the camera-lens is pointed up towards the sky or down towards the ground (in portrait orientation), THETA=90 and the torque is a maximum; in both orientations the weight of the load is the same but the torque is different. The head has to be able to counterbalance the torque that's exerted by your equipment when it is in portrait orientation. However I don't think it's common practice for manufacturers to cite a value for the maximum torque their tripod heads can bear. What they cite is the weight of the load. I've always assumed this is the maximum weight the manufacturer is certifying its tripod head can bear when a camera-lens is mounted in portrait orientation, i.e., in the position where the torque on the ball head is greatest and there must be sufficient friction applied to the head for it to keep the load firmly locked in that orientation.

Mac_The_Knife

Simple test,,,, grab a gallon of milk out of the fridge, hold it out at arms length at 45 degrees, and then 90 degrees. I'm thinking you'll be able to hold it longer at 45 degrees then 90.

My sunpro tripod on the other hand,,,,

TaoTeJared

BabaGanoush - yes that is the calculation.

I'm not confusing anything on the Force or torque - to know the torque, you need to know the force. We do not care about calculating torque since it is a limit, and known (ball head ratings are actually Torque ratings - 15lbs, 22lbs, etc.) Besides that, you can not calculate that in a store unless you brought an entire testing lab with you and a scientific calculator.

You need to know the force of an object (mass, gravity + the weight of accessories, hand, etc.) so that one does not exceed the torque rating of a ball head to failure. As I stated, I simplified the multiple calculations and came up with an EASILY USABLE rule of thumb that one can do in the store or without trying to calculate it on the spot. Some keep missing that point. I do not know a single person that will or wants to take out a notebook, scientific calculator and a pen and revisit physics/trigonometry class in the middle of a camera store. If you want to long hand the calculations out for yourself, you will find my quick and easy rule of thumb is close enough and actually overstates the force exerted on a given ball head just a bit so you can be confident you are getting the correct rating.

all of that said - everyone who has had many experiences with ball heads, knows that not all are made equal. Some heads will fail lower than stated, some at the rating, and some will take much more of a load than the rating suggests.

JJ_SO

I don't know any ball-head manufacturer giving the torque his heads can hold. All of them usually refer to the weight capacity. Torque is per definition the product of force by distance - Nm is an ISO unit of torque, ft⋅lbs is the American unit for it. lbs are only weight.

Of course, it's much more practical to tell the weight - but since every ball-head manufacturer may use a different formula and doesn't want to look worse than his competitors, they operate with incomparable numbers. Torque would be comparable.

So, the numbers of the manufacturers could only be compared in the range of his products, hoping - but not knowing - he will use the same formula for all of them.

But load capacity is just one property. If you just tighten the screw hard enough, it should carry up to it's capacity. The other, usually more interesting ability of tripod heads in general is how much they move when you tighten them. Some of them need to be foreseen before you frame the subject and tighten the head. Others show nearly no movement at all.

Ade

15 lbs, 22 lbs, etc., are not torque ratings. Torque is a vector quantity, commonly measured in lb·ft.

Instead of torque ratings, head manufacturers specify weight capacity (load rating). E.g., the Acratech GP ballhead has a rated capacity of 25 lbs. That means this ballhead is designed to support 25 lbs of the intended load at any position.

You don't need to re-calculate the ballhead rating at some arbitrary angle. Reputable manufacturers (RRS, Markins, etc.) are already conservative on how they rate their heads. So a head rated at 25 lbs can probably still hold significantly heavier loads (within reason) at any angle.

JJ_SO

@Ade thanks for helping with the torque thing

The more I think of specs and how the manufacturers each can make their own specs work and look good in tables, the more difficult is it to tell in advance if a tripod / ball-head combination will work with all your gear (also in the future) and will still be light enough to be carried.

Capacity is not much worth, if the tripod is shaking when the whole capacity is on it. Heavy tripods will should give more stability at the cost of being hard to carry over longer distances. Ball-heads with a big ball are working smoother than the cheaper smaller ones. And usually you can't tell by the pictures if it was a cheap tripod or lack of technique. Even cheap tripods can be of assistance if one knows how to handle their flaws.

spraynpray

@JJ_SO:

"Even cheap tripods can be of assistance if one knows how to handle their flaws."

That includes balancing the load on the tripod by using a tripod foot and not the mount on the bottom of the camera. I said that before and you disagreed.

Golf007sd

With all do respect...you guys have taken this entire topic off track. I and those that have contributed to this topic know full well the capability of your tripod and the ball head upon it; moreover the combinations ability to support your gear.

Let just get back to helping those seeking answers to a: "Beginners Tripod"

sevencrossing

With all do respect...you guys have taken this entire topic off track.

+1

Unfortunately this seem to be a growing trend on NRF

Msmoto

Ahhh.....yes, back on topic. Thanks, Golf. The question is a beginner's tripod, but the question as to whether to purchase a less expensive, i.e., lighter tripod vs. a more expensive heavier tripod remains. Many who have purchased a cheap tripod initially have spent far more in the long run to obtain a sturdy unit which generally carries more weight....and my recommendation is one about 25-30 pounds of "capacity" whatever this means.

JJ_SO

The OP was very clear what he wanted: tripod for D600 and 28-300 (no tripod foot under it) at max costs of 350 £

And I guess that was tripod and head.

Starting with RRS hints for getting a tripod was not my input, Golf. But it appears to be reasonable to make one think about getting the best (whatever that is...) in the beginning instead of upgrading economically based choices and ending up by spending triple the money. Given the 350 £ limit, RRS was already off topic. But who wants to draw the line?

I think that Sirui 3004 with head is worth a look. Given the fact, they already have sealed locks which makes them more suitable for use at the seaside. And Sirui copied as well at Giottos, so one gets with certain tripods of Sirui also a Monopod included. I also think there are great and cheap opportunities on second hands market or eBay. But to evaluate them, it needs experience and this is what one gains by some "wrong" decisions. Honestly, who is still happy with the first tripod he/she started with? I always see mistakes as a great opportunity to learn and improve.

Msmoto

@JJ_SO

I do not have a Sirui tripod but do have a monopod head and plate. The workmanship appears quite good on both. So, the tripod you have suggested JJ_SO, is a really good deal as it also has the feature of one leg detaching and becoming a monopod. My guess for the final recommendation is:

Sirui M-3004 4-Section Aluminum Tripod + Sirui G-10X Ball Head

available for about $316 ....from our sponsors....

JJ_SO

Was not my suggestion originally. Parke 1953 came up with it, so all the honours to him

It has been some time since i have logged in. Moved from California to Texas. I am also looking for a tripod and head and came across this Sirui M-3004 Tripod and K-30x Ball Head $375 at a local store. Tripod is rated at about 40lb and the head at 66lb. Does anyone have any comments on this system. I will be using a D800 and a 80-400 with TC ( don't have the lens yet but am over half way with the $$$).

Just a couple of days before he asked, one of the Swiss Pro dealers came up with new infos and is also now distributor of Sirui. They made a lot of things right, as it seems to me. Although I have Gitzo legs and two heads, I would not recommend them, they are overpriced.

BabaGanoush

"With all *DUE* respect...you guys have taken this entire topic off track"

Yes, we've heard from the unofficial school hall monitor and so now we are all properly chastised, in my case for trying to correct misinformation that was posted---well meaning advice I am sure---but nonetheless likely to lead to a heavier duty tripod than is required by the OP for his situation.

spraynpray

I don't think we were that far off track (I say this without wanting to go off track). If the OP wanted a list of tripods with prices next to them he could/should have looked at any store on the internet or bricks and mortar (preferably our sponsors) for that information.

He was looking for a recommendation though which is tricky because people recommend what they have - which may not be within budget or if it is, may not be the best - so it deteriorates into yet another opinion thread. The opinions above were about the ability of the head to work or not which is more relevant to a beginners tripod than it is one about pro level tripods.

Anyway, that Sirui sounds good AND WITHIN BUDGET.

sevencrossing

The original post was for " A Light, Compact Tripod, something to travel with.
Budget: £350

Many of you seem to have forgotten the Light and Compact bit . With a budget of £350, this should not be too difficult . IMHO, The proposed Giottos Vitruvian VGRN8265 Tripod plus MH5501-652 Ball Head, ticked all the boxes

Msmoto

Possibly, the thread has given a lot of information and has answered the question not asked such as "Should I use a light tripod?" And, for sure one can purchase a light tripod, but is this a good economic investment?

I think the 4 kg capacity is what would turn me off as a tripod weighing a pound more can give a much sturdier base and cost about the same, being more usable. An example is the use of about 10 pounds of weight from the column for stability is not possible with such a light weight unit.

So, the response to the word "beginner" is maybe where folks went.

Now, having looked at the Giottos Vitruvian VGRN8265 Tripod plus MH5501-652 Ball Head does seem to be a nice setup, but as my experience has shown, heavy is good....my opinion only....worth not too much.

sevencrossing

but as my experience has shown, heavy is good.....

On a long hike

http://www.cradlehuts.com.au/the-overland-track/

IMHO heavy is bad

JJ_SO

If one is aware to deal with some compromises, a lightweight tripod can save some shots and will not make others worse than without a tripod. I go with Msmoto, heavy usually is more stable. But when out hiking, I prefer the lightweight traveler series 3 against the much sturdier systematic series 4 which will hold everything out of my gearbag, at every shutter time.

Knowing I need mirror up, knowing I can't extend it to max length, knowing I will have to put a bit extra weight/force to the body still makes me deciding for the lightweight version. I do have a transport problem, where I live I don't need a car and therefore transport most of the stuff with my bicycle. The big and sturdy series 4 simply occupies too much space. When travelling, I'm also very happy with the smaller dimensions of the traveler. So far, I was able to solve all problems the smaller size and thinner legs bring with.

I think but can't prove, the carbon material is swallowing more vibrations in the frequency bandwidth of the camera. It's not only lightweight, it's also stiffer than aluminium.

Gitzo

This thread is a classic example of how very different, different people think; I have never been able to resist replying to a tripod thread; it seems like everyone has his or her favorite tripod and ball head, and often to the exclusion of other "brands"; I really don't think it's possible to make a case for why any one brand of tripod or ball head is "the best"; there are just TOO many personal considerations to take into account; the "best", sturdiest, solidest tripod owned by one person will be disliked intensely by another person because it's "too heavy"; tripods are like airplanes in one sense; the heavier they are, the stronger they tend to be, but "heavier" airplanes also suffer from relatively "poorer" fuel efficiency; the same can be said of tripods; obviously, heavier ones are relatively "harder" to lug around.

Personally, my definition of "best" tripod is one that costs the least, and at the same time, performs at least as well, (or maybe even a little better), than one's costing much more; ditto for bullheads; if you stop to think about it, a tripod is a pretty simple thing, especially when compared to a modern digital camera, ( which tend to become "obsolete" VERY quickly, regardless of how many thousands you invest in them. Fortunately, tripods don't become obsolete nearly as quickly, (if at all). I had all of these things in mind when I decided to get a new tripod and ball head, more than 10 years ago. ( When I say "new", I mean a replacement for the old Slik I still have, which is arguably the WORST tripod I've ever seen.)

After having had an opportunity to use my son's brand new CF, three section Gitzo, with his brand new Arca Swiss B-1 ball head, I was HOOKED ! except for one minor thing; my son and his wife are both engineers, both make tons of money, have no children and no debts; but they have the means to spend a lot more on "toys" than I do; my budget was about 1/5 what my son's was, even though I LOVED his tripod and BH; This led to my first compromise; even though CF is lighter, (and also has several more advantages even more important), it's quite pricey, as compared to aluminum; ( that aspect has improved considerably since i bought my aluminum tripod) I went on eBay, did a LOT of "shopping around", and finally bought an aluminum Gitzo, 3-section, model 340 for around $100; when it arrived, it looked like it was brand new ! (it STILL does) thanks mainly to the most superlative powder-coat finish I've ever seen yet; I'd say the 340 is about half way between "light" and "heavy"; but it's SOLID as a rock; ( I almost never use the center column ) The A-S B-1 was harder to find, but after maybe 2 months, I found exactly what I was looking for; a extremely nice gentleman in the UK who had decided to sell his brand new AS B-1 on eBay; ( we still communicate now and then, after 10 years! )

At the time, the B-1 was $498 at B&H in NYC; I got mine for ( you Brits will understands this, I don't), 180 "pounds" (?) I forget exactly how it compared to dollars at the time, but is was a WHOLE lot less than $495;
Best of all.........after more than 10 years, the B-1 STILL looks (and operates) like a new one.

I've looked at (and tried out) a lot of ball heads since I bought this one; I have yet to see one I would trade it for; it's very light, has a HUGE ball, is rated to support (I think) 45 pounds; most things that need to avoid "creep", need to be "tightened" securely; Arca ball heads DON'T; just a very slight "twist".......and it's like the thing is welded in position; easily the single smoothest, most "precise" piece of camera gear I've ever used; (and I acquired it for a bargain price). If you are "into" panoramas, you need two things; an A-S B1 ball head, and the "self leveling" gadget made by either RRS, or Gitzo, (I forget which, as I don't have one yet) As anyone who shoots panos "knows", the head and camera need to be perfectly level; accomplishing this with tripod leg adjustment is a VERY tedious process; with this other "gadget", it takes but a second, (leaving a lot more time to concentrate on photography, instead of "adjusting" leg locks).

Not being an engineer, I tend to see things in the simplest possible terms; how much does cost ? How well does it "work" ? How well does it please me ? ( If I really need to be bothered with math, I'm probably building a telescope or faceting gem stones; I like to keep photography (and camera gear) as simple as possible.

Gitzo

@ Syn3rgy

After having just read your last post, with several questions, I think I should point something out;
Avoid ANY ball head (or tripod) which "locks you into" a "system" which that one company makes; what I mean by that is this; 3/4 of the companies which make all these things start with THEIR ball head, which can only be used with THEIR QR plates; AVOID that at all cost ! Here's why; start with a really good ball head; it will accept ANY Arca style clamp; once you have an Arca style clamp, you can use ANY one's Arca style QR plates;
Avoid ANY QR plate that has rubber, cork, or any other kind of material between the plate and the camera body; very good reason for that, (requiring a 3 page BOOK to explain) Regardless of WHAT ball head you buy, if it's NOT compatible with the Arca Swiss style QR plates, DO NOT BUY IT ! ( unfortunately, I have just had to insult everyone who owns any of this equipment, and for that I'm sorry, but quite unlike cameras, there really IS one BEST quick release system, and 98% of all working pros use it; Arca-style plates.

Now.....many people make Arca style plates; the very best are made by Kirk and RRS; that doesn't mean the rest are "bad"; ( no one has the time, funds, or inclination to try all of them ); so you go with what so many have already found out from experience; any plate from these two companies will be as good as you can buy;
Now....having said that; plates are very expensive; I'm poor: so ALL of my RRS and my one KIRK plate, I have purchased "pre-owned", (mostly on eBay). Down the line, once you started out with a Ball head with an arca-style clamp, you can find pre-owned plates, (from dozens of companies), and you can use ANY of them ! If you buy a Giotta, you will forever more be trying to find Giotta "stuff" that only works with your Giotta head;
That isn't saying that Giotta is "bad"; it IS saying, you will never have the option of using plates from all these other companies; Most of the other companies have little "pins" on them so you can use it on "any" camera; that may seem like a good idea; it's NOT; because there is something MUCH better, which "works" MUCH BETTER; ( The arca-style plates) I'm going to really stick my neck out in saying this; I'm thinking that if everyone who ever wanted a very good ball head had an opportunity to use an Arca Swiss head as a "test", that a whole bunch of these other companies would suddenly have a VERY hard time selling their ball heads; I have used many of them as a comparison SINCE I've had my Arca B-1; as I mentioned in my other post, I have yet to see one that I like as well. ( but that's just a personal opinion; I haven't tried there one from RRS, and I KNOW i'd like it ! Everything RRS makes is exquisite ! ( and very costly )

I'll give you just one (I think) very good example; I recently decided to buy a "L" plate for my D-300s; the one from RRS is around $165 to $180; I now HAVE a RRS "L" plate ( custom fit for my camera body ) that I bought used on eBay for $82. ( Now I have just made the very nice man at RRS mad at me ! ) But please remember.....I'm 80 years old, and I'm very poor ! I HAVE to "economize", where rich people don't.

I've gone this far, I may as well explain this; custom flat plates and custom L plates for specific camera bodies are one thing; They are CNC machined to fit the exact contour of the camera body; because of this, the attachment screw requires MUCH LESS torque for the plate to remain tight; the cheaper plates attempt to do this with rubber or cork; but you have to use even MORE torque to compress that resilient material between the body and the plate, thus wearing out the aluminum (or magnesium) threads in the camera's mounting hole. Trust me, you do NOT want to have a new tripod socket installed in your camera !

Plates for lenses are mostly just flat, and are somewhat less expensive; but you only need them with longer tele lenses, (which have collars and mounting "feet".)

spraynpray

Reading your post Gitzo, it is obvious you are happy with your tripod. I'm happy for you, BUT, different strokes for different folks. I too have budget constraints but am happy with my Slik. It has a QD plate which is circular and so after using the built-in level in my camera to set the ball head up level, I only have to loosen the lever that tightens the QD plate to spin it for panoramas. That is a non-Arca plate that you are advising people to avoid. Different strokes for different folks.