Greenguy33 Loc: Rhode Island

What should the focus be on? Your height or the tripod's height when purchasing a tripod?
I see so many tripods with a relatively short max height. At 6'5" tall, there aren't many tripods my size.
I shoot mainly nature and landscapes.
I really like the Manfrotto 190 series carbon fiber tripod.

http://www.manfrotto.com/collection/8374.58969.1070646.0.0/190_New_Series

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

Your tripod needs to be whatever height is required for the camera to attain the desired composition.

Izza1967 Loc: Bristol, England

The tripod you mentioned has an adjustable centre column so although not recommended to extend it due to increasing the instability it will allow you to comfortably look through the viewfinder without stooping.

I have the 055 pro and bought it because it could accommodate my height too while still being very stable, stooping gives me back pain.

amehta Loc: Boston

The tripod legs + head + camera viewfinder height should be close to the height of your eyes for it to be comfortable to use. This means the tripod legs can be at least 1' shorter than you, perhaps more, depending on the equipment. With vertical shots, the distance from the top of the tripod legs to the viewfinder will be less, even if the lens is mounted or an L-bracket is used.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Tripods should be tall enough that when the camera is mounted on the head, then the viewfinder should be at a comfortable height to look through without having to stoop over very far, that will assure it will be comfortable for you to shoot for a long period of time if need be. It also allows you to shoot upward, as in the moon, without having to drag out a chair to sit in.
The Manfrotto 190 is a decent lightweight tripod with pretty good stability, but it is generally shorter than you require at 6'5". Take a look around for a Manfrotto 190XPROL model as it is the same as the 190XPROB model but is 9 inches taller, same height as the 055XPROB legs.
I have tripods in the store that go all the way up to 9 feet in height, but then you are spending much more money and they also weigh a lot more.

Greenguy33 Loc: Rhode Island

Thanks for that recommendation MT Shooter. I'll check it out.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

I personally think you are aiming way too high (pun intended).

The height you seem to be aiming for is so that you can have the back of the camera at eye level when standing fully straight up.
I don't think this is necessary at all.
The only time that I put my eye to the viewfinder is when I am handholding.
On a tripod I use the screen, BBF for focus, for aperture and light etc.
Not only that, many cameras these days have buttons and readouts on the top panel. Mine does. It pisses me off having to stand on my tip toes and try to read these at an angle.

I think that the height you should be aiming for is the height that you wish to take the image at.
Eye level landscape shots are frequently boring.
A lower viewpoint is virtually always better - especially for wideangle shots.
If you should be taking your shot from a height of 20", why do you need your tripod to go to 76"?

Now I just know that someone is going to pipe in and say that I don't know what I am talking about, and that I have to take older people and people with back problems into account - well, I can tell you now, that IS me. I am older, I do have a significant back problem.

Greenguy33 Loc: Rhode Island

As someone who shoots nature and landscapes, I do have to move to the subject's level. I haven't been able to move a landscape. :lol:
You are right Lighthouse. If I was shooting portraits, tripod height might be more important.
PS..I like the signature. :thumbup:

jcboy3

I have several tripods of various height, weight, and closed length, but one (Manfrotto 055XPROB) that is 56" without column, so that with ball head and camera the viewfinder is at eye level when standing straight. This is important for bird blinds, where you cannot use the LCD or the light will scare the birds. Sometimes I need to run it even higher, using the center column, when shooting up hill.

It's just so much more comfortable to be able to stand up straight when using the tripod for extended periods (and I'm talking hours here).

I also have Sirui and Benro travel tripods, Sunpak carbon fiber, but for the occasion where I can bring a big tripod, it's the Manfrotto.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

Yep, good comments.
I wouldn't have thought that the LCD light would be much of a problem inside the blind.
Stand up straight for hours? Doesn't apply to me. I cannot do that. I can walk all day, but am lucky to stand for 15 minutes. If I was in a blind for that long it would be a chair and therefore a lower tripod position.

jcboy3

For the sandhill crane migration in Kearney NE, they make you tape a cover over the screen so you can't use it, and put tape over auto focus lights and tape down pop up flashes. You really have to do everything through the viewfinder.

Shooting sports events like skiing and snowboarding, I usually use a Benro CF monopod which also extends over my head, but if I can bring in my tripod and gimbal, it's great for the big lenses (400mm, 500mm). These can be multi-day events, so I'm happy if I don't have to handhold.

brokeweb Loc: Philadelphia

If you are willing to spend a whole month's SS check on it than be my guest. Personally the the ball-head is the most important.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

Who makes you? The cranes? LOL
I am a little more backwoods than that. I don't photograph anywhere where anyone makes you do anything.
This thread has started me looking at chair blinds. Any ideas?

jcboy3

At the wildlife refuge, the guides make you. The birds spook pretty easily.

brokeweb Loc: Philadelphia

Shoot in "live view" and use a remote shutter release. No reason to spend $300 for a carbon fiber tri-pod.