imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I am just quoting some one else earlier in this thread regarding RRS statement - I have not personally researched it - but I never the less AGREE with the statement ... and mostly agree with your comment also.

I just am not so sure vibration dampening qualities are as important as people selling CF tripods would have you believe - they do have an agenda.

..

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Context is everything.

I gave away my massive Bogen 3051 with it's 3047 head - 15 lbs, 2 leg sections which when fully collapsed was 34 inches, or 27" wit the head removed. I used it in my studio when I didn't need the stability of my 250 lb Foba camera stand. It did ok in the studio with relatively short to medium focal length lenses, at lower magnifications. For macro it vibrated too much.

I got rid of it when I started using a DSLR with 300mm and longer lenses. It just was not stable enough. So much for inertia (aka mass) as a criteria for tripod selection.

I was on a limited budget (3 kids in college will do that) but I wanted to do more wildlife photography - especially birds. I had rented an aluminum Gitzo 1500 Tele Studex with 3 section legs and found it to be far superiod to the Bogen - but it still weighed 10 lbs. I then rented a Series 5 carBon and found it just as stable, if not more, when compared to the aluminum - despite the fact it was less then half the weight. So I scoured The classifieds, eBay, Fred Miranda Naturescapes and other active buy/sell websites for over 4 months and none came up for sale. So I bought what I could afford, a series 3 for about $550. It was a beautiful tripod, but, as expected, it was less than stable enough with my 600mmF4. However, it was more stable than the Bogen and weighed a totally manageable 4.1 lbs. While I was close, I had not been able to hit my budget/stabilty/dead weight goals.

It was 2006, and I was running out of options. I sent the tripod back. What was the point of owning an amazing tripod that failed to meet my needs?

I was beginning to hear great things about a new brand out of China - Feisol - so I looked at their top model - the CT-3472. Under 4lbs, thicker legs than the Series 3 Gitzo (so it had to be more stable than the Series 3 I thought), and it had a comparable load capacity 66 lbs vs 55 lbs - in the event I wanted to add some weight for more stability. So I took a chance and ordered one from China. It hit all my criteria - affordability, stability, collapsed size, extended size, build quality. It cost me $540 shipped.

With it's 37mm diameter top leg sections it was in fact more stable than the Series 3's 35mm (as expected), the same weight, and could fit in my carry on bag.

While a comparable Gitzo (Series 4) GT-4543LS will work, it is 1.25 lbs heavier, and currently costs $1000. The Feisol is under $600. So my answer to the original question is- tripods do not have to be expensive to be good. But you need to pick the correct performance criteria - top tube diameter and platform diameter - to match your needs. If you need a tripod for travel with "normal" focal lengths, you needs are quite modest and even a $200 tripod can work. But if you push the stability envelope, you would be throwing money away buying a light-duty tripod for use with long lenses or macro. I use a 2 lb Feisol tripod for travel and backpacking, but it still costs $400. It has a load capacity of 55lb, so if I need to I can always hang my backpack from it, but I find I seldom need to as long as I don't go too crazy with magnification. FWIW, the 2 lb CT-3442 is about as stable as my 15 lb Bogen was.and it has 2x the load capacity. So much for weight, mass, inertia or whatever you want to call it, being everything. It's more complicated than that.

Grnway Loc: Manchester, NH

Bravo, Gene! I KNEW you would weigh in with the most cogent argument for a very good tripod.

I bought the Feisol, largely on Gene's many explanations and endorsements of good quality tripods. I have a CT-3442 model which is more than adequate for my Fuji X-T2, with grip, and 100-400 lens, which is my largest setup (don't think there are any larger/heavier lenses in the Fuji lineup, yet). The thing is extremely well built. I put a Sirui K-20X ballhead on it (55lbs capacity, fwiw). A rock solid combo in a relatively small package. The whole setup cost $460.

So, you really don't need to spend a bundle on a good tripod, but Gitzo and ReallyRightStuff certainly have the right idea about how to make an excellent tripod.

Photocraig

For the record my two tripods a Bogen now Manfretto and a Gitzo are both 30 years old and work like new. So, if chosen properly, they are a buy once item. Now that type of tripod still requires a head. Heads are like lenses. Some like a tilt/pan or Ball are pretty general purpose depending on your shooting style.

I'm looking to lighten my load, and the Sirui mentioned above looks nice. Also I saw the new line of Vanguard tripods. They used to make sturdy heavy less than elegant pods, in my opinion. These look nice and are affordable.

Amazon is using its enormous selling reach has private labelled a few "Basic" products to compete with the artificial Photo Markup. Including a basic tripod and head.https://www.amazon.com/AmazonBasics-60-Inch-Lightweight-Tripod-Bag/dp/B005KP473Q. This is basic BASIC, But it will get the job done. After using this for a while you will be able to identify what features on a tripod are worth paying extra for. Meanwhile, there's always a use for an extra tripod. There's a phone attachment available so you can make a video and stills simultaneously and post onto the net from the phone.

$23 bucks is way cheap, and if you have a tilt out screen, you can do live view composing and focusing without bending in half. (hint: use teh $$ saved to buy extra batteries because Live View is a power hog.

I suggest that you look into that and check it out. They have an almost painless return policy. I think many of us would appreciate a mini review on it, too.

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

Thank you Gene, I had hoped you would step in as you put words together far better than I. The beginners need good reasoned advice from experienced old hands. I pray they heed yours.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Thanks! These days money is a little tighter, so I try to find value in everything I buy. I think Feisol makes the best alternatives to RRS and Gitzo, ahead of most of the competition. Sirui, Induro and Benro are also quite stable but generally heavier. Leofoto, a Swedish tripod mfgr, seems to make a product in the same league as RRS, but slightly less expensive. I haven't seen one but the numbers look really good if you don't mind the weight - their Gitzo Series 5 equivalent weighs, 3.7 kg.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58060986

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Thanks, Rich.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Mass does not equal weight. Mass is the same whether you are on earth, Jupiter or the moon. Weight would be different in each case. I learned this when my grammar school took us on a trip to the NY Planetarium, where they had set up a series of scales ro show you how much you would weigh on a number of different PLANETS.

I have understood the difference between mass (inertia when you factor in a mass's resistance to acceleration in any vector), and weight, which is entirely dependent on gravity, or acceleration in one vector - vertical.

That's pure Physics 101.

But I am sure you know this and just misspoke. . .

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I did not mis speak - and I do not care how you slice it or dice it - the end result is still the SAME - at least on THIS planet !

..

jgm

Gene51, very much appreciate your remarks. Would you mind sharing what ball-head you use with your CT-3472?

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

I have a similar setup from camera to tripod to ballhead. Another factor (hinted at-but not directly mentioned) which may drive up the cost is quality of materials and workmanship: having used a number of tripods over the years (including several Bogen/Manfrotto models), my current tripod is easier to transport, set up and use. A quality tripod is just a joy to use. The difference between my current setup and my past “mistakes” is night and day.

As a former machinist, I can attest to this: generally machined parts are superior in workmanship, finish, strength, and durability to cast parts. Machined is generally more costly from a labor perspective.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Thanks!

I use an Arca-Swiss Z1, with long lenses I use a Manfrotto 393 gimbal.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

You really are never wrong, are you. You remain my go to as the finest example of cognitive dissonance I have ever come across. I thank you for not letting me dowm.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

That was my deciding factor in moving from Gitzo to Feisol. I was nervous about a random bubble in the casting. . .

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

I’ve noticed this as well....