I’m about to start taking long exposures and naturally I will have to use a tripod. I have a few of them but rarely use them. I have a big Manfrotto one for a medium format camera with Manfrotto’s version of a Gimbal head. Two medium sized Manfrotto’s, one with a trigger head and the other with a pan head. I also have a small light weight Costso special where you can unscrew a leg and then you have a monopod (this will fit in a camera bag) and finally an old Quick-Set Low Boy. For around home I can use anything, but I am planning a trip, so the big Manfrotto is out. From what I have read tripod vibration is a big issue.

I know this probably won't be much help but…

I had an aluminum tripod that was obviously vibrating. I then returned it for one made of carbon fiber. It absorbs vibration much better and I've been extremely happy with it.


I haven’t done any tests yet except for pinging the tripod legs with my finger nail and surprising enough the old Low Boy performed the best. Plus this thing will almost fit in a camera bag. Quick Set made a High Boy and a Low Boy, the high boy is a little bit bigger. If you haven’t heard of Quick Set tripods it is because they got out of making consumer products years ago and now they just make commercial tripods (movie industry and such)

Anyway, I know some people add a weight to the center column such as a camera bag to reduce vibration. Then I read make sure it rests a little on the ground so that it will not move in the wind. I also read is better to put a bean bag on top of the camera. Oh yeah I also read somewhere you are better off hanging a weight off of your camera strap (not the tripod) but again not swinging but touching the ground. After all this I read about anti-vibration pads for the legs of your tripod, which makes a lot of sense to me if you are on a hard flat surface. Perhaps useless outdoors?

Anyway these are usually used for astrometry where vibration is a big issue. I found that there are some very expensive camera tripod heads designed to absorb some of the vibration. So, I started researching more on anti-vibration products in general and I saw a 3 inch rubber foot pad - perhaps put one in between the head and the tripod – just a idea.

My question is have you ever used any anti-vibration products with your tripod? If so which ones? Do you use a weight, if so, do you attach it to the camera or tripod? Do you use a bean bag on top of the camera?

Actually, the picture you have for download doesn't look bad, but to answer your question, NIK makes a package called HDR Efex that does a decent job. Zoner photo editor also has an HDR package built into it, if you watch the 'Giveaway of the Day' website they usually offer 1 rev. down from latest-greatest once or twice a year.

Personally I have used Photomatix, Photoshop HDR, NIK and Zoner and have found Photomatix to give me the most freedom of options between very realistic to way-out grunged. Photoshop stays pretty much on the realistic side with NIK somewhere in-between (my experience, anyway).

I have lugged my Canon 5-D-11 around Europe twice now and not sure its going to happen a third time.
I am considering buying something lighter and more compact such as an Olympus OMD-E-1 or equivalent mirrorless, or bridge camera.I'm aiming for potentially near SLR quality images.
Has anyone got any suggestions?If so, please give what you think are the best features/reasons of the camera you recommend.
Last trip, Hogs were very helpful enabling my wife to choose a new compact.
Ok, so thanks in advance to anyone who has any ideas.

This dilemma has no right or wrong as I see it. Bottom line, I now shoot primarily for my own pleasure so that makes me the judge of what is a proper photograph. Somebody else can do it differently and that's OK.

I fall into the minimalist category. Sharpening and cropping always, highlight and shadow corrections when needed. Trashing when appropriate. I firmly believe that any good camera can get the exposure correct at least 99% of the time if it's used correctly. I learned photography by shooting slides in a 100% manual camera (Miranda Sensorex/Nikon FM) and I use my DSLR automation to assist rather than control the capture.

I don't attempt to be creative, preferring to record what I am seeing. I do not like to see man-made things like paved roads or fences in my nature shots so I may remove those.

I do wonder how many of the photographers that use PP extensively would have taken the same pains to perfect their work if the medium was film negatives.

BTW, I passed the 60 year mark a number of years ago

First off an apology if this has been asked and hashed over many times already.

I'm curious, not trying to make a statement or judgement. I fall into the minimalist camp most of the time unless I have something I really want to try to "save".

Where do you stand? And in your circle of photographer friends, what percentage of them would you estimate do minimal if any P.P. Vs those who consider it a normal part of the process? Not talking about pro shooting here, just personal.

Thanks for having a look.