RRS makes a point of focal length and magnification, not load capacity, as the criteria for tripod selection. If you buy a tripod using load capacity, you could easily buy something that is inadequate. Case in point, they rate their smallest lightest tripod, their TQC-14 that supports a 25lb load, adequate for UP TO a 300mm lens (equivalent on 35mm or full frame). This would be inadequate for a 400mm lens on a cropped camera. But though the tripod would "safely" support the camera and lens, it won't be stable enough to dampen vibration.

It's a very simple concept, but few seem to understand what makes a tripod stable enough, and how top tube diameter is the best predictor of performance, and how focal length, and not camera&lens weight is what you should be using for tripod selection.

Otherwise, yes, I cannot think of a better tripod and head system. I just wish I could justify the cost.