Cheers Ron,

I don't know the prices and availability in Australia. But...

Counsel your friend to not be too stingy. A tripod is a good place to spend a bit more than you like like, because a quality tripod can last a lifetime. Cheap tripods don't last long and ain't much fun to use even when new. Good ones last forever and work well, encouraging you to actually carry and use them.

I bought a good Bogen (which is now Manfrotto) more than 40 years ago and it still works like new. It cost about $400 way back then, but has supported any number of different cameras from small to large (4x5 film) over the years. It's a big, heavy aluminum beast (nearly 20 lb.) that I didn't mind lugging around when I was young, but quite a bit more than I like now that I'm older. So I did buy a top quality carbon fiber tripod roughly 20 years ago, which is less than half the weight with all it's accessories fitted. I use it a lot and it's also been completely reliable.

Suggest your friend look at other things first, before worrying about price.

First, how heavy is the gear they want to put onto the tripod? Tripods and tripod heads are given weight capacity ratings by their manufacturers. This isn't necessarily the best way to compare, but it's the only thing that's widely available. I'd recommend once they know how much weight they need to support... either now or in the future if they plan to eventually add more gear... then at least double or triple that weight and look for tripods and heads with that capacity or more.

Next, how tall do they need? Your friend should measure their eyeline while standing flat footed. Take into account that the eyeport of their camera's viewfinder will be a couple inches higher than the tripod plus the height of the head. Ideally a tripod should position the eyeport slightly above the users eyeline so the camera can be aimed upward comfortably. Also, ideally the tripod's center column (if it has one) should need to be raised as little as possible to achieve that height. The most stable tripods don't even have a center column. But most do. Some even have two piece center columns! The more the center column needs to be raised, the less stable the gear on top of the tripod will be and the more it will be influenced by breezes and other factors.

Do they want to travel with the tripod a lot? If so, they might look at tripods specifically designed for that purpose. Today many travel tripods are designed so that their legs reverse to "enclose" the head, which makes them as compact as possible. However, this means only a properly sized ballhead can be used on the tripod. As a result, travel tripods are usually sold with a matching head, as a complete kit. While this means you can't customize the combination, it can be a good thing because kits often cost less than buying the components separately.

For best stability, advise your friend to buy a tripod with as few leg sections as possible. Obviously one or two section legs are impractical because the tripod will not fold up very much, if at all, for storage. 3-section are a very good compromise, though not the smallest for storage.4-sections are possible in tripods with large enough diameter legs. But, while it makes for more compact tripods, any more sections than that can be slower to set up and reduces stability because the lowest sections end up being awfully spindly. More joints also increase the chance of leaving one loose and having the tripod tip over with the gear on it.

There are also different types of leg locks. Many tripods today use a twist type, which are low profile to reduce chance of catching on things while carrying or getting damaged in storage. They also are largely self adjusting and offer some weather and dirt resistance. Another type of leg lock is levers. Those are the fastest to use, but can wear over time and can catch on things pretty easily. A third type is thumbscrews, but those are rarely used on field tripods now... they protrude a lot and are fairly slow to set up, but are now mostly only found on heavy duty tripods for big video gear and studio use.

What materials are used in the tripod? Avoid plastics! Metal and carbon fiber are the best. Aluminum tripods are less expensive, but heavier. Carbon fiber is ideal for weight savings and rigidity, plus can absorb some small vibrations that would "ring" in all metal tripods, but are typically more expensive.

Brands may be important. Long-established and well-known brands like your Manfrotto are reliable and most likely repairable, should it ever be necessary. There are quite a few tripod manufacturers, many of whom are recognizable. But there are also a lot of vague brands and knock-offs that may be cheaper now, but might not be the same quality or possible to get repaired if needed once the company has disappeared a couple years from now.

Other things to look for....

Some tripods offer a leg that can be removed and combined with center column to serve as a monopod. Personally I think that's sort of a gimmick, might make the tripod less stable or unreliable. Besides, if you extend just one leg of any tripod it can be used like a monopod without having to disassemble anything.

It's nice to have a pad on at least one leg of the tripod, for more comfortable carrying. It's also nice when a carry bag to used for folded up storage is included or an option.

Many heads offer a quick release. The most common of those is called "Arca-Swiss". It's used by many manufacturers for a very wide variety of accessories. More proprietary QR systems, such as are used by Manfrotto, are not as versatile, less common and made by few manufacturers. Your friend might save some money buying a tripod head that doesn't currently have a QR platform. One can be added later, if wanted.

You might end up buying more locally, but B&H Photo in New York carries almost every known brand of tripod and head, and has a well-organized web site where you can filter to narrow down the options using your friend's decisions and answers to the above questions. Just looking at tripods with head kits, B&H lists 558 ranging from $15 to $1550 (I'd steer well clear of the cheapest ones!): https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/products/Complete-Tripods-with-Heads/ci/2635/N/4075788742?sort=PRICE_LOW_TO_HIGH B&H does a good job gathering info for their descriptions and specifications, but once your friend narrows down their options there I'd recommend confirming things at the manufacturers' websites.

Hope this helps!

There's an element of GAS going on here. I have a rarely used Sigma 85mm 1:1.4 DG (not ART) I'd like to sell and buy a Nikon 70-200mm E F/2.8 for my D7200. I'd like this to be my go-to-lens because of the sharpness and quick focus, judging from what I've read. I own the Nikon 16-80mm and 28-300mm glass. I like them, they do the job. I'd like this lens to stay on the camera most of time, hoping, like everyone else, for an improved image with better bokeh and I still get a good portrait lenses. If nothing else I'd like to lose the Sigma and buy better glass. Opinions and advice appreciated. I'm a hobbyist who shoots anything. I'm not locked in on the "E" model, I just read it's the man.

Thank you MS, going out to purchase the photo book immediately and thanks for the myriad of information. First of May, we're planning 2+ weeks with +/-..... 2 days on Mull, 3 days on Sky, 3 days in Inverness area (already have tickets for the Jacobite Steam train as we leave Skye). Cairngorm NP then on to Edinburgh and 3-4 days there. Doing some boat tours (Skye & Edinburgh) along the way for scenery & wildlife, including the Isle of May.

Three years ago spent a few weeks in England; York, The Northern Lakes District, Wales, Bath area and the Cotswold….absolutely loved it. After Edinburgh, heading south along the east coast for a few days thru Durham, North York Moors, Norfolk coastal area on way back to London....as always when we travel, our itinerary is fluid....Cheers

We've scheduled a trip to Scotland soon, flying in, renting a car in London and then traveling up to Scotland for a couple of weeks starting with Isle of Sky. Currently my plan is travel light, minimal lenses and to use my A7iii/24-105mm lens which is my all around use combo. I'm taking one old Minolta legacy w/a lens for inside, low-light shots.....need the room to bring back a few bottles of excellent scotch...

However we plan to do wildlife tours and not sure if the 24-105 will be sufficient for birds and other critters. I have a 100-400 but that's a lot of lens to carry/drag around on a trip overseas. Without necessarily purchasing a Bridge camera, any recommendations for a longer focal length combination (~$500) or just use the 24-105 & crop....options I've considered;

Sony 24-240, but already have most of that covered with the 24-105.
Sony 70-300, A-Mount w/adapter.
Adapted Minolta, Sigma, Tamron, Canon or Nikon 70-300 or other focal lengths.

Any recommendations or combination/other options from this 'experienced' group would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance