Tripods: Carbon Fibre vs Aluminium

"TP" wrote ...

The 3021B Pro (Manfrotto 055B Pro) is perfect for 35mm and light
medium format work. If you want a lighter tripod the 190 is also
suitable for light 35mm work.

Tony, since you've mentioned the 2 tripods I'm considering
replacing/supplementing my Uni-Loc S1700 with in the next few months, what
would you advise is the largest lens that can be securely supported by these
2 tripods ? Which head would you suggest ? 141RC ? 222 ? 322 ?

--
Life is hard . . . . . It's harder if you're stupid

Hi Tony,

TP wrote:
The 3021B Pro (Manfrotto 055B Pro) is perfect for 35mm and light
medium format work. If you want a lighter tripod the 190 is also
suitable for light 35mm work.

Choose your tripod head carefully, and avoid the Manfrotto 460
magnesium head because it is not rigid and tends to vibrate.

Thanks for the information.

Martin

"Tony Parkinson" wrote:

Tony, since you've mentioned the 2 tripods I'm considering
replacing/supplementing my Uni-Loc S1700 with in the next few months, what
would you advise is the largest lens that can be securely supported by these
2 tripods ?

With the right head, the 055 Pro/3021 Pro will support a 300mm f/2.8
or even a 400mm f/5.6. For a faster 400mm you should choose a larger
tripod. The 190/3001 will support a 300mm f/4 but is marginal for a
300mm f/2.8. In very good conditions (no wind, firm ground) you might
stretch to longer lenses.

Which head would you suggest ? 141RC ? 222 ? 322 ?

From long experience (since 1988) I would not recommend any Manfrotto
tripod heads except the geared 3-way heads 410 (Bogen 3275) and 405
(no Bogen equivalent). I use a 405 in the studio and it works
perfectly; the 410 is a lighter version suitable for 35mm format with
lenses up to 200mm, maybe 300mm at a pinch.

The 141RC is a good, sturdy, cheap 3-way head that has been around for
years. Because it's so cheap, it is very popular, wlthough sales have
been dented by the new 460 Magnesium. I have always found that the
141RC moves when you tighten it. Every time. It's very annoying.

The 460 is light, handles well and is cheap, but simply isn't rigid
enough. It also moves when you tighten it.

The 222 and 322 are from a long tradition of grip action heads (of any
brand) that simply don't work. Anything that's so easy to unlock and
move is just not going to hold your camera steady, except maybe for a
wide angle or standard lens in 35mm format on the 322. The 222 is
surely just a joke?

It's not easy to find a good tripod head.

I sold my nearly-new Manfrotto 055N Pro about two years ago and now
use a Tiltall with integral 3-way head. It's no good for working low
down but it's fine for everything I do in 35mm and 6x6, and it's also
light enough to carry. Probably the best thing about it is not having
to agonise about which 3-way head to buy.

;-)

HTH, HAND etc...

In article , TP
writes
"Tony Parkinson" wrote:

Tony, since you've mentioned the 2 tripods I'm considering
replacing/supplementing my Uni-Loc S1700 with in the next few months, what
would you advise is the largest lens that can be securely supported by these
2 tripods ?

With the right head, the 055 Pro/3021 Pro will support a 300mm f/2.8
or even a 400mm f/5.6. For a faster 400mm you should choose a larger
tripod. The 190/3001 will support a 300mm f/4 but is marginal for a
300mm f/2.8. In very good conditions (no wind, firm ground) you might
stretch to longer lenses.

Which head would you suggest ? 141RC ? 222 ? 322 ?

From long experience (since 1988) I would not recommend any Manfrotto
tripod heads except the geared 3-way heads 410 (Bogen 3275) and 405
(no Bogen equivalent). I use a 405 in the studio and it works
perfectly; the 410 is a lighter version suitable for 35mm format with
lenses up to 200mm, maybe 300mm at a pinch.

The 141RC is a good, sturdy, cheap 3-way head that has been around for
years. Because it's so cheap, it is very popular, wlthough sales have
been dented by the new 460 Magnesium. I have always found that the
141RC moves when you tighten it. Every time. It's very annoying.

The 460 is light, handles well and is cheap, but simply isn't rigid
enough. It also moves when you tighten it.

The 222 and 322 are from a long tradition of grip action heads (of any
brand) that simply don't work. Anything that's so easy to unlock and
move is just not going to hold your camera steady, except maybe for a
wide angle or standard lens in 35mm format on the 322. The 222 is
surely just a joke?

It's not easy to find a good tripod head.

I sold my nearly-new Manfrotto 055N Pro about two years ago and now
use a Tiltall with integral 3-way head. It's no good for working low
down but it's fine for everything I do in 35mm and 6x6, and it's also
light enough to carry. Probably the best thing about it is not having
to agonise about which 3-way head to buy.

Just to add a few comments of my own to Tony's thoughts (and with
apologies if I have repeated anything said earlier - I have been
away/busy over the last few weeks):

(1) I have used a 141RC on my 055 for many years with a high level of
satisfaction. In particular, I have never noticed any problems with
shifting about any of the 3 axes when tightening; either Tony is more
fussy than I am, or I am more careful in tightening (neither sound
likely to me) or Tony's 141 is slightly sloppy.

(2) The 055/141 combination works fine with my EOS 1n/100-400 IS, and
with my Mamiya 6 120 outfit. I have when stretched used it with my
Linhof 5x4 camera; it is some way below ideal for this, but better than
hand-holding!

(3) My favourite Manfrotto head is the 229; I use one on my 058 tripod,
the heaviest I own. This combination is marvellous to use (the leg level
adjustment mechanism on the 058 is inspired*), and robust enough for
anything I have ever used, or imagined using - but too heavy to carry
"just in case", and really only necessary for LF work. It would be
perfectly possible to use the 229 head on an 055 tripod, but maybe a bit
of overkill. It is also rather expensive compared with many of the
others discussed.

*Many people overlook the fact that to use a tripod accurately - e.g.
for panoramas - it is essential to get the axis of the legs accurately
vertical - levelling with the head just will not do - and the 058 is the
only 'pod I have ever seen that allows you to do this in seconds and
without bending down.

(4) I have just (literally - just got back half an hour ago) bought a
Manfrotto 440 and 460 head. I was very surprised - and impressed - to
find that the 4-section model showed no significant loss of rigidity
compared with the 3-section version. I had gone along with a firm
preconception that "less sections must mean more rigidity" but I
certainly could not measure any difference, and I spent half an hour
trying to compare them.

(5) Having read Tony's comments on the 460 yesterday, I was slightly put
off it - over the years I have found Tony to be a good source of comment
on such matters. Having tried it - in the shop only, which I agree is no
substitute for use on the job - I agree the locking knobs seem less than
ideal. When the knobs are slackened the transition from locked to free
seems rather jerky. However, I really did want to save weight, and I
judged that the rigidity when locked was good enough for purpose.

(6) I have only tried the action grip heads in shops, and I agree they
are not good - I certainly would not use one.

(7) Many people seem to swear by ball/socket heads, but I have never
liked them much. Maybe if I got a Rolls-Royce version I would like them
more - the only one I have used much is the one which came on my Benbo -
but I have never felt the need.

I got the 440/460 to take to Madeira next week (my wife was getting very
stroppy about the weight of the 055/141 in the suitcase*). I will try to
remember to give a report on how I find it when I get back.

*It was cheaper than getting a new wife, and I'm quite attached to the
one I have.
--
David Littlewood

David Littlewood wrote:

(5) Having read Tony's comments on the 460 yesterday, I was slightly put
off it - over the years I have found Tony to be a good source of comment
on such matters. Having tried it - in the shop only, which I agree is no
substitute for use on the job - I agree the locking knobs seem less than
ideal. When the knobs are slackened the transition from locked to free
seems rather jerky. However, I really did want to save weight, and I
judged that the rigidity when locked was good enough for purpose.


David,

The lack of rigidity I referred to occurs when everything is tightened
up and you are ready to take the shot. Unfortunately, the magnesium
alloy casting is flexible, and it can even resonate in the wind.

I found this when taking some night shots with exposures of between
10-45 sec with a Nikon F100 and 85mm f/1.8, and a Bronica ETRSi with
150mm f/3.5. There was evidence of camera shake on many of the shots.

When re-shooting them several nights later I noticed the movement in
the viewfinder. I tightened all three axes only to find the movement
was still there. Then I realised the magnesium alloy casting was
flexing, and it would even resonate at high frequency (order of
60-80Hz) when the wind was at right angles to the optical axis!

I returned the tripod head the next day and the new one was exactly
the same. I returned that one and waited a few days for another
replacement, and that replacement did exactly the same thing.

In the studio I set up the 460MG head on a Manfrotto 075 (huge and
heavy tripod) and mounted the Nikon F4 with an 80-200mm lens set at
200mm and a 2.0X teleconverter. Making sure that everthing was
tightened up, I flicked the end of the lens while observing a red
laser dot on the white wall through a 6X turret viewfinder, and the
vibration was very noticeable. I exchanged the 460 for a ball head
and the vibration was absent.

Several friends have bought Manfrotto carbon fibre tripods complete
with the 460MG head, and all have experienced a lack of rigidity that
is in stark contrast to the excellent rigidity of the tripod legs.
All have sold their 460MG heads on eBay, where there is a ready market
for them - which is good news for sellers.

I have not checked to see whether the latest production 460MG heads
have been re-designed. If not, you shold perhaps consider replacing
it with something better. For all its other faults, the 141RC has no
such flexibility problems and weighs not much more.

Tony

In article , TP
writes
David Littlewood wrote:

(5) Having read Tony's comments on the 460 yesterday, I was slightly put
off it - over the years I have found Tony to be a good source of comment
on such matters. Having tried it - in the shop only, which I agree is no
substitute for use on the job - I agree the locking knobs seem less than
ideal. When the knobs are slackened the transition from locked to free
seems rather jerky. However, I really did want to save weight, and I
judged that the rigidity when locked was good enough for purpose.


David,

The lack of rigidity I referred to occurs when everything is tightened
up and you are ready to take the shot. Unfortunately, the magnesium
alloy casting is flexible, and it can even resonate in the wind.

I found this when taking some night shots with exposures of between
10-45 sec with a Nikon F100 and 85mm f/1.8, and a Bronica ETRSi with
150mm f/3.5. There was evidence of camera shake on many of the shots.

When re-shooting them several nights later I noticed the movement in
the viewfinder. I tightened all three axes only to find the movement
was still there. Then I realised the magnesium alloy casting was
flexing, and it would even resonate at high frequency (order of
60-80Hz) when the wind was at right angles to the optical axis!

I returned the tripod head the next day and the new one was exactly
the same. I returned that one and waited a few days for another
replacement, and that replacement did exactly the same thing.

In the studio I set up the 460MG head on a Manfrotto 075 (huge and
heavy tripod) and mounted the Nikon F4 with an 80-200mm lens set at
200mm and a 2.0X teleconverter. Making sure that everthing was
tightened up, I flicked the end of the lens while observing a red
laser dot on the white wall through a 6X turret viewfinder, and the
vibration was very noticeable. I exchanged the 460 for a ball head
and the vibration was absent.

Several friends have bought Manfrotto carbon fibre tripods complete
with the 460MG head, and all have experienced a lack of rigidity that
is in stark contrast to the excellent rigidity of the tripod legs.
All have sold their 460MG heads on eBay, where there is a ready market
for them - which is good news for sellers.

I have not checked to see whether the latest production 460MG heads
have been re-designed. If not, you shold perhaps consider replacing
it with something better. For all its other faults, the 141RC has no
such flexibility problems and weighs not much more.

Tony

Thanks Tony. I must test mine this weekend and (if necessary) put the
141 on to take away.
--
David Littlewood

"David Littlewood" wrote in message
...

[SNIP]

*Many people overlook the fact that to use a tripod accurately
- e.g. for panoramas - it is essential to get the axis of the legs
accurately vertical - levelling with the head just will not do -
and the 058 is the only 'pod I have ever seen that allows you
to do this in seconds and without bending down.

A levelling base is another way of accomplishing the same thing, albeit over
a less extreme range of angles - I have a Gitzo one that fits between tripod
and Arca B-1 and like it very much. Gitzo has just brought out some new
tripods that combine this levelling effect with a fitted column, which would
be another method still.

[SNIP]

(7) Many people seem to swear by ball/socket heads, but I
have never liked them much. Maybe if I got a Rolls-Royce
version I would like them more - the only one I have used
much is the one which came on my Benbo - but I have never
felt the need.

The Benbo one isn't that good, though dismantling, re-lubing and carefully
reassembling mine improved it.

For years I was 'anti-ball', but now I use them far more than P&T heads,
which I use only for some macro, some studio, and most architectural work.
A bad P&T is sort of like a good P&T only (d'uh) not as good, whereas a bad
ball-head is just _nothing_ like a good ball-head.


I got the 440/460 to take to Madeira next week (my wife was
getting very stroppy about the weight of the 055/141 in the
suitcase*). I will try to remember to give a report on how I
find it when I get back.

*It was cheaper than getting a new wife, and I'm quite attached
to the one I have.

Yeah, I feel that way about my tripod too...



Peter