Tripod for MF

"Tony Polson" wrote in message
...
Steve wrote:

On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 15:41:24 +0000, Tony Polson
wrote:

No-one would ever get fired for buying a Bogen/Manfrotto
5021 Pro. Outside the USA, it is known as the Manfrotto
055 Pro.

At 6kg, this weighs in at twice the weight of the Velbon 830
mentioned here. I'm just wondering if that extra weight gives
returns, and am not ruling this out. Would appreciate any
comments on the relative merits of these two contenders, can
lug 6kg if I have to :-)


A carbon fibre tripod is certainly easier to carry, but weight saved
is stability lost.

Any tripod offers two things; rigidity and stability. Rigidity is
defined by the ability of the tripod to retain its geometry while
resisting external forces. Stability is defined by the ability of the
tripod to resist toppling by external forces such as wind or you
stumbling into it.

Carbon fibre tripods are potentially very rigid - potentially even
more rigid than alloy tube tripods. But their lack of weight means
that the overall centre of gravity of the camera/lens/tripod
combination is much higher than when using a heavier tripod.

You can put this weight back by hanging your camera bag on a
hook under the tripod head. However, stability is not always fully
restored because the camera bag is not a rigid component of the
camera/lens/tripod combination. It can swing, and that reduces
overall stability of the system.


One answer to this is not to let the bag swing free in the air. Put it on
the ground and then run some elastic shock cord from bag to tripod apex,
tight, but not tight enough to lift the bag.


Peter

Oops.... I meant to type Studex and was thinking of the
Reporter series for some reason and only realized it as I
read your response just now!

Steve wrote:
On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 12:42:54 -0600, shoes
wrote:

When I was testing hiking pods for Pentax 67 duty, I came
upon an affordable combo that has worked well on the P67 up
to my longest optic, a 200mm. A Gitzo 1320 Reporter topped
by a Bogen 3047 head.


Thanks for that recommendation, sounds like it's based on a lot of
experience, considering it against the rest for sure.

Steve

"Steve" wrote in message
...
I know this is a "how long is a piece of string question", as tripods
come in an infinite variety of size/weight/cost variations with all
the tradeoffs involved. But I thought I'd get some ideas on this.
All I have at the moment is a Benbo Trecker used for 35mm
work. And it's really not the ideal thing for a Mamiya RZ67 with
motordrive and maybe a big lens... The solution needs to be
portable for outside use, and stowable in a domestic situation. I
am the sort of person who is prepared to lug an RZ, so can
tolerate a bit of weight.

The carbon fibre Gitzo 1325 is my choice for MF. I have lighter 'pods, and
I have a massive aluminium Gitzo 5 series for when I need the height, but
the 1325 gets the most use. I also have a Manfrotto 075 - this is a very
good tripod too, but I really do prefer the Gitzo, especially in the field,
so the Manfrotto is used more often in the studio, on a dolly.


Also what head should I put with this? Recommendations
welcome.

Do you like a pan and tilt, or a ball head? The set-up I have on my 1325
for at least 95% of the time is a Gitzo levelling base topped by an
Arca-Swiss B1. The Arca is a superb head, but they are expensive (and
heavy).

The levelling base may or may not be useful to you in addition: for me it
lets me get the panning base of the head levelled quickly without messing
about with fine-tuning leg heights - something you may not necessarily need,
but I like it.



Peter

"Bandicoot" wrote:

One answer to this is not to let the bag swing free in the air. Put it on
the ground and then run some elastic shock cord from bag to tripod apex,
tight, but not tight enough to lift the bag.


That's a good idea.

Personally, I just take the heavier tripod. It isn't *that* heavy,
and it has more weight where it is most needed - low down.

"Bandicoot" wrote:

The carbon fibre Gitzo 1325 is my choice for MF. I have lighter 'pods, and
I have a massive aluminium Gitzo 5 series for when I need the height, but
the 1325 gets the most use. I also have a Manfrotto 075 - this is a very
good tripod too, but I really do prefer the Gitzo, especially in the field,
so the Manfrotto is used more often in the studio, on a dolly.


I also have an 075 in the studio. I would never take it out without
an assistant - it is a brute of a thing to carry along with MF gear.

On Mon, 4 Dec 2006 09:47:06 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
wrote:

The Manfrotto 055 Pro _weighs_ 2.4 kg, and will _hold_ 6kg. The Velbon 730,
at 2.3 kg, is in the same weight class. The 830 is 3.05 kg.

Ooops thanks for that correction, my misread.

Reading this debate with interest!

Steve

On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 20:41:23 -0600, shoes
wrote:

Oops.... I meant to type Studex and was thinking of the
Reporter series for some reason and only realized it as I
read your response just now!

No worries, thanks for the correction!

Steve

On Mon, 4 Dec 2006 02:41:58 -0000, "Bandicoot"
wrote:

Do you like a pan and tilt, or a ball head? The set-up I have on my 1325
for at least 95% of the time is a Gitzo levelling base topped by an
Arca-Swiss B1. The Arca is a superb head, but they are expensive (and
heavy).

I have to say I've preferred pan and tilt based on my admitedly
limited past experience. The ball head I had for the Benbo seemed to
suddenly go badly loose as I slackened it off for say a small
horizontal pan adjustment. I can see an argument for having the two
axes separate. Though I've not used a top-grade ball head as
recommended here. Wonder if things can be better.


The levelling base may or may not be useful to you in addition: for me it
lets me get the panning base of the head levelled quickly without messing
about with fine-tuning leg heights - something you may not necessarily need,
but I like it.

I see that point. Messing with leg heights is a pain, will consider
this, thanks.

Steve

Tony Polson wrote:
Pudentame wrote:

Tony Polson wrote:
"RolandRB" wrote:

Steve wrote:
I know this is a "how long is a piece of string question", as tripods
come in an infinite variety of size/weight/cost variations with all
the tradeoffs involved. But I thought I'd get some ideas on this. All
I have at the moment is a Benbo Trecker used for 35mm work. And it's
really not the ideal thing for a Mamiya RZ67 with motordrive and maybe
a big lens... The solution needs to be portable for outside use, and
stowable in a domestic situation. I am the sort of person who is
prepared to lug an RZ, so can tolerate a bit of weight. Also what
head should I put with this? Recommendations welcome.

Steve
Benbo Mk 1.

If you want a tripod:

that doesn't go very high, but is still surprisingly large and bulky
when telescoped right down;

that is heavy and cumbersome, without being especially sturdy;

that will deposit you, your expensive camera and your expensive lens
unceremoniously in a tangled heap on the ground (or in the muddy
water) as a result of a nanosecond's lost concentration;

whose operation is like wrestling with bagpipes;

... then the Benbo Mk 1 is exactly the tripod you need!


Come on Tony. Don't be shy. Tell us what you *really* think about it. ;-D


Well, I have owned two Benbo Mk 1 tripods, plus a Benbo Mk 4, which is
a very short version of the Mk 1, plus a Benbo Trekker, plus a Benbo
Trekker 2. I bought one of them, the others came with whole outfits I
bought mainly for other items.

They are all abominations. ;-)


I have a Uni-lock System 1700 which I believe is the original design
Benbo bought. It's a usable tripod under some situations, but I wouldn't
try to use it as my primary tripod.

"Steve" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006 02:41:58 -0000, "Bandicoot"
wrote:

Do you like a pan and tilt, or a ball head? The set-up I have on my
1325 for at least 95% of the time is a Gitzo levelling base topped
by an Arca-Swiss B1. The Arca is a superb head, but they are
expensive (and heavy).

I have to say I've preferred pan and tilt based on my admitedly
limited past experience. The ball head I had for the Benbo seemed
to suddenly go badly loose as I slackened it off for say a small
horizontal pan adjustment. I can see an argument for having the two
axes separate. Though I've not used a top-grade ball head as
recommended here. Wonder if things can be better.

I had a Benbo head (still do, but not using it) and it is not a brilliant
ball-head, though better than some. Mine improved a lot after I dismantled
it and cleaned and re-lubricated the ball, but it still wasn't that
wonderful.

Making a good ball-head requires much better, and more complex, engineering
than making a pan and tilt. This means that an expensive pan and tilt head
is (hopefully) better than a cheaper one but not fundamentally _different_
to it. A cheap ball-head, however, is nothing at all like a really good
one. For this reason I always say to people who are limiting their budget
that they should try to work with a pan and tilt, because a cheap one can be
OK, whereas a cheap ball-head is just a pain. At higher price levels you
see what a ball-head is really able to do: for a long time I thought I
didn't like ball-heads - then I tried a good one and realised what I'd been
missing.

As to which to use, it is down to personal preference and shooting style. I
prefer the compactness and speed of a ball-head for much of my landscape
work and when travelling, and will even put my lightweight 4x5 on it. But
for architecture, high macro, and most studio type work I prefer a pan and
tilt. My heavier 4x5 and my larger cameras never go on a ball head, not
because I don't think the Arca would take the weight, but because they'd be
awkward to operate on it: a geared head is best for this, and I have an
ancient Majestic to do this job in the studio.


The levelling base may or may not be useful to you in addition: for
me it lets me get the panning base of the head levelled quickly
without messing about with fine-tuning leg heights - something you
may not necessarily need, but I like it.

I see that point. Messing with leg heights is a pain, will consider
this, thanks.

Something else nice about Gitzo's levelling base is that it uses a lever
tightener for the screw that holds the head to it. This makes it much
easier to take the head off and re-fit it or swap between heads. This can
be good for travelling, to remove and protect the head. I use it when
teaching too: I whip the head off, put on a Manfrotto projector table, and
the tripod becomes a very sturdey and very quickly levelled projector stand
for slides, without me having to carry much extra weight over the tripod
which I'd have with me anyway. I sometimes use the Arca with a Wimberley
sidekick, and that is another time that being able to level the panning base
of the head quickly is very convenient.


Peter