Tripods

[Montage]

I recently snapped the head off my quite old tripod while on holiday. Does anyone have any suggestions for a reasonably priced (~$100 AUD) tripod.

I'm not after the full-on Manfrotto professional tripod, just something fairly sturdy and not too flimsy.

[desi]

Hi Montage,
I have a Bogen 3021 with Bogen 3047 head. I bought both off of Ebay for under $100 USD - I am sorry but I don't know what that converts to in AUD.

I like this set up a lot as it is very stable. It is a bit heavy though for walking around.

I hope this helps,
Desi

[ron.richardson]

i don't get it... why the expensive tripods? perhaps i only go shooting when it's not windy, but i've had my $30 tripod from walmart for 2 years now and haven't had a shot i've missed yet because it wasn't fancy.

it's sturdy, holds up my canon 20D, is lightweight, hooks onto my bag, covers the height range that i need.

what are the benefits to a more expensive tripod?

[RainPacket]

I have a Manfrotto tripod -- not the superduper high-end pro kind, but a sort of prosumer one -- which a friend got me for Christmas. I think it was about US$130, which isn't so bad.

That said, for AU$100 (which I gather is about US$80), I'd probably go for something like the Sunpak 8001UT. I don't particularly like Sunpak, but I know some people (including my uncle) who use 'em with no problems. (My issue is that in cold weather -- which we have aplenty in Seattle -- I find the Sunpak's little tripod-leg locks very hard to open.)

It technically costs $45 (AU$57) but can be found for as little as US$27 (AU$36) or so. It's a decent casual photographer tripod.

[RainPacket]

Benefits of more expensive tripods are varied, and depend on the tripod. Some are just pricier because they're 'trendy.'

Some, it's sturdiness. My old tripod broke when I was flying back from Washington, DC. Some idiot tossed luggage on top of the tripod holder in the plane's cargo hold, and broke one of the legs off. No huge monetary loss, but it made me sad because I was fond of that tripod. It was a hand-me-down older than I was! Still, a sturdier tripod would probably have survived the trip better.

Some, it's the head. (Really, the head is a BIG reason.) Lots of tripods can't rotate on all axis readily; you have to unlock each axis and adjust separately, so it's hard to track a moving object or get unusual angles. This is why people love ball heads, which let you just rotate around everywhere much more readily. Nature photographers and panorama photographers tend to find ball heads work best, according to my photography instructor. Architectural photographers find 3-axis locking heads probably are best. A lot of the lower-end tripods don't do 3-axis properly, because they're actually designed for videocameras more than still cameras.

Of course, super-highend pro tripods, you buy the tripod and the head separately, to get just the combination you need.

Some, it's specialized features. Folks who plan to shoot in really cold, snowy conditions can have their tripod 'freeze' (literally) and be unable to adjust it; this is why you have those National Geographic approved graphite tripods for extreme weather shooting. There are other special features, too; in my case, my Manfrotto actually lets me pop the head off and put it UNDER the tripod, suspending the camera down beneath where the legs meet. This is absolutely WONDERFUL for macro shots; I can use the tripod for stability, and still have the camera barely above the ground.

If you don't need the fancy stuff -- and you probably don't -- don't worry about it. In my case, I probably could've made do just fine with a lower-end tripod, but a friend bought me this one as a Christmas present. And I'm not gonna complain, nosiree. :)

[TxJim]

I have to agree with Ron. Maybe because I haven't ever used a "fancy" tripod, but outside of the extras it might contain(levels, etc...) isn't it just a stand for the actual tool? I mean, if you can afford it, I suppose why not. But I too am curious of the benefits outside of appearance.

[Montage]

i don't get it... why the expensive tripods?

Ron,

I've been suckered into buying a cheap 'lightwieght' tripod before, and had no end of problems with it. It wasn't sturdy, didn't extend high enough, movement was clunky and in fact the head didn't even sit straight.

I'm not after an 'expensive' tripod, but something reasonably priced that will do the job.

[ron.richardson]

thanks for the info rachel!

in my mind, if it's freezing outside and wind is blowing, my ass is sitting at home in front of the fireplace! which is probably why i don't work for national geographic...

my walmart tripod has a level on it, but i rarely use it... i just look through the viewfinder and adjust accordingly. it does require a quick turn of a handle to make an adjustment on each axis. rarely am i tracking something moving when using a tripod.

perhaps i just got lucky with my tripod, and haven't gotten to that point of needing anything fancier. i'd rather spend my money on a nice lens instead.

and montage, sorry to have hijacked your thread.

[Joshua Schroeder]

I've got a Slik U6600 (http://www.slik.com/u/4906752101223-e.html) that I got for about $50CDN.

It doesn't have any of the fancy features that have been mentioned on some of the more expensive tripods, but it's sturdy and pans smoothly (nice if you're doing video as well). It could stand to have a bubble level on it, but it does alright without one.

[smc1377]

There are other special features, too; in my case, my Manfrotto actually lets me pop the head off and put it UNDER the tripod, suspending the camera down beneath where the legs meet. This is absolutely WONDERFUL for macro shots; I can use the tripod for stability, and still have the camera barely above the ground.
*Runs to my makeshift studio at work and checks my ManFrotto tripod.*

Well I'll be! Mine can do that too! I never knew. But to be fair, it was given to me by my boss. The tripod part itself is the ManFrotto 3021BPRO and the head is the ManFrotto 3030.

But if I were to buy one myself, I'm with the walmart folks. My hard-earned cash would be better spent on other things.

**EDIT**
I just checked online and at Amazon, my same Tripod/Head Combo goes for $240. Yikes! And here I was leaving sit on the passenger seat of my unlocked car.

[EntityDesigns]

I believe as well a cheap vidcam/camera tripod with features you want will do just fine. I got an lightweight alumnium one off ebay and I love it. Some of the features I like on my tripod are:

Lightweight
Quick release head for quick removal
Quick Release Legs (Mine you just unlatch and legs come out and relatch)
Vertical Swivel
I have a pan swivel since mine was for both camera and video camera use
Levels both on my quick release mounts and tripod

[AdamLyon]

I received a Cullman Magic 2 as a gift last year, and while it's not a heavy duty tripod by any means, the fact that it folds up to 14 inches (minus the removable head) makes it perfect for me. I can shove it in my backpack without it taking up hardly any room, and yet it expands to a full size tripod.

I agree with many posters on here that expensive tripods just aren't necessary for your average photographer unless you're doing specific work that would warrant one (in which case you wouldn't mind dropping more than a few hundred dollars). Hanging a camera bag from it and not extending the main post fully are great ways to stabalize a less expensive tripod. Plus you can swap the heads if you have a particular style which you prefer.

Here's a page (http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/tripods/tripods/cullman/PRD_84507_3114crx.aspx) with some information on the tripod. Looks like the best price is about $120 USD. Again, the portability is the number one selling point for this. I've had this on many occasions where I wouldn't normally carry any sort of tripod and I've been thankful that it was there.

Also, adding a remote shutter release (either via cable or a wireless remote [my preference]) helps with camera shake ruining longer exposures, plus you can use it in lieu of/in conjunction with the self timer.

[Bail]

I have one of those 30$ tripods from walmart (I found out it's walmart because when I searched the model number, a ton of walmart sites appeared). It came with the camera when I bought it, so it didn't phase me.
The tripod is OK. Not horrible but not good. I like the levels and I love the ease of adjusting. I Don't like how the head moves. Don't try panning with the OSN MX-2000 Tripod. Another thing I notice is that the camera is loose when it's "Secured" into the tripod. It shakes and moves around. So I would say it's an okay tripod if your not panning and if you have a remote shutter release cable.

Another one I have is a No name that was handed down to me from my grandfather. I Assume it's from the late 70's or 80's.

http://www.jeffreybail.com/dps/mytripod.jpg

I am not sure who makes it (If you do, contact me w/ info) but IMO it's better then the walmart one.The Pan and tilt operate smoothly It stands very high. The downsides are that it takes longer to adjust the legs since it's a screw type and mounting the camera is a little challenging.

[edubya]

I don't know if this should be a seperate thread, but here's another option. If you are looking for something a little smaller (think, fitting in the camera case) you should check out joby.com, they have the gorrillapod bendable tripod. I just ordered the SLR-Zoom model made for heavier cameras, I guess it will accept other tripod heads too, a big plus. It's $50.

[RainPacket]

Friends who have the Joby Gorillapod basically say that the two lower-level versions are a "neat concept, but don't grip strongly enough" -- they'll hold small point-and-shoots if you wrap them REALLY tightly, but don't tend to stay put; they'll tilt a little bit, or slide down slightly, etc.

Apparently, the uber-sturdy Gorillapod SLR-Zoom is the only one that /really/ grips where you put it, and stays there securely.

[BusShooter]

Apparently, the uber-sturdy Gorillapod SLR-Zoom is the only one that /really/ grips where you put it, and stays there securely.

I was just looking up on the gorillapods and not wanting to hijack the thread, I've just got a quick question. I have the Canon S1 IS and it's kind of heavy (batteries in), so is it worth it to get the SLR version of the gorillapod to make sure it won't weigh down the pod when it's attached to the camera?

[RainPacket]

I was just looking up on the gorillapods and not wanting to hijack the thread, I've just got a quick question. I have the Canon S1 IS and it's kind of heavy (batteries in), so is it worth it to get the SLR version of the gorillapod to make sure it won't weigh down the pod when it's attached to the camera?

Considering it's like a $10 difference, I wouldn't think it could hurt...

[BusShooter]

True, plus you'll never know when you need that extra support. I guess I just needed a second opinion since it's my first time attempting the purchase of a tripod.

Thanks RainPacket.

[turtlebud]

I was just about to start a thread asking about the gorillapod. I just got one as a gift yesterday - it's the SLR Zoom model (very happy and very nice gift). I wanted to get an idea of how people use it and whether they use it with a tripod head or just screwed on (and left on) their camera.

BusShooter, in regards to your question, your camera is 13.1oz/370g without the batteries, so the gorillapod is out (max weight 275g/9.7 oz). The SLR version can go up to 800g (1.75 lbs) and the SLR-Zoom version goes up to 3kg (6.6 lbs). I'm not sure how much weight the batteries add, but I would assume it wouldn't double the weight of the camera, so you should be okay with the SLR version.

However, if you ever plan to upgrade to a dSLR, the SLR Zoom version might be worth the investment. The one thing to be aware of is the Zoom version does not come with a slim line attachment - only a screw at the bottom (that you need a screwdriver or strong fingernails to screw in). I think it's made more to use a tripod head with or to screw on to your camera and leave it there for the duration of your shoot. The SLR version DOES have a slim line attachment (i think)

[Bail]

I was just about to start a thread asking about the gorillapod. I just got one as a gift yesterday - it's the SLR Zoom model (very happy and very nice gift). I wanted to get an idea of how people use it and whether they use it with a tripod head or just screwed on (and left on) their camera.


I have one and never used a head on it since I can flex the pod almost into any position I want. Unless your panning or something along the lines where you must need the head. I would go without.

For those canon users with SLR version. Do not try it if you have the battery grip. It will make the camera top heavy.

[turtlebud]

bail, two questions:

1. do you have the SLR Zoom version?
2. do you just leave it screwed into your 20d?

Thanks.

[Bail]

bail, two questions:

1. do you have the SLR Zoom version?
2. do you just leave it screwed into your 20d?

Thanks.

Yes, I have the SLR Zoom.
And yes, I just screwed it into the bottom of the camera. I removed my battery grip. No point in using a head when you could just mount it in any direction.