Leightweight tripod and packs selection for field use

Hi, there

 

I bought a Nikon N80 and AF-D 35-70mm f/2.8D a few days ago. Mounting

the camera on my "general brand" tripod originally bought for digital

point-and-shoot camera and tiny digital camcorder, I found the tripod

was too tiny to support the heavy N80 and the lens. I tapped one of

its legs, and the camera shook. I tapped the lens, and the camera

shake. The even worse is that I can't shoot vertical from the tripod

because of the heavy lens. I realized that I need a sturdier tripod. ;-)

 

I love nature photography. So I need a good tripod for working in

field. I am not a big fan of the professional but heavy tripods like

Gitzo 1340. When travel/hiking, the weight of gears I carry on is the

first priority to me, without too much tolerance of sturdiness and

performance. The second priority is the price. It's better to be

within $300 (including head). The lenses in my upgrade plan are AF-D

24mm f/2.8D and AF-D 85mm f/1.8D. The prime lenses are lightweight, so

a Gitzo series-1 tripod will be OK, am I right?

 

The potential tripods and heads for me are Gitzo 1120/1126/1197 and

Bogen 484RC2 or 3028/3029. Could you give me some comments on them?

And which tripod/head is perfect for me?

 

I am yet to buy a bag for my new camera. I am a bit into Lowepro Off

Trail 2 or Off Trail 1. Which one is better for me? Or would you

recommend some Lowepro backpacks?

 

Thanks.

 

-Bo

I think 1126 is the smallest yet reasonable sturdy tripod, consider your lenses aren't that heavy, but it is quite short. Another choice would be Manfrotto 190, not nearly as compact but quite a bit cheaper and taller.

I would have a look at Velbon's range of tripods, in particular the Maxi range. All of them wiegh around a kilo, extend to 180cm max and fit on the side of Lowepro's backpacks without sticking out of the top or bottom (and getting caught on branches etc). Just like you I would rather have a tripod that is light enough so that I always carry it with me, rather than a 5 kilo beast that I would prefer to leave behind. Any tripod is better than no tripod and heavy camera gear will often be left behind. The lenses you are using can easily be supported bt the Velbon maix range. Ignore the specs and other lovers of expensive gear on this and other forums. Borrow one if you can from a shop for the day and try it. That's the only way to know.

 

As for heads, I see no reason to buy anything but a ball head unless you are invloved in commercial architectural photography. As for bags, I like backpacks as they do not scream 'I'm loaded with camera equipment - steal me' and are kinder to your spinal column. With that in mind I would buy one that will fit your equipment in, plus leave room for a few bits you haven't yet bought, plus some room for a mobile phone, water bottle, lunch, compass....and all of the other things you may need. Don't buy one that just manages to fit your existing gear. By the sounds of it you may be best looking at a Lowepro Mini Trekker. A very good bag. If that is too small, Nature Trekker. If it is too big, Micro Trekker.

RE: LowePro bags...Given your interest in and the 'nature' of nature photography, I think you'll soon find those two bags (L'Pro Offtrail 1 and 2) to be of limited value. Good for walk-around / social shooting but not conducive to nature work.

 

Perhaps (likely!) you'll be adding more gear; filters / holders, macro gear, extra batts, flash / cable, etc. How about food, jacket, water, etc. You can't comfortably wear either bag with a daypack. Secondly, while fiddling with gear I find it helpful to have a large, EZ access, open compartment to safely set gear while changing lenses, filters, etc. My solution has been the Orion AW. I can't offer an opinion on the use and carrying comfort of the top (backpack) and bottom (camera bag) together. My top piece has been on the shelf since day-1. When wandering from the car I put the camera bag inside a larger daypack. (The Orion Trekker is a smaller version of the AW.)

 

The bag also has tripod straps on the underside and one very usable zippered pocket with 4 others that are of very limited value. Not enough 'bellows' material to allow stuffing anything over 1/4 inch thick into the other pockets, ESPECIALLY the exterior, lid compartment; more like a slot. Design flaw. Plenty of Velcro dividers. Some removable padding (both bag and esp. lumbar panels; in fact redundant as they are stacked) would have been nice to minimize bulk if desired, yet I (happily) count on that padding at times. Hang from shoulder (removable strap) or waist (integrated belt) and the lid stays out of your way while fiddling at waist (not ankle/dirt/mud) level.

I second the suggestion to consider a bag which carries more than just photo gear. For short hikes I'll usually bring a shoulder bag for convenience, but for a true day hike into more remote areas, or mountain climbs, how do you carry rain gear? extra summit layers? lunch for the trail?

 

I purchased the LowePro Rover AW Plus, and found it to be the pefect bag for me. It's a bit much for short hikes where a shoulder bag will do, but for true excursions where you're a few hours from civilization it allows you to bring a reasonable assortment of camera goods (up to a 300mm) and a reasonable assortment of food/gear to make sure you're safe as well. I always wonder how folks use the nature trekkers and manage extra layers - it's friggin cold on top of most mountains even in summer, and those photo-only bags just don't carry anything else.

 

In the end, to each their own!

I used to own one of those Lowepro Phototreker backpacks. I've since traded it in for a Kata R102. I'm able to fit a 6x9 camera and a Kodak 14n with 3 zoom lenses plus accessories. I use this for day hikes, but for overnight or longer treks I use a Mountainsmith Gryphon internal frame backpack. The reasoning is that both backpacks weigh less than 4lbs (I believe the Kata is around 3lbs). The Lowepro that I had weighed in at 8lbs, just the bag itself! Mountainsmith also makes photo backpacks, you might want to check into that.

 

As for tripod. I bought a rather cheap carbon fibre one from Ebay - a Taiwan based company makes them, called Feisol. Very lightweight, it replaced a very heavy wooden Berlebach tripod that weighed 7lbs (the Feisol is half that). For the ballhead, I got a Benbo Medium ballhead that weighs a few ounces and is rated to hold 22lbs (I very much doubt this claim). It's no Arca Swiss, but it has served it's purpose very well and is fairly stable.

Take a look at the velbon el carmagne (or neocarmagne) tripod line. These are carbon-fiber and should be available for around well under $300. The 540 is extremely light (~2.5 lbs) and packs really small. I have the 640 which is a little larger and heavier.

 

In terms of packs, I prefer to use regular hiking equipment instead of the dedicated photography packs which I feel are too heavy and bulky because they use far more padding than is necessary. My current favorite is the REI traverse daypack. The best thing about it is that it has two side pockets which you can reach while still wearing the pack -- I use these for storing lenses so I change them without taking off the pack.

Thanks for all the inputs.

I've realized that I actually need two bags. One for walking around in the neighbourhood, and one for hiking in the remote area. ;-) I'll go to local camera shops to try Orion AW and other Lowepro bags.

 

As for tripod, I'll take 1126 for its weight and price.

 

Regards,

-Bo

I've never found a camera bag that I really like so I can't advise you there. I have several - hate 'em all.

 

The tripod heads with the best value, considering load supporting strength, weight of the head itself, price and ease of use are the Velbon magnesium ballheads. I have a PH-273, the largest - comparable in size to any of the larger ballheads from any manufacturer - but far lighter than anything else I've tried. The design is extremely simple - a clamshell that clamps around the ball. A single larger locking lever locks and unlocks the ball. It is easily operated even with cold, wet hands or with gloves on. It costs about $150. The smaller, lighter Velbon magnesium ballheads are less expensive and should be adequate for any combination of equipment other than something like a Nikon D2X with a fast, heavy telephoto. So the smaller heads will be a better choice for your equipment.

 

I think carbon fiber tripods are overrated. I've compared the handling, features, weight and stability to the aluminum legset from my Slik 300DX and couldn't see enough difference to justify the cost. A larger, taller CF legsest tall enough that I wouldn't have to bend over to look through the viewfinder without raising the centerpost might be worthwhile, but most affordable CF legsets are the same size as the Slik 300DX. The 300DX is very affordable and if you don't like the tilt/pan head included with it you can take it off and not miss much. It's not a bad head, tho'.

 

While you're shopping you might consider one of the recently introduced basalt legsets. They're between aluminum and carbon fiber in weight and price

Have you looked at a Velbon 343E or one of the Ultra Maxi range?

 

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/velbon/velbon_343e.html

Well, Velbon is good but I perfer to Gitzo a bit more. Thanks anyway.

if price is a factor in the legset decision, avoid Gitzo. The $250-300 tripods from Slik, Hakuba, Velbon, and Feisol have identical functionality for much cheaper. The ones I've looked at extend a bit higher, collapse a bit shorter, and weigh a bit less than Gitzo without a penalty in stiffness. I chose a Hakuba 503MX for its height and low weight. The Gitzos have higher cosmetic quality and finish, but I don't see how that affects my pictures. Now, if budget wasn't a issue, Gitzos are truly fine tripods and have a very broad selection of sizes to fit you perfectly. But beware that people who spend for premium products often are loathe to recommend anything else, just a quirk of human nature.

 

I concur about the Velbon PH-273 quick-release head. Very cleverly made, cheap, lightweight, and works great. My PH-263QL and Hakuba 503MX combo is 3.5 lbs, $420 new at B&H, tall enough for me (6'3"), compact enough to travel with.

 

I'm not too impressed with Lowepro packs. They weigh and cost absurd amounts for what they do. They're typically overpadded and laden with useless pockets and zippers everywhere. My Rover AW-II is reasonably handy (the built-in rainfly was a kicker for me, and I got it for half price), but is pretty uncomfortable on the back when loaded even short of capacity. The waistbelt and suspension look advanced but are strictly for show (I'm a long distance backpacker and know a good suspension when I meet it). Their high-end packs are better suspended, but again are too heavy, over-stuffed, too expensive, and full of too many useless features that just add weight and complexity.

 

I haven't yet seen a large photo pack that is trail worthy (my taste runs to Granite Gear, Mountainsmith, etc), relatively lightweight, and simple. I'm all ears if anyone else has. Currently the best solution I can find is Domke padded inserts in a real backpack, like a climbing pack for good stability control and toughness.

I meant to add - beware of over-speccing a tripod. For shooting with an 85mm lens, almost any cheap tripod and head will do the job (I had your exact N80/85 1.8 combo for a long time). The real competition in tripods and heads are for long heavy telephotos. Best to have a light cheap rig for what you describe. If you get into big lenses down the road (which probably won't go very far down the trail anyway), a heavy sturdy rig will be a very small fraction of the lens cost. In other words don't think that you need to get one setup now that will do it all.