Tripods

ive decided i want i tripod, my camera dosnt have IS so the tripod is the cheaper option. dont argue with

me, im getting one what ever you lot say. can i have some good examples.

what about these?

<br><br>

Vanguard VT-158<br>

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Vanguard-VT-158-panhead-3-sections-elevation/dp/B0008EIA3M/

ref=sr_1_18/026-8128137-9421267?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1185020173&sr=1-18

<br><br>

Sony VCT-R100<br>

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sony-VCT-R100-Tripod-General-Use/dp/B000EYADSG/

ref=sr_1_4/026-8128137-9421267?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1185020173&sr=1-4

<br><br>

Camlink TP2500<br>

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Cape-Polish-Inc-Camlink-TP2500/dp/B000TCSMUO/

ref=sr_1_36/026-8128137-9421267?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1185020505&sr=1-36

<br><br>

Hama Gamma 74<br>

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hama-00004274-Gamma-74-Tripod/dp/B00005YVHM/

ref=sr_1_47/026-8128137-9421267?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1185020505&sr=1-47

<br><br>

at the moment i like the Hama Gamma 74, but im thinking abouy the Sony VT-158 because is compact

and easy to carry.<br>

<br>

thanks Brad

Brad,

You have not told us what camera & lens(s) you need to support?

All these tripods you are looking at, while being better than no tripod at all, are very much at the 'cheap and flimsy' end of the market; I think you would soon become dissatisfied with them.

Also they all have pan/tilt type heads attached - most people find a Ball and Socket type head much more convenient.

IMO you would be better off looking for a more substantial model - perhaps s/h on ebay?. You would get much more for your money that way.

Or if you really must have new and have a small budget check out something like this one - http://www.morrisphoto.co.uk/ProductDetails~man~Slik~productID~5879~categoryid~189.html

(if you spend 50 quid or more with these guys you will get free postage).

Hope this helps,

Nick.

Brad

my camera is a Caonon EOS 400D

Brad

is the standard lens (18-55mm)

Hi Brad,

I certainly wouldn't discourage you from getting a tripod. Just the opposite. IMHO, it's a great idea even if your camera (or lens, in the case of the Canon EOS system) has IS. Not only will a tripod help you get steadier shots, I think you will also find yourself taking a more considered and thoughtful approach to your photographs. Some might suggest that's the difference between a "photographer" and a "snap-shooter". So, I say go for it!

The next question is what tripod to buy.

First, consider that whatever you buy might well end up serving you for a lifetime, possibly supporting several different camera systems and all kinds of equipment. I've got one tripod that's near 30 years old and often still in use. So, if at all possible don't scrimp. Look for long-lasting, durable quality that you'll enjoy using. (Sorry, I have no experience with any of the particular models you mention.)

And, your concerns about weight and portability are good ones. Buy something that's easy to take with you and you are far more likely to use it. A tripod that's no joy to carry around and use gets left in the hotel room or trunk of the car, where it does you no good what-so-ever.

However, you have to balance weight and compactness against other key factors:

For example, the steadiest tripods are those with the fewest leg joints. I compromised with 3 joint legs in my latest purchase... a Gitzo 1325 CF about five years ago.

Also, a tripod without any center column will usually be a lot steadier than one with. (There's none on my Gitzo field 'pod, but my older Bogen studio 'pod has a gear driven column.)

You also need to choose a tripod that has adequate support capacity for your current and future equipment. I need to support up to 500mm f4 lens and full size D-SLR with battery grip, often with a flash and off-camera bracket and sometimes even with a 5 lb. beanbag laid on top to help keep everything as steady as possible. (Note: This concern includes the head you choose, too. I really liked using the Bogen/Manfrotto grip release head, but it cannot support enough weight for me.)

All these factors run directly counter to a tripod's compactness and the lightest weight. So, it's a matter of finding the compromise that works for you.

Some other things you'll need to think carefully about:

1. Materials. A metal tripod is heavier, but carbon fiber is more expensive. Metal is also a bit more uncomfortable to handle when working in really cold weather. Some metals are more susceptible to damage if you often work in and around salt water. But, CF tripods can bind up if used in water, too. And, most metals can "ring" with vibrations, carbon fiber and wood tend to be better at dampening.

2. Mechanical methods. How do the legs extend and what are the fasteners? I've used tripods in the field that utilized lever latches and had a few near-disasters when a sleeve or a pant cuff caught on them. I prefer the grip-twist type tightener, ala Gitzo. Some folks feel just the opposite. In fact, my studio 'pod has eared tightening screws that are not a problem for me indoors. You'll need to decide for yourself.

Also, do the legs allow really low use of the tripod, or is it necessary to reverse or rotate the center column? Is this even important to you, considering what and how you shoot?

3. Accessories. This sort of depends upon what you might need now or in the future. A few brands have the widest range of dedicated accessories. Gitzo and Bogen/Manfrotto both offer quite a few items (by the way, they are actually the same company now). Some other manufacturers also offer a lot, but others have little or nothing in the way of accessories. There are some third party accessories that can be purchased (Kirk, Really Right Stuff, Wimberley, etc.), but these are most often tailored for the more widely available and popular models and brands.

For example, I like to use them, so have levelers on both my Gitzo and Bogen tripods. These accessories sit below the head and mean that you don't have to fiddle with leg length to adjust the level of the tripod. The Gitzo leveler is much faster acting and far handier in the field. But, a leveler adds significant weight.

On the other hand, the old Bogen is fitted with a dolly accessory that makes it fast and easy to move around indoors, on any smooth studio floor.

Quick releases are another thing I personally insist on using. After years of working with various other styles and getting frustrated about the lack of interchangeability, I've converted everything to Arca-Swiss type QRs. These are probably the most widely used design and cross-compatible among various manufacturers. Bogen/Manfrotto and others have over the years come up with a series of proprietary QRs... and still continue to do so. My old Bogen stuff is now all converted to use Arca-Swiss, but that added some cost and sometimes took a little creativity.

4. Most tripods have interchangeable heads, which are somewhat universal... but not always. It's something to watch out for, if the tripod you are considering doesn't come with a head that you like. While I use a traditional Bogen head on my Bogen tripod, the one that came with it in fact, I chose a Kirk BH-1 ballhead for field use on the Gitzo. Not all tripods allow interchanging the heads. Some use a more proprietary fastening method that really limits your choices.

I'd suggest you head for a camera store with some of your kit and try out several different tripods, to get a good idea what you like and what you don't. There's no substitute for hands-on experimentation, especially if this is the first tripod you've shopped for.

Cheers!

First step is to disabuse yourself entirely of the mindset that image stabilization is a

substitute for a tripod. IS should be viewed as a reluctant backup for when you absolutely

cannot place the camera on a tripod for some reason, namely your subject or your self

must move too fast to make it practical. Anytime you CAN have a camera on a tripod, you

SHOULD have it on a tripod.

There are few things you can do that will make more immediate improvement in your

images than placing your camera on a quality sturdy tripod. It will amaze you.

I can't otherwise add to the advice you've been given.

A quick and dirty test is to put the camera on the tripod with a long lens, and tap one of the legs or the side of the camera while looking through the viewfinder.

A flimsy tripod will shake for a long time (or forever), while an adequate tripod will quickly stop shaking. A good tripod will hardly shake at all when abused in this way. The test is comparable to using the tripod in a light breeze. If you can see the camera shake or sway without looking through the viewfinder, you are probably using one of the tripods you listed.

I doubt very much you'll find any significant anti-tripod camp here. By all means get a tripod, the best you can afford. You'll use it often, and for a long time. If you're shooting stills, I recommend you avoid "tilt-pan" video style heads, which do not allow fine adjustment of the horizon without adjusting the legs. For landscapes and slow moving quarries, a three-way head will be much easier to use. For faster moving subjects, a ball head is nice, but a really good ball head will probably cost a good deal more than an adequate 3-way.

For overall daily use I like my Slik 400 DX, which is relatively light, relatively cheap, and quite versatile. It's well made and a good value for money. If you have a bit more money to burn, look at Bogen/Manfrotto - they have some good and very sturdy legs and heads, and if you scan the archives here you'll find a lot of suggestions. For heavier stuff and big lenses I have a Bogen 3221 with a 3047 3-way head, and another Bogen 3011 with a ball head (whose model number I forget, but it's discontinued anyway). These are very nice tripods, but they're quite heavy, and also a little tall for some people. I generally take them out only when I know I'll need the extra beef, but the Slik goes everwhere.

If you have a little more money to burn, check out Gitzos and exotic ball heads.

A really nice tripod will outlive your camera's technology by a few generations.

Get a light one if you are doing walkies, either expensive if you are doing it seriously, like

the Manfrotto carbon ones

http://www.manfrotto.com/Jahia/site/manfrotto/cache/offonce/pid/1799?

categoryKey=BRAND:MN:MAIN:AA:SUB1:AA:SUB2:AA&livid=68&lsf=68&child=2

If you dont do walkies then get a cheaper metal one, but make sure you get a good one.

Poor quality tripods dont last long, and dont help.

http://www.velbon-tripod.com/ultra_maxi.htm

Pretty much anything else will anoy you sooner or later.

Hi Bradley,

There is some honest and sage advice here. Take it from me too...I've gone down the skimpy end of the market and have cut myself short in terms of expanding my lens array and have upgarded to (slightly) heavier camera and a lovely (but heavier) quality lens and my original 'bargain' tripod failed to fasten the lens (Nikon 17-55 DX on D200) and even a slight wind buffet would ruin an exposure.

I have 'seen the light' which is as a general rule ie. you get what you pay for (most times) and invested $470 Australian dollars in the Manfrotto /Bogen 055ProB legs and the 488 RC4 ball head which is medium priced equipment and will take my expanded lenses and I expect will last me a min. of 10-15 years as an occasional, amateur photographer with a lot of use for a good , steady tripod and reliable fastening pivot head. Wait a while, save up some more- you will not regret it.

to keep it short:

do not buy any flimsy tripod. do not.

Save up and get a sturdy one: manfrotto, velbon, gitzo, giotto to the max of your budget and what your are prepared to carry.

Denis