What is a good field tripod?

I have heard a lot of raving about Gtizo 320's, Gitzo 340 inter pro & Bogen 3021's. I am looking for a good field tripod that a 6'1" person can use confortably (with out too much,or no, center post extension), and be usuable at ground level. What do you guys think? Any comments, sugestions, and/or corrections would be much appreciated.

Thank you,

Daniel Lopez

<P>I am very pleased with my Gitzo G320. The Inter Pro Studex series has the 80 degree setting (for low-level work). Check out the Gitzo web site (http://www.gitzo.com); animated GIFs illustrate how wide the legs open.

 

<P>I am 5' 6" and I don't need to fully extend the bottom leg segment; the G320 should work fine for six-footers. This tripod is rated for something like 19 lbs. Personally I'll never come close to the rated maximum load. Gitzo's Mountaineer carbon fiber product line is quite nice, too.

 

<P>It is better to have a tripod with three leg segments, rather than four. However, this makes for a larger package when collapsed. If you have a dollar limit, you will need to prioritize desired specifications. You might get more bang to the buck with a Bogen (my 3001 compact legset is far cheaper than the most inexpensive Gitzo).

 

<P>Don't forget to budget for the Arca-Swiss B1 monoball with quick release (if you don't already have one). Hope this helps!

After a great deal of soul-searching and procrastination, I finally broke down and bought the carbon-fiber version of the 340-series

Gitzo tripods (1348??? something like that). No center column, four leg sections.

 

<p>

 

At first I was a bit dubious about having four leg sections, but this tripod's very sturdy and perfectly capable of holding my 600/4. I was looking at a 410 as an alternative, so the weight savings was especially important to me.

 

<p>

 

I'd prefer it to be a three-section leg, simply to ease setup, but as Sean notes the four-section design's a bit more compact, and this thing extends taller than me (6 ft). I've only extended a leg fully when working on a slope, when of course I've needed extra extension on the downhill side.

 

<p>

 

The 340 seems really nice, too, just a bit inadequate for my 600/4. I didn't play with a 320.

 

<p>

 

With all of these no-column 'pods, you can buy a column to put in, they're interchangable.

 

<p>

 

Some people really like the geared columns, but most folks think the regular columns suck. I own a shorter Gitzo with a regular (non-geared) column and think the column sucks. I've not played with the geared columns, the resulting package seemed to bulky for my taste.

 

<p>

 

So I've gone the no-column route.

 

<p>

 

I've been through two 3021s, after awhile the release levers seem to get brittle and break, and dings and scratches make the legs harder to use. I repaired my first one a few times, then bought a new one, keeping the first to put flashes and the like on. Now I've got the smaller metal Gitzo and the larger carbon fiber one. I think my experiences are typical - most serious photographers end up with a few tripods. I always have two in my trunk, so I can set up off-camera flash if I want.

To Don:

 

<p>

 

What's your opinion of the relative stability of the 3021 Bogen

vs the Gitzos (320, 340, CF version of the 340) wrt mounting

a 600/4 on them? In general I'm more than happy with the stability

and durability of the Bogen 3021(3221), except for the stability

with a big (500 or 600) lens on it. If it's extended, it wobbles

in any kind of wind. For smaller lenes, I can't really fault it

at all and it is certainly the best value around. I did take

the center column out of my 3021 and replace it with a short (4")

column I machined up myself - just about as good as a direct

attachment to the legs. The standard 2 part center column isn't

particularly solid, even when not extended. For big lenses it

makes a difference, for small lenses, it's probably not worth it.

I'm 6'1" and the only tripod I have is a Gitzo 1228. It could be a little taller but it's an ok tradeoff considering how easy the 1228 is to transport. I do use the center column occasionally and find it reasonably sturdy. I almost never extend the center column all the way up(I have a few times when it was necessary and didn't notice much flex). Gitzo charges a lot for the cf tripods but, as I said in another answer, the 1228 would be one of the first things replaced if I lost all my equipment. The biggest lens I use on it is a 320/4.5(80-200/2.8 + 1.6x converter) though I'm pretty sure it would handle more.

 

<p>

 

To Bob, I have no experience with big lenses on Gitzo or Bogen tripods but I have owned a 3221 and two Gitzo tripods. The main fault I see in Bogen's is that the thin wall material used for the legs and the joints allow too much flex. Gitzo legs are much stiffer and don't wobble as much. I actually tend to think the my 1228 would handle a big lens better than the 3221 I used to own, assuming no center column. Bogen's are great bargains though.

Bob et al:

 

<p>

 

I found the 3021 just fine until I mounted my 600/4 on it, so my opinion matches yours, I think. It's inadequate for such a lens. I spent a year and a half shooting on it anyway, trying to decide what to get. In my informal testing in camera shops of a 340 vs. 3021, the 340's more stable when you lean hard on it (less leg wiggle) but not, IMO, enough to be that much better with the 600/4. That's why I was looking at the 410 as an alternative. And squawking over it, as it's big and bulky and kinda heavy. A rock solid tripod, though.

 

<p>

 

So, the carbon fiber version really interested me. With the big three leg sections extended, it seems just about as solid and rigid as a 410 to me. With the fourth leg out, a bit less rigid but still more rigid than the 340 that I would put my weight on in the store. Pro Photo here had both, so I could extend the 340 and the CF 300 series side-by-side and do some serious pushing and pressing and leaning.

 

<p>

 

And, as I mentioned earlier, the CF 300 version (again, 1348? tripod's in my car trunk and I'm too lazy to go look) gets high, and like all Gitzo "Performance" models goes almost right to the ground. I especially like the fact that it goes high enough for the camera to be over my head, as the 600's long enough that tipping it upwards on a perched bird then puts the body close to eye-level for me. I have a hard time shooting upwards from a crouch on a shorter tripod, a hard time framing, focusing, and getting things steady. It's also really convenient on slopes.

 

<p>

 

Another advantage, which I've had the pleasure of experiencing already on a few high-desert frosty mornings, is that it doesn't suck the heat out of your hands the way a metal tripod does. I've always insulated my metal tripods with pipe insulation, of course, but they still suck the heat out of my hands, even with light gloves. And I hate wearing heavy gloves while trying to photograph.

 

<p>

 

I'm hard on my tripods, so it will be interesting to see how the Gitzo holds up. I found that with time, the Bogen flip-lever leg lock system got really cranky. Metal fatigue? Scrapes and scratches on the legs making the grip vary? I found myself carrying a small wrench to adjust the leg locks. If they're adjusted too tight, you can't loosen them enough to move the legs easily. Too loose, the legs slip. I first got into this Catch 22 when I started using my 300/2.8 on it. It's heavy enough to make the legs slip if the locks aren't properly adjusted.

 

<p>

 

Bogen over the past few years put a plastic lock over the adjustment nuts, which kept them from moving on their own. A good move. Yet, the locks themselves seem to relax with time, and if you're going to use heavy stuff on the 'pod, you'll end up fiddling with them.

 

<p>

 

And, with the 3kg 300/2.8 (and much more so with the 6kg 600/4!), there seems to be enough expansion/contraction of legs and locks to cause the tripod to loosen or tighten when going from very cold to warm conditions (say, when the sun comes up and hits your frozen tripod).

 

<p>

 

This all seems to worsen with age. I used my original 3021 for ten

years, replacing all the flippers once (they get brittle, too, with time and eventually all broke off, after about 8 years, all within about six months of each other).

 

<p>

 

So, it is, IMO, inadequate for true long/fast glass, and marginal but adequate with fairly frequent futzing/adjustment as the tripod ages for a 300/2.8.

 

<p>

 

Still, the tripod's so cheap (got my second for $90), so stable for th e price, and despite my bitching so rugged (remember, I'm speaking of ten years of solid abuse, not just my wildlife photography but leading field trips with a spotting scope mounted, with it being casually tossed into trunks and vans), that I got a second one after the first got so cranky that I figured the locks et al were just worn. I could've just rebuilt it, but there's no local source of leg locks for a reasonable price ($5 for a flipper is not reasonable!) and I decided having a second 3021 around was a good idea.

 

<p>

 

Many photographers will use their tripods much less than me, so wear and tear will be less of an issue, too. And, if you don't lead trips, abuse by strangers won't be happening, either.

 

<p>

 

As I said earlier, I've come to like the CF Gitzo far more than I expected, since my relationships with tripods have always been love/hate, with the emphasis not on love...they are, after all, an evil necessity. Necessary for sure, but evil for sure :)

 

<p>

 

Another netizen told me he'd come to like the CF 300 far more than he expected when I was poking around, asking for opinions, and assured me I would too. I was very skeptical, despite liking it a lot from my playing with it down at ProPhoto, but he was right. It's heavy duty enough that I can set it up and put the 600 on without worrying about leg slip, don't have to over-torque anything. Of course, we'll see what age and wear does to this! And, I haven't had the leg locks freeze up on me, one reason I've shied away from Gitzo in the past. The fact that carbon fiber doesn't expand/contract as much as metal during temperature changes probably has something to do with this.

 

<p>

 

And it feels like plastic, giving me another bullet in the constant "metal's better than plastic!" wars over on Usenet :)

I also have a Bogen 3021 tripod. Despite some shortcomings, I have found it to be a very serviceable tripod for field use. Considering its price, its a very good value and I recommend it. I did, however make some modifications to it which have improved it greatly. These are:

 

<p>

 

1) Mine came with plastic tighteners. I bought metal replacements. Yeah, I know, we're talking aesthetics her, but the set of metal ones are cheap and I like them. I think the newere 3021s come with metal ones.

 

<p>

 

2) I don't use the column adjustments except when nothing else will get the job done. I took the column out and cut most of one of its halves off using a tubing cutter. Now when I want to get right to the ground I remove the long section and I'm all set. I still have most of the original column left in case I need it, but I can't conceive of ever using a colum for more than a few inches of lift, and that only when nothing else will do. Even after cutting off most of the bottom half of the column, I still have much more colum that I will ever need. In fact, sometimes I remove the long remaining section and but the end cap on the stub of the remaining top section.

 

<p>

 

3) I took the legs off and ground down the bevel on the top part (the part that attaches to the legs). This allows the legs to swing all the way up. In fact, there are businesses that specialize in performing this modification, but it only takes a few minutes and a bench grinder to do yourself.

 

<p>

 

4) I added foam to the top leg sections to keep the tripod comfortable to hold in the winter. This modification also cushions the tripod when it is carried over the shoulder and adds almost no weight. I just used pipe insulation tubes sold at any hardware store wrapped with gaffers tape. It's been that way for years.

 

<p>

 

5) I drilled out one of the handles so the hole in the end was large enough to epoxy a socket wrench into it which is the size of the adjustment nuts on the tripod. This is much better than the plastic tool that came with the tripod. When I need to adjust something I simply unsrew the handle and use it as a wrench. Nothing extra to carry and nothing to lose.

 

<p>

 

6) I was always losing the column lock/allen tool. It seemed that every time I went into the field it fell off and was lost when I carried the tripod over my shoulder. To solve this, I drilled a small hole in the end of the handle and attached a steel fishing leader with to rings at each end. One ring to the handle, the other to a nut on the tripod. Since doing this, I have never lost this handle/tool.

 

<p>

 

This might all sound like a lot of trouble, but really these modifications only cost a buck or two and took maybe a half an hour to make. The result is a much better tripod. Admittedly, it could be argued that a good tripod should not have to be modified, but I am very happy with the results. I sometimes even use this tripod with a 4 x 5' monorail with no problems. I have a 3047 head mounted on it.

Thanks to Don for his comparison of the 3021 vs the Gitzos. We

certainly see to agree about he 3021. It's OK with

a 300/2.8 and even with TCs it's still adequate. More stability

wouldn't hurt, but it's up to the job. It becomes

marginal with a 600/4 and the legs extended. If you can work

close to the ground of course, it's OK (and indeed that's

what I find myself doing whenever possible).

 

<p>

 

I can also recommend the Bogen 3051 if weight isn't an issue

(i.e. if you are working from a car and don't have to carry

it far). Built like a tank, 2 section legs (highly stable, but

it doesn't fold up very small) and weighs about 12lbs. The

leg angles are infinitely adjustable and it has locking leg

braces. Cheap

too (it's a Bogen after all). Very solid indeed. It's really more

of a studio tripod than a field tripod I guess, but I've used

it in the field and I've heard of others (with stronger back

than mine) actually carrying it around outdoors (not just

lifting it out of the car like I do!).

 

<p>

 

I also agree about the center column of the 3021. It's a weak

point and it's impossible to lock it down solidly (its a 2 part

column with a plastic device which is supposed to lock the 2

parts together - but doesn't do so very fimly). I think Kirk

sells a short solid column if you can't make your own replacement

like I did.

 

<p>

 

I guess my overall advice is that if you are not shooting with

anything longer and heavier than a 300/2.8, the Bogen 3021(3221)

is a good choice and should be sturdy enough for most purposes.

It comes up to my (6ft) eye level on flat ground with no

center colum extension, using a typical tripod mounted lens

on a 3038 or 3055 head. With a B1 it would be an inch or two

lower I guess.

I'm going to continue to enjoy my 3021, at least until one of you guys hands down to me a 400, 500, or 600 mm Nikkor you don't happen to need any more. THEN I'll spring for the Gitzo.

 

<p>

 

Until then, I can report that the two-section column on the 3021 can easily be separated into its two parts and put back into use as a one-section (shorter) column. The rubbery plug that covers the botton of the two-piece section comes off easily and will snap back on the top piece after you take off the lower piece.

 

<p>

 

Makes the unit lighter by a bit, and no less stable.

 

<p>

 

I'm 6' by the way, and with a tripod head and my camera body the 3021 is of a nice generous height. Of course, most of the shots I want to take are not with the tripod at full extension anyway.

Well, John, you're absolutely right. After all, I was thoroughly satisfied with my 3021 until I bought heavy, fast glass - and since the 3021 isn't designed for that heavy stuff, it didn't bother me that the tripod wasn't up to supporting it. I was impressed I could make it work as well as I did, actually.

 

<p>

 

It was good for laughs out in the field, too. "Gee, Don, you seem nice and all, but...don't you think you need a little more tripod for that 600 of yours?". Said in the way strangers criticize strangers while trying to be inoffensive.

 

<p>

 

I also removed the lower half of my 3021's center column when I first got it. Both of my 3021s. This removes the temptation of using a lot of center column, while leaving something short for teensy adjustments.

 

<p>

 

Regarding Bob's comments on the plastic piece which supposedly holds the two column pieces together, on mine there's two opposing half-cylinders of metal inside the column. An allen wrench is used to spread these against the inside of the second half of the column, and can be made very stiff. Bob, are your legs newer and differently designed? My newer 3021 did vary some from the older, the handle/allen wrench tool devolved into simply a handle with no allen wrench, for instance.

 

<p>

 

I did check out the 3051. Yes, very solid, but I realized it would break my back even more quickly than a 410! Bob's comments about using it on short walks from the car are on the mark.

Don:

 

<p>

 

On my 3221 (vintage 1993??) there

is no allen screw or metal parts holding the telescoping sections of the

2 part column together. The adjustments come via a rubber covered

plastic piece at the top of the tubes. When screwed one way it "locks" the inner and outer

tubes together (except it really doesn't). Even when *really*

tightened up (don't forget it's plastic...) the inner column

still spins inside the outer with enough force on it (like a

big lens). The inner column holds the tripod head of course, so

no matter how tight the scew is that locks the outer tube of the center colum in

place to the leg set, the head will still turn.

 

<p>

 

At least that's how I remember it. I took it apart in an effort

to "re-engineer" it, but there was nothing that could be done.

It's fine for smaller lenses I guess, and the extension could

be useful at times, but I just use a solid short column I

machined out of a 2" diameter aluminum cylinder. Doesn't get

any sturdier than that!

Bob -

 

<p>

 

Hmmm, on both of my 3021s, the latest bought in 1995 or early 1996, I got a two-piece center column. Not a telescoping center column as you describe. No wonder you think the center column's pretty worthless!

 

<p>

 

So, after removing the bottom piece, you get a short, one-piece, rigid column.

 

<p>

 

Does this tripod come with two center column options? Or did Bogen/Manfrotto simply experiment with a telescoping center column for awhile and then switch back to the two-piece version?

 

<p>

 

Or ???

 

<p>

 

Now, I'm curious!

To Don:

 

<p>

 

Since mine is the only 3221 I've ever looked closely at, I can't

say if the telescoping center column was a short lived experiment

or not! Mine certainly has it. It's very convenient, very quick to

set the extension you want, but not as solid as it could be. Maybe

others can comment how their 3021(3221) center column works.

 

<p>

 

Regarding the stability of tripods. Maybe there's another way

to look at it. Instead of thinking of the Gitzo 340 as a more

stable tripod than the Bogen 3021, maybe we should think of it

as a taller tripod. I was testing the 3021 this weekend. With

no extension, it's rigid enough for a 600/4, no question. Even

with the first (larger) leg extension it's still a pretty solid

tripod. It's really only when you extend the smaller leg section

that it starts to wobble. So a big Gitzo (or Bogen) actually

buys you a couple of feet in hight with a big lens, not really

greater overall stability (assuming there is such a thing as

"enough" stability!). Just another way to look at it.

My 3221 is like Don's. I do know that Manfrotto do change specs from time to time. I've seen some of the older 3047 pan heads, and they are not nearly as nice as the current version of the 3047, even though they bear the same model number. Perhaps there have been various incarnations of the 3021-3221 as well.

Yes, you're right, Bob, and sitting down with my 3021 is how I managed to delay buying a more rigid tripod for 18 months after buying the 600/4. This fit well with the stuff I was shooting with it, at the time - a lot of shorebirds and waders. Stuff you want to sit down for anyway.

 

<p>

 

But I knew this spring I was going to concentrate more on passerines, i.e. the perchings birds, mostly not perching at sitting level. This kinda got me off my butt solving my tripod problem, in preparation to getting off my butt to shoot more birds in trees :)

 

<p>

 

In my mind, when it comes to price-performance, the 3021 is the best tripod out there. Though I've bought the Gitzo mountaineer, I still own my two 3021s and recently passed up the opportunity to sell one to an aquaintence who was in the market for one.

The question that needs to go back to Dan Lopez is what length lense are you using?? I would agree with all of the above that the Bogen 3221 is fine for a 400/f5.6 or a 300/f2.8 with extenders. Get into big glass and it is not. I shoot my 600/f4 with a Bogen 3051 and a Foba Superball head. Tripod/lense/body/head goes out at close to 30 pounds. No wonder I am tired by lunch time.

 

<p>

 

The question I have is for Don. Does the Gitzo 1348 give decent vibration dampening? I tried the first carbon/fiber that Gitzo came out with and it twanged like a tight banjo string with the 600 on it.

 

<p>

 

I have been thinking about going to the Gitzo 410 but if the 1348 is good with vibration dampening I will go it. Gitzo also has a 15xx (don't remember the number), it is shorter than the 1348 and another $100 more. I need to lighten the load. Sitting in front of a PC all day with the physical conditioning factor and the ageing factor (mine)requires it.

[From Daniel Lopez; reposted by Bob Atkins]

 

<p>

 

Currently I am using a Tamron 28-200mm. I plan to get a 105mm Miro Nikon in the near future then probally some big glass like a

500mm. The reason I am asking for a good field tripod is: I am a collage student with out a lot of money, and want to buy one tripod that

will last, and allow me to take ALL types of nature photos. I am asking for the impossible I know, but thank you to all who have

awnsered my question. I appreciate you taking time from your day to help me out. Thank you, Genaro Daniel Lopez

A Bogen 3021 will more than meet the needs of anyone using a 28-200

zoom and a 105 macro lens. Even a Bogen 3001 will do the job. By

the time you can afford a decent 500mm lens ($3000), you will be

able to afford a better tripod. The Bogen 3021 is still just fine

for an affordable 400/5.6 lens (the cheapest telephoto worth buying).

I don't know about the Nikon 500mm lens, but one of the pluses associated with the Canon 500 f/4.5 is its light weight. It is similar in size to the 300 f/2.8. While it might be more stable on a $500 tripod, it ought to do just fine under most circumstances mounted on a 3021, and maybe even a 3001 Bogen leg set.

Regarding putting a 500mm lens on a 3001 (ugh!) I can only say that I actually thought there was something wrong with my 500/4 until I mounted it on a 410. Sure, a lighter tripod can bear the weight, but there's no rational reason to compromise the stability. The mass and wide leg splay of the 410 is critical for anchoring the assembly to the earth with minimal vibration. Plus, the tripod is large enough to get the camera to eye level without extending the bottom sections fully (I'm around 6'3") and certainly without using a center column (mine has only a flat plate.)

 

<p>

 

I wouldn't recommend a 410 as a person's only tripod for all applications, but if shooting long glass, it's the only way to go IMHO. The sturdier 300 series (like a 340) would work well too, I'd imagine, and the 1348 too. But based on experience, I wouldn't now trust a 3021 or lesser tripod with the 500 unless the bottom leg sections were never extended.

Frank:

 

<p>

 

Carbon fiber is stiffer than metal, which is why it became so popular with racket manufacturers early on. This lightweight, stiff material lets you build a big racket head with a larger sweet spot.

 

<p>

 

So, all things being equal, a carbon fiber tripod ought to dampen vibrations better than an equivalent metal tripod.

 

<p>

 

The 1228, though, is a relatively tiny tripod and not really meant for the likes of a 600/4! The 1348 has greater diameter tubing, with only the fourth section being skinny, its only real weakness. However, to stand up I normally only need to deply a few inches of the fourth leg section, and this fourth leg section is much less wobbly than the third leg section of a Bogen 3021.

 

<p>

 

The 500 series carbon fiber tripod is undoubtably awesome. I compromised a bit by going with the 1348, but it is working fine for me.

 

<p>

 

Your best bet is to go to a camera store and compare the 1348, the 15xx, and a 410 and think about weight vs. stiffness vs. price vs. whatever else is important to you. I've never seen the 15xx 'pod myself, so just compared the 410 and 1348. The 410 is certainly extremely rigid, but my own leaning and pushing and the like convinced me the 1348 would do the job for me, at greater cost but much less weight and a modest decrease in bulk.

Daniel, the 3021 will do fine for you. Plenty of good things have been said about it and I won't waste time by repeating them. You might wish to spend an extra $10-$15 and get the 3221 which is the black leg version of the 3021. The black legs are supposed to help at times when doing closeup photography since they don't reflect light. And besides, the black legs look cool. People will think you are a "pro" or an "artiste". :)