An question of weight

<p>While reading this post <a href="http://www.photo.net/casual-conversations-forum/00SKbg">http://www.photo.net/casual-conversations-forum/00SKbg</a> I was thinking to myself of my time with the army. As part of a recce/survey troop in the artillery, we often had to carry loads that far exceeded what one would normally require for photography; weapon, ammo, helmut, webbing, as well as survey equipment including tripods and director heads. Because of the nature of our business, this equipment was also packed in very sturdy/heavy containers. And we had to hump this stuff across some god-awful terrain.<br>

In all my time our tripods never tipped over. The cost of a director head being much more than any camera, our tripods were large wooden things with 3 inch spikes on the feet which we drove into the ground.<br>

My question is: have we become so focused on reducing the weight of our equipment that we have conceeded the quality of manufacture? Are we so weak that we can't strap on a 10 lb tripod and walk some distance if it would insure that the whole setup wouldn't fall over in a gust of wind?</p>

<p>Its an issue of convenience combined with physical condition. Many a person can't handle lugging a 10lb tripod a good distance, especially without strapping it to a pack or carrying sling. Photographers range from people who are disabled, to elderly to young and triathelets. So some may manage a 10lb tripod with no problems, others may have an issue with a 3lb carbon fiber tripod.<br>

Personally my 6lb tripod (with head) doesn't give me any serious problems, but it does begin to weigh once you have been carrying it in your arms/over your shoulder for an hour or so. At that point being able to strap it to a pack would be nice, and frankly I don't like carrying a pack everytime I go out for photography. Though I do if I am hiking far (more then a mile or two). Its an issue of how you carry it and not everyone wants to use a pack everywhere. I have not issues with a 50lb hiking pack 20 miles a day, but that 6lb tripod gives me issues without it on a pack.</p>

Yes! Some of the new Carbon Fibor tripods are very light weight, but well made. You still have to worry about them tipping

over because of the light weight. When I was younger I didn't think twice about walking all over Chicago with a 4x5 + film +

light meter + food + booze and a large tripod. That was quite a few years ago. Now I am built for comfort, not for speed (as

my poor dead mama used to say).

As a tourist I have noticed that the first thing most other tourists do when entering a cafe, coffee shop, etc, is take off their photo equipment from their shoulders and plunk it down on a table with a sigh of relief. Recently I switched to carrying my camera in a pouch with a belt loop and the weight seems much less this way.

<p>Ian, I don't know about you, but I am in nowhere near the kind of physical conditioning I was in when I was in the Army. At that time, I considered anything with 5 miles to be easy walking distance.<br>

Having a comfortable pack helps. Having straps around your neck aren't particularly useful, I keep finding.<br>

But Americans in general are not as fit as they were a generation or two ago.</p>

<p> If you read what the average photonetter carries, bag weights of 20-30 lbs are not uncommon. And this is all for the trip to get a gallon of milk at the 7-11! Just kidding!</p>

<p>Add lights, tripods, make up, props, reflectors, laptops, extra drives, lights, generators, tent, sleeping bag, cooking kit, etc. and the weight adds up. But this is not about macho. There are extremely heavy and sturdy wooden and spiked tripods for those wanting to carry them. Toaster-sized DSLRs are not uncommon, nor are fat, white lenses. So the answer to your question about "...we being so weak..." is no, the heavyweight stuff exists and is waiting for you.</p>

<p>http://www.digital-photography.org/RiesIndustrieswoodencameratriod/Ries_tripod.htm</p>

<p>And if you really want to mimic the Stations of The Cross:</p>

<p>http://www.amazon.com/Gitzo-G1504-Studex-Tripod-without/dp/B0002PQ1BK</p>

<p>Be sure to add a long center column, and this:</p>

<p>http://www.tripodhead.com/products/wimberley-main.cfm</p>

<p> But no well-constructed lightweight tripod, properly set-up, and within its load bearing range, should fall in a 30 mph gust. Even very inexpensive travel tripods, like the Leitz, have a hook at the bottom of the center column so one can hang their (80lbs in the OP's case) pack/bag from it, thus keeping it anchored.</p>

<p> People more fit than you prefer to carry less weight, because they find it distracting. Galen Rowell, who was a mountaineer, preferred to carry minimal weight, one small film SLR body, 2 lenses, a tiny modified Gitzo, and cover maximum distance on the ground, and his pictures speak well for his ideas.</p>

<p>There are dozens of other legendary pros who prefer to travel light. I heard Ernst Haas at a lecture talk about working for LIFE, carrying 2 Leica bodies, 3 lenses not spanning the focal lengths that many kit lenses blow away nowadays, saying that the 2nd body was a spare, and that he carried one body, one lens at the ready.</p>

<p> I'm with Edward Weston, who said: "Anything more than 500yds from the trunk is not photogenic".</p>

<p> </p>