Gitzo 1548 Carbon Fiber Tripods

Discussion in 'Nature' started by jim_zipp, Dec 28, 1998.

  1. Has anyone compared the Gitzo 1548 carbon fiber tripod versus the 410
    tripod in the field? Arthur Morris states that he "has been able to
    make sharp images with his 600" using one but is it as good as the
    410? They are a huge invistment but the weight savings with already
    heavy 600's could make them worth it only if they are equally steady.
  2. Here's what Art Morris says on the nature forum.




    There are only 2 choices: the Gitzo 410 or the lightweight Gitzo 1548
    Carbon Fiber. Both are strong and sturdy enough to
    routinely produce--with perfect technique on the photographer's part,
    sharp images at shutter speeds down to 1/60th of a
    second. Though the 1548 is expensive, and I wish that it were a bit
    taller, I absolutely love mine; it is my everyday tripod.
    When working out of and near my vehicle, say at Bosque Del Apache or
    Ding Darling, I'll opt for the heavier 410 tripod.
  3. As an aside, it never ceases to amaze me that people complain about
    the price of these tripods after spending a minimum of $6000 on a
  4. I do not think he was complaining, I think he simply does not want to
    waste money on an expensive doodad without knowing it works. If you
    have any extra cash laying around that you care to discard I have a
    really nice tripod made out of carbon fiber toothpicks for sale only
    4000 dollars!!(shipping included) Since thats is only 1/3 to 1/2 the
    cost of a 600/4 I think according to your logic its a steal.
  5. Altaf Shaikh is correct in that I was not complaining about the price
    of the carbon fiber tripods. I totally agree that after investing
    large sums of money into long lenses it would be foolish to try to
    save a few dollars on a tripod. I am more than willing to pay the
    higher price as long as it is as good as the 410, as I stated in my
    question. If on the other hand I found it to be only lighter but not
    quite as good as the 410 I would rather shoulder the extra weight
  6. Jim, let me add that Moose Peterson
    uses a 1548 with his 600 mm and
    swears by it.
  7. My personal testing led me to conclude that a 13xx Gitzo CF tripod is
    nearly as rigid and stable as a 410. The 15xx CFs weren't out at the
    time, so I bought a 1348 and am very happy with it. If I were buying
    today I'd probably buy the 15xx because it would be total overkill,
    and why not for the price increment? It should blow a 410 away. I
    don't subscribe to the theory that greater weight yields inherently
    more stable tripods, material stiffness plays a role, just ask any
    designer of tennis rackets, where CF has caused a tremendous


    So, Arthur Morris, IMO, is being overconservative by using his metal
    410 close to the car and the 15xx only when further away. I think
    he's probably giving up rigidity. My personal informal testing makes
    me think I give up VERY little with a 1348 compared to a 410, and gain
    a lot in stability over a 340 which I've also tried. My photos are
    sharp. My photos sell, when I care to market them. So ... I'm happy.
    My 1348 is a GREAT tripod, and it is my major tripod, my 99% use
  8. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Moderator

    Like Arthur Morris, Art Wolfe also uses the Gitzo 1548 with a
    Studioball (a very large ballhead) in the field. He wants to maximize


    The G1548 is a very large tripod. I have played around with a couple
    of them, and they sure give you a lot of stability. However, they also
    cost $900 and weight 6.75 pounds. Now $900 may not be that much more
    than a $700+ G13xx, but adding two pounds over a G13xx sort of defeats
    the purpose of using a lighter carbon-fiber tripod. If you really need
    the stability, I am sure the G1548 is an excellent choice.


    When the G1348 was introduced about two years ago, I was interested in
    it too. (I think that was around the time Don bought his.) However,
    Gitzo has since introduced the G1325 which has 3 sections (2 joints
    per leg) instead of 4 sections on the G1348 (3 joints). Since I hate
    those joints, the G1325 would be my choice now although it is kind of
    long when closed all the way down; I wonder that may be a problem
    during air travel. Neither the G1548, G1348 nor G1325 has a center
  9. My choice is a 1325 for use in the field with a 600/4. As Shun says,
    the 1548 is 2 lbs heavier which is starting to eat into the reason
    for using a CF tripod in the first place. A 1325 is 4.4 lbs, a 1548 is
    6.4 lbs and a 410 is 8.5lbs.


    The 1325 seems pretty stable with a 600/4, though I'm sure a 1548 is
    slightly better. My "shooting from the car with maximum stability"
    tripod is a Bogen 3051. If you aren't going to carry it, what does
    weight matter. It weighs 12.5 lbs, is as stable as a rock and costs
    under $200. I wouldn't think of carrying it in the field or taking
    it on an airplane, but on car trips it's fine. It's also overkill
    anything but a heavy 500+mm lens, at least in 35mm format. A great
    studio tripod I guess. You're certainly not going to accidentally knock
    it over!
  10. Gitzo 1548 with ArcaSwiss B2 is the one I use from 500 mm and up to
    1000 mm. It is substantial more stable than my Gitzo 1325 with
    ArcaSwiss B1.
    A rubber disk is placed between the bottom of the ballheads and the
    topplates of the tripods to make the connections more solid.
  11. I just returned from a week of hauling my 600mm lens and 410 tripod with Studioball around in the tropics of Trinidad & Tobago. No doubt I am tired from the "exercise"! I still prefer the 410 tripod even though it is heavier. More weight means more mass, which only helps in support. I was tired carrying in on a 2 mile hike in the forest, however, the majority of the time I am only walking a short distance with it. Typical uses are working a road in a Naitonal Wildlife Refuge, or walking from my car into my blind; both very short distances.
  12. Guys I don't know what all the fuss is about these two tripods, the
    choice should be easy. I have used both extensivly and to have the CF
    that holds nearly the same amount of weight as the 410 does but is 2.5
    pounds lighter, or two go with the 410 that is a heavy brute, gee which
    one one would I buy ?? My next tripod will be the 15xx series CF from
    Gitzo, one hell of a tripod !


    Rob Hadlow
  13. Thank you everyone for the input. From all the information provided I
    can see that the 1548 carbon fiber tripod is approximately equal to
    the 410 in performance and either would be a good choice. That was my
    real question in the first place. Now I will have to decide if the
    weight savings is worth the difference in price. I would probably
    come up with two different answers depending on how long a walk I had
    just taken with that rig over my shoulder. Thanks again, Jim
  14. This is not an answer but a question on the same topic. I am about to purchase a new Gitzo Carbon Fiber Tripod. I am a relatively small but strong woman(over 50) and I travel a lot, sometimes by plane--don't hike a long ways but some. I photograph animals and birds; also like to do scenics. Which is better--the G1548 as advocated by Arthur Morris, the 1325 or the 1348? Also, do you have to order a seperate center column for each of these tripods? I am leaning toward the 1548 but cannot tell if it comes with a column and, if not, which one to order. Currently I have the 1227 which has not come unglued and has withstood all types of weather situations but is not stable enough for a Canon 100-400 IS with 2x TC and probably couldn't handle a 500mm. Would really appreciate some feedback since I need to order ASAP. The big birds are nesting in Louisiana and I don't want to miss out.
  15. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Moderator

    Nancy, either the Gitzo 1325 or the 1348 is sufficient for a 500mm/f4 type lens. Even Arthur Morris agreed on that when he saw me using my 500mm/f4 on a G1325 last November. In fact, a lot of people feel that those tripods are sufficient for 600mm/f4 also, but that is matter of opinion. The 100-400 IS zoom is considerably lighter than the 500/4, so it won't be a problem.

    Neither one of the 1325, 1348, and 1548 comes with a center column. IMO you are better off without one. However, for those who like center columns, the corresponding models are 1329, 1349, and 1549 respectively. Check Gitzo's web site: for more info.
  16. I am thinking of buying either a Gitzo 1325 or 1548 aftre reading all the information in the many helpful threads about these tripods. My question is less opinion and more utilitarian. I am wondering about how the model numbers translate to todays model numbers. I have found the following items on the B&H Photo website and want to make sure they are what I think:

    G1325 Mountaineer Mk2 Inter Pro Studex Performance Carbon Fibre Tripod Legs (without column) this the 1325 that has been discussed? Sounds like this should be more than adequate for a 300 f2.8

    G1548 Tele Studex Mk2 Performance Carbon Fibre tripod...I assume this is the 1548?

  17. I assure you that I'm not Arthur Morris or Art Wolfe but I have compared a 340 and the 1548. Without an extender, the 340 does just fine with the 600 (non IS). YOu get sharp shots consistently. With a 1.4x attached, the sharpness ratio goes straight downhill - some excellent results but plenty that are not.

    In the past I've owned a 410 with medium format and the big problem is carrying it. It's long and heavy and without tripod pads, a pain in the shoulder.

    With a 500 or less, the 13xx would be my choice. With a 600 when an extender is going to be used more than rarely, I'd pick the 15xx.

    But, that also depends on the overall system. Maybe with a different head (I used the Arca B-1), a lighter tripod could be used. Or, maybe, with a cable release and mirror lockup. You gotta look at everything in the line of fire, unfortunately.

  18. do you know if the Gitzo 1321 Leveling Base works on G1548 ?

Share This Page