I've seen claims that the newer 2-series Gitzos have capacity similar to the older 3-series. I've used a Gitzo 1325 with excellent results to mount my Canon 300/2.8 IS lens for several years. I'm attracted by the faster setup time on the new 6x Gitzo tripods, and the lighter weight of the Gitzo 2530 appeals, especially since I'm doing more landscape photography and hiking more now. The rated load on the 2530 is minisculely less than the load for the 1325, which seems just fine for my 300/2.8--The 1325 is more than I actually need there. I know people who are satisfied using a current 2-series, such as the 1228 with a 300/2.8. And since a 3-series is adequate for a 500 or perhaps even a 600mm lens, and the 2530 has almost the same capacity, it seems reasonable that the 2530 could handle a 300/2.8 lens (I'm NOT suggesting it be used for a 500 or 600mm lens). But when I look at the Gitzo promotional literature, found on the Bogen Imaging website, I see that the 2530 is recommended for lenses no longer than 200mm! Since I'd like to use my 300/2.8, and probably use teleconverters on the lens, that bothers me about the soundness of my thinking. I'd use the new tripod with a RRS BH-55 ballhead much of the time, but replace that with a Kirk BH-3 when I left the 300/2.8 at home and was hiking with lighter lenses. After the 300/2.8, my next largest lens is quite a step down in weight, a 100-400L. I don't own any larger lenses than the 300/2.8, and doubt very much that I ever will. Camera used with these is a (original version) 1Ds. When and if a Canon 5D replacement comes out, I will purchase one if it looks good at the time. I'd probably keep the Gitzo 1325 around for shooting near the car (the extra few inches of height over the 2530 will be an advantage). Am I misinterpreting the Gitzo literature on the 2530's capacity? Anyone with experience with the Gitzo 2530 or Gitzo 2540 and larger lenses, especially the 300/2.8?