Tripod for Hasselblad

I'm looking for a tripod set up for my Hasselblad 500C/M. I use the camera with either a 60mm Distagon

or the 80mm Planar- weight of camera and lens is slightly under 4 lbs... A camera store clerk recommended

a Manfrotto 055XB, and 808RC4 head. I'll be using the set up in the city to photograph buildings and whatever

in low light or at night. The 500C/M body has a single tripod hole in the plate at the bottom of the camera.

Should I also get a Quick Coupling? What else might I need other than cable release? I'd probably occasionally

also use the tripod for a 35mm camera and DSLR.

 

Thanks...

<p>I have a Hasselblad 501C/M and 60mm and 80 lenses. I use a Gitzo GT 2531 with Arca Swiss ball head and Really Right Stuff QC plate.<br>

Sometimes, I use a Leitz Tiltall from the 1970s...those are high quality aluminum tripods often available at bargain prices on the auction site.</p>

<p>The main advantage of the Gitzo is that it's much lighter in weight than a Tiltall. You can find info about Tiltall tripods here:<br>

http://tiltallsupport.blogspot.com/p/tiltall-replacement-parts.html</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Steve, I use severl tripods, but the Tiltall is almost always the one for my Blads including everyhting from the 40mm C Distagon to the 500mm C TeleTessar. For me, the Tiltall's weight is negligible.</p>

<p>Ray, The Quick coupling is a great accessory. I would recommend it highly. If you ever get the 500mm lens, the lens anchors directly to the tripod, but for all others, the quick coupling is a delight.</p>

I use my original aluminum Bogen 7032 medium tripod for most stuff with the regular two handle 3 way head. The legs

spread out, it's not too heavy, folds up nice, Hasselblad is no problem.

Being lighter is an advantage? Have we forgotten that the working part of a good tripod is its mass?

Sorry, that number I gave is wrong, it's the 3021. Another smaller Manfrotto I like for walking around, but it's a tad more

finiky and the legs are quite not as stiff, BUT still a good one is the 3205. I see it comes in Carbon now, mine is the green

aluminum 3205g in camo and has a nice 3262 medium ball head with the Hasselblad quick release plate mounted on it. I

have used that with fine results even with the 180mm but you HAVE to be careful everything is snug and set.

<p>I also endorse old Tiltalls; mine is an original Marchioni Bros. one from the '50s or '60s great tripod. Get either a Marchioni Bros. one, or a Leitz, NJ. model--later production (especially the recent Taiwan-made ones) are reputed to be less well made. I use a Manfrodo hex plate quick release adapter on my Tiltall--it adds a 1/2 lb. of weight.</p>

<p>Good recommendations. I had a Bogen 3021 and it was very nice. The Tiltalls are quite a bit heavier. Lately, I use a Star D that I bought on ebait for $20 and it works fine for everything from a small camera, right up to a Crown Graphic 4x5.</p>

<p>Instead of the 808RC4 you may wish to look at the Manfrotto geared heads like the 410. Framing is more precise with the geared heads. The three-way heads like the 808RC4 usually shift a bit after locking. I have not used the 808RC4 itself just three-way heads of similar construction.<br>

<br>

I still have a very old 055 type. It is stable but I prefer a lighter Series 3 Gitzo now. I would not mind using the 055 more often providing Q.G. will carry it. [grin]<br>

<br>

Ferdi.</p>

So is the recommendation of a used Tiltall value for the price? Would the Manfrotto set up have any advantage?

It would appear on the Tiltall that you would just attach to the camera and leave it there while working, not having the option of using a Quick Coupling.

<p>Ray,</p>

<p>Tiltalls were not made with quick-release couplings, but any adaptor that threads onto a tripod head should work. As I mentioned earlier, I use a Manfrotto hex-plate adapter. That actually (@ $50) cost me as much as my used Tiltall. FWIW it works fine. I believe there are also adapters that take Arca Swiss type QR plates.</p>

<p>BTW, yes, IMO used Marchioni or Leitz Tiltalls provide REALLY good value for the money</p>

The Hasselblad quick release would be the best choice QR adapter, given that part of it already is fixed to the bottom of the camera. ;-)

Ferdi,<br><br>I'm getting old, and weak. But still 'carry' my heavy Gitzos.<br>People are clever beings sometimes, and - would you believe it... - have invented handy trolleys that make transporting heavy kit a breeze.<br>No, i will not carry your tripod for you. But how about those thingies? ;-)

<p>Ray,</p>

<p>There is no question in my mind on tripods. I have been in photography since the mid century and have tried most of them. I have standardized on the Leitz- Marchioni Tiltall. I use a H'blad 500C/M<br>

with the H'blad quick release. I also use a Nikon which I have adapted to be able to use the H'blad quick release plate</p>

<p>The price of a RRS tripod,ball head and camera holders would exceed the price I paid for the H'blad and Nikon outfits</p>

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=282122">Q.G. de Bakker</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Hero" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/hero.gif" alt="" /><img title="Frequent poster" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/3rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Dec 28, 2012; 02:57 p.m.</p>

</blockquote>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Being lighter is an advantage? Have we forgotten that the working part of a good tripod is its mass?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well said. I use a Giottos carbon fiber tripod for my 500c/m and my 80 and 150 lenses. Well technically it's a Promaster ... but it looks an awful lot like one of the Giottos models, and rebranding is kind of Pro's MO, so I'm assuming there :) I also use it with Manfrotto's horizontal grip head; I forget the model number. 322, maybe?</p>

<p>The tripod is plenty sturdy on all exposures up to about half a second, with or without mirror lockup. 1/8th seems to be my 'regular' shutter speed on that guy. Using the mirror lock, it's good for several minutes ... provided the wind isn't blowing. At all. You can technically hang some weight off the centre bar, but I'd be over the tripod's weight rating by the time I put enough ballast on there to actually do anything. I've thought about upgrading it many many times, but ... I just don't walk around with a tripod enough at night to justify the expense.</p>

<p>I do also have an old Bogen video tripod. Again, I forget the model. But it's all aluminum, and has split legs and a crank on the centre column. I have taken nighttime exposures up to four minutes long with it, shooting an old, extra heavy Linhof 4x5 camera with a 150mm lens, in some pretty serious wind. The images were perfectly sharp, without a hint of movement. But that guy weighs a ton, and I really can't carry it around. But I <em>can</em> put it in the car.</p>

<p>Ray, you can have lightweight or you can have solid. You can have both, but you'll need to pay dearly for it. I would think that in order to get a lightweight tripod that is even close to as solid as my old Bogen, you'd need a set of carbon fibre legs that could support around 25 pounds, since you're going to need to hang plenty of stuff off it. Just from memory, I think that pretty much puts you into $600 Gitzo territory. Plus then you need to carry around that much extra crap, or at least a trowel so you can shovel some dirt into a sandbag :)</p>

<p>The camera clerk's recommendations were excellent. Others suggested geared heads; I'm not sure how I feel about them. I like them for 4x5s, but the Hassy isn't heavy enough to make a good quality ball head sag, so it's probably overkill. I think what you need to do is figure out just what you expect from this tripod, and how much weight you're comfortable lugging around. If you're not looking to do several-minute exposures, and you don't need it do be extremely light, go with the 055. But if you need it to do one of those other things I just mentioned, then you're going to have to find a place where you can make a sacrifice, or you'll need to <em>really</em> open your wallet.</p>

 

<p><br /> <br /> <br /> </p>

<p>"Being lighter is an advantage? Have we forgotten that the working part of a good tripod is its mass?"<br>

<br>

Maybe I ought to have written that a difference is that the Gitzo weighs less than my Tiltall...which might not be an advantage.<br>

One thing is certain, Leitz made Tiltall's were well made tripods. I bought mine new in 1975 or so, and it still works great!<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>

</p>

A note about hanging stuff off a tripod: unless it is draped over or tied to the tripod such that it really adds to the mass, forms one rigid unit with the tripod, it will do something, but not much.<br>Some brands tripod have a hook on the bottom end of the centre column, if you hang a bag full of stones, dirt or other heavy stuff on that hook, the thing will swing freely, not adding to the inertia of the tripod. If you kick a tripod with such a thing dangling below it, the rigid tripod will move instantly, as a whole, i.e. including the hook. The bag's own inertia however will keep it where it is. It will start swinging if the tripod moves enough. Too late to be usefull.<br>Not that it will do nothing though. It will help prevent any movement that cannot but move the bag itself too. What movement that is depends on where there is no play/freedom in the way the bag is attached. If you just hang it on that hook, with the weight of it pulling any play out of whatever it is that is used to hang it from the hook with, it will effectively make it hard to move the tripod in the direction opposite the force that has taken the play out of the attachment, i.e. up, against gravity. It will only do something against the vertical component of any vibration or larger movement of the tripod mounted camera.<br>Though it will still vibrate, resonate with small movements, move side to side when kicked, a tripod will not jump up when you hang a bag of stones below it. ;-)

I mainly use a series 3 Gitzo tripod (326) and an Arca Swiss B1. I do consider this to be a good compromise. It is quite sturdy but still can be carried on my photo rucksack. It can be used with confidence up to about 500 mm lenses. I do use these old aluminium Gitzo tripods as they are nearly undestructable. I have an assortment of those in use for birdwatching as well.

 

Ulrik

I'm not sure if anyone mentioned it, but if you don't need fold out legs for uneven ground and low POV, a tripod with

center arms will be more stable for critical work, IMO. My older bigger Bogen (Manfrotto) had center supports and a crank

up mid section and was very good for critical type, long exposure situations. As time marched on I got more on using the

3021 which is still my "go to" tripod.

<p>If the tripod is on a solid surface, stiffness rather than mass is the most important element. The tripod could have zero mass as long as the camera was connected solidly to the earth. If the surface is springy, like grass or a forest floor, then adding weight helps plant the tripod more firmly to the ground. Hanging a weight does not effectively add mass unless it is firmly coupled to the tripod (e.g, bolted or clamped).</p>

<p>Carbon fiber is much stiffer than aluminum of the same thickness and diameter (e.g., Gitzo). In fact, a #2 CF Gitzo is as stiff as a #3 aluminum tripod. The presence of a column detracts from the stiffness, and the added height, even when collapsed, increases the moment arm of any forces in or on the camera causing it to vibrate (e.g., shutter, mirror, your hand on the shutter, or wind). The way in which the camera is mounted is also a factor. Rubber surfaces should be avoided. The stiffest mount is a clamp and beveled plate arrangement, like the built-in Hasselblad plate, or an Arca-Swiss style plate and clamp.</p>

<p>To get the best results from an Hasselblad, use the stiffest tripod you are willing to carry, a shutter release cable, and pre-release the mirror. You must also focus the camera very carefully. Acute-Matte D screens are somewhat transparent for brightness. Make sure your eye is focused on any grid markings on the glass itself when focusing. It's easy to look through the glass at a virtual image.</p>

<p>If the tripod is on a solid surface, stiffness rather than mass is the most important element. The tripod could have zero mass as long as the camera was connected solidly to the earth. If the surface is springy, like grass or a forest floor, then adding weight helps plant the tripod more firmly to the ground. Hanging a weight does not effectively add mass unless it is firmly coupled to the tripod (e.g, bolted or clamped).</p>

<p>Carbon fiber is much stiffer than aluminum of the same thickness and diameter (e.g., Gitzo). In fact, a #2 CF Gitzo is as stiff as a #3 aluminum tripod. The presence of a column detracts from the stiffness, and the added height, even when collapsed, increases the moment arm of any forces in or on the camera causing it to vibrate (e.g., shutter, mirror, your hand on the shutter, or wind). The way in which the camera is mounted is also a factor. Rubber surfaces should be avoided. The stiffest mount is a clamp and beveled plate arrangement, like the built-in Hasselblad plate, or an Arca-Swiss style plate and clamp.</p>

<p>To get the best results from an Hasselblad, use the stiffest tripod you are willing to carry, a shutter release cable, and pre-release the mirror. You must also focus the camera very carefully. Acute-Matte D screens are somewhat transparent for brightness. Make sure your eye is focused on any grid markings on the glass itself when focusing. It's easy to look through the glass at a virtual image.</p>

<i>"If the tripod is on a solid surface, stiffness rather than mass is the most important element. The tripod could have zero mass as long as the camera was connected solidly to the earth."</i><br><br>True, if that solid surface is inert enough not to vibrate. And if the camera itself isn't a source of vibrations. A tripod has to deal with vibrations, and it does that by being unimpressed, by remaining inert. Put a rigid, zero-mass tripod on a surface that does vibrate (and unless you are on a thick concrete slab that is 'floating' on a rubber bed, or on solid bed rock, it will), and it will bounce aroud like mad (like a coin - very rigid - on a drum skin), unless you tie it down rigidly to, eventually, something that hass enough mass not to be moved by whatever is causing vibrations.<br>So we do indeed need mass. Lots of it.<br><br>Being inert, having lots of mass, isn't everything though. If a camera itself causes vibrations, and the thing it sits on is absolutely inert, the vibrations will reflect back from that surface into the camera. If the thing the camera sits on is capable of absorbing the vibrations, they will be lots less and die out much sooner. (the principle is demonstrated by stringed instruments. The more inert the thing that holds the string at either end, the longer the string will vibrate. Build in some slack, for instance by replacing the solid body of an electric guitar with the vibrating top deck of an accoustic instrument, of by replacing a fixed bridge by a tremolo bridge, and the result will be less sustain. The energy is absorbed by the vibrating top deck or tremolo springs, instead of having no place to go but back into the vibrating string again.)<br>That's also the principle of a fluid head: a balance between inertia and flexibility. We can mimic that by leaving some minimal slack in all the parts of the tripod (head) that we fasten with all those screws. That will help absorb vibrations, and reduce camera shake to below levels a camera fixed hard to an unflexible, inert tripod head would have to deal with.<br>And rubber surfaces, Edward, will in fact be a help!

<p>Q.G.</p>

<p>Please add your thoughts on using the rubber feet that many tripods have (including the marvelous Zeiss Tiltall) rather than the all metal spikes. My own impression is that using those is a further dampening agent, insulating the entire system from the bounce back effect you mention. The only time I allow the spikes out is winter shooting on ice. <br>

Further, on all of my camera stand heads and tripod heads, I have replaced the cork or rubber surfaces with pieces of Deer hide cut to fit for a number of reasons, primarily to do with dissatisfaction with the grip of the other materials. I have seen no negative effects in terms of sharpness as the deer hide is cushioned enough to hold the camera well, but then I do routinely use cable releases and mirror lock up functions.</p>