Tripod suggestion?

Ive got a job where I need to photograph a lot of locations and carry my gear. My carbon fiber Gitzo has been fine but is still to heavy and big.... I want to get a smaller / lighter tripod. I need it to go about 55 inches high (without extending the column) . It needs to be solid enough for me to take five exposures to be blended together in Post. So the camera can not move... Does this exist? Preferably not to pricey either. So far the reviews on the ones I have researched always say that the camera moves on them so that wont work for me. Anyone have something that they like that would fit my needs?

What degree of movement versus rigidity is required? What kind of camera/lens combo are you using? What kind of "blending" are you doing in PP? Light weight and portability are generally incompatible with extreme rigidity, so a clear understanding of your equipment and operational requirements will be helpful.

Light, cheap, sturdy - pick 2.

Carbon fiber is pretty much the lightest material you'll find that is yet sturdy enough to be really stable. So frankly, I severly doubt you can do better than the one you already have, at best a smaller carbon fiber (and Gitzo is a great brand), but the weight savings won't be massive.

. . . a clear understanding of your equipment and operational requirements will be helpful . . .

 

More than 'helpful': necessary to give quality advice.

 

WW

Without some guidance on what camera you use, what and where you use it, it's hard to make a good recommendation. I can start with some basic specifications, types of construction, and specifications to consider. As suggested, "cheap," "light," and "strong" are mutually exclusive - pick any two.

 

Gitzo CF tripods come in a variety of sizes, from smallest to largest, #0 to #5. I would not recommend anything smaller than a Gitzo #2, and then only in CF. For lenses 300 mm or longer, start with a #3. Weight capacity is immaterial as long as it is more than that of your gear. It is a function of joint strength, not the tubes, and Gitzo joints are among the strongest in the industry. What counts is stiffness - the ability to resist wind and other disturbance, then settle down once disturbed. CF is much better than aluminum in that regard. Gitzo uses bushings between the upper part of the leg and the inside of the larger tube. This imparts great stiffness to the joints, so that they don't degrade the overall stiffness of the leg.

 

55" tall, without a column, is actually pretty large for a tripod, consistent with a #2 Gitzo long.

 

I recently purchased a Really Right Stuff #2 long tripod. RRS uses oversized but somewhat thinner tubing. The #2 tripod has the weight of a Gitzo $2, but the stiffness of a Gitzo #3, for about the same price as the former.

 

These are relatively light weight, perform well with long lenses (I use up to 600 mm equivalent for video, indoors). They are not inexpensive. That's the tradeoff. Manfrotto tripods tend to be twice as heavy as a Gitzo for the same capacity, which is no higher than a Gitzo #2. They employ heavy aluminum castings for strength, rather than high pressure castings (Gitzo), or machined aircraft aluminum (RRS). Clamp type joints add to the weight, and don't hold as well as collars.

 

Benro, a Chinese company, seems to make high quality equipment, at half the price of a comparable Gitzo. They started with some serious manufacturing flaws, but have since cleaned up their act. There are other Chinese knock-off's under various names.

 

Now you have to choose a head, and they're not cheap either.

Canon 5D with a 16-35mm zoom... hdr type blending. So it can’t move at all.. I shoot on a timer so as long as the head doesn’t slip at all it’s fine . And I never use the column

So it can’t move at all.

 

Well, all structures, including tripods and heads, deflect under load. The trick is to mitigate and minimize movement such that it is within tolerance of the system. This includes all movement, not only the camera on its mount. The use you describe will be as sensitive to movement in your zoom lens, or changes in focus point, as to minor deflection in the tripod structure. You need to consider all of the following factors and then decide which are contributing to your problems and can be addressed effectively:

1. Is the tripod sufficiently stiff at the desired height? 55 inches is pretty tall, but is certainly achievable in a carbon fiber tripod. RRS TVC/TFC-34 MK2 fits the bill. However, they are certainly pricey, and will require the purchase of an appropriate ball head. You did not say which Gitzo you have, but that is likely not the weak link in your system. As alluded to by Ed, the larger diameter the leg sections are the stiffer for a given weight of material. However, tightness in the joints can also be an issue. Check all of the pivot points to make sure they are not sloppy, and tighten the screws/bolts if needed.

2. Select a ball head large and strong enough to provide excess strength and rigidity. RRS BH-55 or BH-40 ball heads will fit the bill, particularly if mated to an RRS L bracket on the camera. One of the weak points in a camera mounting system is very often the clamp and plate attachment to the head. The RRS ARCA-Swiss type system is very rigid and nearly foolproof. (No, I don't work for or own RRS stock, but they are a benchmark in performance.) A good ball head will not be cheap. The beauty of the RRS head is that it incorporates their clamp as an integral component, rather than securing it to the head using a separate plate+clamp system.

3. For any blending, panorama, or stacking work it is essential that the relationship between the lens elements and the sensor remain as or more rigid than the camera mount. Even tiny, internal movements of lens elements can have more impact on the images than more substantial movements in the camera or mount. Since you are using a zoom lens, are you taking any measures to fix the focal length across multiple exposures? If not, then you should be applying gaffer tape to the zoom ring once you have set up your composition.

4. Unless you are intentionally using focus stacking you should choose a fixed focus point and then lock focus. Generally, this means either using manual focus (with AF turned off), or using back button focus and not re-focusing between exposures. Even the best AF system can experience slight differences in focus from frame to frame with the same focus point, so it's best to only focus once and then not move the lens elements at all.

5. Use a remote shutter release, and mirror lock-up.

6. Forget shooting in the wind, or where there is substantial vibration due to traffic, etc.

7. If your tripod is so equipped, hang a heavy, stabilizing weight (like your camera bag) from the hook on the center post. If no hook, you can still rig a sling and hang a weight to stabilize the rig. However, be wary of any swing.

8. If exposure bracketing, set the camera to do it automatically (if supported), rather than manually adjusting between exposures.

9. This is picking at minutiae, but you might consider which component(s) of exposure you're changing between shots. The aperture diaphragm is a moving component inside the lens and in the light path, so leaving it alone, and adjusting either ISO or shutter speed to modify exposure, might remove one variable.

 

Conclusion: Without a more detailed understanding of how and what you shoot it's hard to know if any of these will make a difference. I suggest you do everything you can with your current kit to lock down all of the variables noted above, and see if this improves your results. It might simply be a matter of removing the cumulative effects of multiple, minor inconsistencies, rather than changing one big thing. If not, then you'll most likely need to spend money on more capable (hence more expensive) gear like the RRS tripod, ball head, and L plate. Like Ed said, cheap, light weight, and strong are mutually exclusive.

You can produce HDR images from hand-held shots, so I think most any reasonably sturdy tripod, and more importantly, good ball head would do the trick.

Canon 5D with a 16-35mm zoom... hdr type blending. So it can’t move at all.. I shoot on a timer so as long as the head doesn’t slip at all it’s fine . And I never use the column

 

Commenting only about the Head: I have a Manfrotto 128LP; it’s a Pan and Tilt Head (typically used for Video but I don't use it for that).

 

I use this Head for: long exposures (e.g. night time and daytime using ND1000; IR; and some HDRI bracketing exposures.

 

I use 5D Series (Fuji for IR), and typically I’d use an EF 16 to 35mm; 14mm or 11mm; the latter two lenses are a bit 'front heavy'.

 

I find that this Pan Tilt Head combines the relatively light weight (compared to my Three Way Head) and it does easily lock solidly into place.

 

The P/T handle allows an easier fine tuning for Framing, rather than using a Ball Head.

 

There are quite a few P/T heads on the market, mine is not an expensive one: I have found that it stays locked in place and it does the job nicely.

 

As you might glean I am not 100% sold on the "expansive usefulness" and "value for money" of most Ball Heads - in this conversation, there are many points which you might find useful and applicable: [LINK]

 

WW

Thanks all.... Ill take it all into consideration.... Ive got my system for shooting down. Works great with my Gitzo but walking up and down 6 flights of stairs and all over Manhattan with all my gear, I was just needing to lighten the load. If you want too you can see what I am doing at realarchmedia.com . I supposed I should have just asked for a tripod /head that wont break loose . The reviews on Amazon usually have complaints of the camera falling forward without notice....

I did work at a studio today that supplies the equipment . I was shooting handbags and dresses and what not , so I wasnt looking for the same qualities in the tripod but I have to say that the manfrotto tripod head was stiff and hard to lock down without really cranking down on the twisties on the pan and tilt head. Big difference in a cheap tripod and a pro one.... Maybe I'll just give up on the lighter idea and keep doing what I do.

7. If your tripod is so equipped, hang a heavy, stabilizing weight (like your camera bag) from the hook on the center post. If no hook, you can still rig a sling and hang a weight to stabilize the rig. However, be wary of any swing.

 

I'd just emphasize this. Total mass of the tripod and its steadiness are dialectically interrelated.

 

or as Wouter put it:

Light, cheap, sturdy - pick 2

[Q

I supposed I should have just asked for a tripod /head that wont break loose .

 

What do you mean by "break loose"? The mount? The angle of the tripod head?

 

On the whole, a good ball head (~ US$500-600) is the lightest, most compact and most flexible choice, especially if one were to carry it up 6 flights of stairs. It will work an any set of legs capable of supporting the camera safely. Wind and vibration are not an issue for indoor photography. On a ledge in the mountains, you might need something more substantial, perhaps with weights hanging from a hook for good measure. In use, you control the head with one hand and the camera with the other. That's easy enough, but must be repeated each time you re-position the camera. You can pan accurately, but must first level both the base and the camera, in that order.

 

The most secure way to mount a camera is with an Arca-style clamp and plate. It is a V-block style, used in heavy machine tools throughout the world, is stable and can withstand considerable force (the camera will break first). RRS and Kirk make plates which conform to the camera, resisting any tendency to turn on it's screw when the camera is tilted or moved, and does not need excessive tension when screwed to the base of the camera (or lens). The clamp is attached to the plate is by direct force, either screw or cam, and is not dependent on safety catches or springs. Not all Arca-style plates are compatible with each other. A few thousands of an inch difference matters. It's best to use clamps and plates made by the same company.

 

No ball head that has visible grease is worth consideration. The best heads have no grease, other than sealed within the controls. For that matter, a 3-way head should not need grease either.

 

Arca QR is oriented in one direction, either parallel to the film plane, or parallel to the optical axis. They can only be used on a 2 or 3-way head with adapters for the other direction. Consequently Arca QR is used almost exclusively on ball heads.

 

If you want to work with both precision and speed, fluid heads, with base leveling, are the best choice. They have relatively weak holding power against an off-balance load. In order to be reliable, they employ various means of counterbalancing the load. Designed and adjusted properly, they will support a load over a +/- 90 deg tilt range, without clamping. Clamping is simply insurance the position won't be disturbed accidentally. Fluid heads which do everything well range in cost from $500 to over $2000. Inexpensive fluid heads, as described above, are best used with lightweight cameras, or kept nearly level, as for landscapes and panos,

 

3-way heads are the cheapest, and almost as flexible as a ball head. However they have separate handles for pan, tilt and angle, and the handles themselves are used to tighten and loosen the movements. As a result, they wobble. That's not a problem for a view camera, where a few degrees precision is good enough. Their stickiness and looseness will drive you batty making fine adjustments for closeups or with telephoto lenses. No matter how you carry them, a handle is in your way. None come with Arca QR, and the QR they have depends on screws and springs for security.

Edited February 10, 2019 by Ed_Ingold

Tough spot. You've already got a steady carbon fiber set up. If you go super-light and smaller, you're going to have to stabilize it anyways. Maybe you can hire a local photo student who would be willing to assist. You might get someone to help schlep who will work for less in exchange for the experience of working with a pro. Just a thought.

I read that some of these 100 dollar tripods will "break loose" .. meaning that after cranking down on the ball head , the camera can still fall forward.... I cant have it move at all, not even a millimeter.Tripod "shake" is ok cause Im shooting on timer. But it needs to settle in the same position as when I took the first frame. I suppose my tripod is light enough . Im certainly not spending that much money again, on a second tripod when mine is already perfect for most applications. . I was just hoping someone had an experience with a satisfactory cheap tripod. I use assistants when i can pay them but this real estate work is always last minute and low pay. It just fills in during slow times.

You aren't making sense. You don't need to "crank down" on a good ball head, particularly the BH-55. Even if you did, how would that affect the tripod? Do the legs slip on your Gitzo tripod once tightened? I didn't think so. The new "G-Loc" collars are even better than ever. They won't loosen even if they back off a little. You need to literally unscrew the bushing from engagement (about 1/2 turn). If you want a lighter tripod, then a Gitzo #2 would do the job, as would a Really Right Stuff "long" #2 tripod (for about the same price).

 

Once set, the camera won't move a millimeter, unless you kick it. Even if it did, stacking software like AuroraHD will align the shots and crop the result, perfectly.

As a tidbit to reinforce what I said before, the BH-55 has a tension control, which can be very useful setting up a shot. The camera can be moved, but is held well enough you can lock the head, keeping one hand on the camera.

 

The trick is to set the tension (with the small knob) with the main knob completely loose. If the main knob is tight, and you screw in the tension knob until you feel resistance, the ball won't unlock when you loosen the main knob. Furthermore, you can't turn the tension knob until you tighten the main knob.

 

Loose to lock takes about 1/4 turn of the main knob, with little or no effort - fingers, not a fist.

A ball head is too finicky for interior real estate photography

Since (most) interiors are shot from a level floor, it is not necessary to use a leveling platform. A flat plate (or column) is sufficient. For small interiors, the camera should be dead level, to avoid convergence, and loss by cropping for stitched panoramas or VR. The BH-55 (or BH-40) has a bubble level in the clamp for this purpose - level the clamp, then attach and point the camera. If nothing else changes, the ball head could be left locked in place, requiring only panning to take the shot.

 

If a ball head were to require adjustments, there would still be a net gain with regard to QR. Manfrotto plates are large, and often removed from the camera, then re-attached for each use. Arca plates are thin, and generally left in place. Furthermore Manfrotto QR is less solid and much less reliable than the clamp and V-block principle.

 

The thought of a head "wearing out" is intriguing. In 20 years of using ball heads, none have ever "worn out." However, I've worn out two or three Manfrotto video heads in that time period, through loose, unreparable joints and broken castings.

QR alone would disqualify a Manfrotto geared head, IMO. Aside from a precise, compact head for view cameras, I have found no use for a geared head at all. Should the need arise, it will be met with an Arca "Cube", not Manfrotto. For portraits, especially event portraits, I use a 2-way fluid head with a leveling base. Once leveled, you simply point, focus and shoot. I can turn the job over to an assistant or volunteer, with little or no technical experience. Paraphrasing Geico Insurance, "Even a cave man can do it."

There’s an adapter for the Manfrotto geared head for use with Arca Swiss QR.

The adapter is attached to a Manfrotto QR plate. The Manfrotto plates attach to the adapter or camera with a single screw, free to rotate under stress. The security stiffness, and freedom from accidental rotation is no better than the weakest link.

 

Would you feel comfortable putting the tripod over your shoulder and climbing stairs with the camera attached? I'm not alone doing just that with Arca-Swiss type connections.

You have your comfort zone, I have mine. Opinions are worth every cent the cost.

, it will be met with an Arca "Cube", not Manfrotto.

$1200-1500 versus $235. I agree with Phil S on this one.

 

The amount of money that can be wasted on tripods and heads is enormous. The various Asian knock-offs such as Feisol etc are usually much better value than all the overpriced Gitzos and RRS out there. Not that Gitzo etc are not nice, but they all do the same thing. As to ballheads, people treat them as if they are planning a mission to Mars. The "problem" is that there is so much choice. Again no need to overspend on RRS or Arca-Swiss. So much information on the web about tripods and heads seems to have been written by people from the film age, who only seem to have heard of high end Gitzos (or RRS). The introduction of some lusty competition in tripods and heads has brought the prices way down with many comparable products available at half the price of those expensive brands.

I appreciate your position. It's not my money to spend.

I'm swayed by experience, not lured by sales pitches. Gitzo and RRS put a lot of money into development and manufacturing, and relatively little into advertising. Their satisfied customers spread the word on their behalf. Taurus is touted as the Brazilian Smith & Wesson. True enough from the outside, but pop the side plate and the truth be known, even if you can't hit the side of a barn from inside, with the door closed.

 

You tend to get what you pay for (aside from pure bling). Buy cheap, buy twice.

I never said an Arca-Swiss Cube was the right solution. In fact, I haven't found a pressing need for a geared head of any sort for the last 50 years or so. A ball head is more portable and flexible than any other types I have used, including with a series of Hasselblad cameras, film and digital, over the last 15.

 

On the subject of cost v benefits, perhaps you could explain why using an RZ67 is worth $20 (film and processing only) for 10 exposures when the incremental cost of digital is practically zero, with greater selection of lenses and generally higher quality? Digital is probably easier on the back and legs, shooting in 6 story walk-ups.

 

Arca-Swiss is a small company on the French side of the Swiss border. It makes what are easily described as boutique products, which have a surprisingly wide following. My guess is that it is small, in large part, due to French tax and labor policies, which favor small (< 50 employees), extremely large companies, and little in between.

 

RRS is a growing, thriving enterprise, and recent emigree from California to the fine state of Utah. Their products too are widely imitated.

Edited February 14, 2019 by Ed_Ingold

Good tools are essential - the "best" probably are not for most. Every practitioner has their tool preferences developed with time and experience. At the end of the day, we all prefer to make our own choices for the tasks at hand - the proper choice for ourselves.