Tripods

[jaophotography]

I bought a cheap tripod from a store, and when I put my 500mm lens on it, it

shook so bad I couldn't take a good picture. What kind of tripod do I need to

take a good picture with a 500mm or more?

Thanks

Jon

[leicaglow]

A good one<g>. Look into the Bogen 3021 series. That will do the trick. I think you're going to need at least a $200 tripod.

[jirka_vejrazka]

You might want to read this: <a href="http://www.bythom.com/support.htm">http://www.bythom.com/support.htm</a>

[beeman458]

What kinda long lense? Is it one of the super lenses like a Canon 500/4.0L IS?

 

If so then you're going need to do two things, get a high end tripod and ballhead combination Like a GT3540LS, RRS BH-55 LRII. Maybe you'll even need a full Wimberly and you're going have to put in some serious time learning long lense technique as well as practice, practice, practice.

 

Hope the above helps.

[Matthew Currie]

Even a decent light tripod will have trouble with a 500, and even a tripod big enough will need some care in use. My wife and I both use Bogen/Manfrotto 3221's with 3047 heads for long lenses. She has a 500/f4P Nikkor lens, and I have a much lighter 400/5.6 that I use with a 1.4x extender at times. Although the 400 is pretty easy to manage, and works pretty well with a medium sized ballhead also, the big 500 needs all the support it can get. Some of the blame for this may lie in the rather jiggly tripod foot that the lens comes with, but a lens that big would much prefer a gimbal mount. Even the tiniest jiggle or movement is magnified with a lens that long, and even a solid mount can vibrate in unexpected ways.

 

We don't use ours professionally, or often enough to justify a great deal more expense, but basically, for a 500, whatever you hope will be good enough will probably turn out to be less than you'd wish for, and the solutions will be expensive. I don't think we'll be really happy until that 500 gets a gimbal mount.

[Ed_Ingold]

You need a stiff tripod and a really good mounting ring for a 500mm lens. Something like a Gitzo G-15xx and a Wimberly gimbal mount is typical. You might get by with something like a Gitzo G-1325 CF if you use a cable release. A Bogen 3021 is a jiggly toy by comparison.

[m_barbu1]

I remember reading something about a general rule of thumb that the tripod should weigh twice what you want it to support. With the advent of sturdy, yet light, materials (such as carbon fiber), this rule is a bit more "bendable", if you'll pardon the pun. However, I think it's still worth considering.

[beeman458]

"I remember reading something about a general rule of thumb that the tripod should weigh twice what you want it to support."

 

Bad idea and not reasonable with today's technology in mind. Here's a link to one of today's carbon fiber gold standard.

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=475936&is=REG&addedTroughType=search

[m_barbu1]

Did you stop reading after my first sentence? ;-)

[beeman458]

"With the advent of sturdy, yet light, materials (such as carbon fiber), this rule is a bit more "bendable", if you'll pardon the pun. However, I think it's still worth considering."

 

Yes I did and unfortunately, to me, the follow-up comment in regard to CF was off base. I'm not trying to kick over a fight here as that's why I posted the link (~8:1 weight/capacity). In all my years, weight has been a function of materials and manufacturing costs (the more sophisticated and lighter, the more expensive; wood, aluminum & steel) as CF is a developing and relative newcomer to the tripod world and has just recently, last couple of years, become affordable via third party suppliers such as Feisol Vs the likes of Gitzo, whom I now use exclusively. Equipment wise, these are good times to be a gearhead. :)

 

There is a weight ratio I'm aware of in regard to head and tripods as in no more than a 2:1 ratio (tripod to ballhead) for reason of top heavy stability but I've never been aware of a similar ratio in regard to tripod weight and carrying capacity. Maybe I slept through that chapter. :) Maybe I'm the one who's all wet. Either which way, my apologies if my comment was found to be offensive.

[m_barbu1]

<p><i>Either which way, my apologies if my comment was found to be offensive.</i></p>I didn't take offense. It's just that your response seemed odd to me, given my reference to carbon fiber allowing for a higher load to support weight ratio.

[beeman458]

"...this rule is a bit more "bendable",..."

 

I keyed on the word "bit" for I'm not a bit more robust cause I am robust. :) That sort of thing.

 

I felt the choice of word "bit" undermined the weight ratio advances and underplayed the benefit of going CF.

 

A "bit" of nit picking on my part, if you will. :)

[les]

Well, there is not as much advantage in CF as most people think. If you consider aircraft grade titanium and aluminium alloys, then the strength ratio (for equal weight) Titanium/Aluminium/Carbon Composite is about 1.0/.89/0.88,

and the stiffness ratio is 0.83/1.0/.84.

 

So, the raeal advantage for CF is about 16% more stiffness for equal weight. Whether it is worth 3x the price is an individual choice.

 

The problem with CF is that on paper it has great strength and an excellent strength/density ratio - but in practice you can never use its full strength. Practical limit for a typical carbon/epoxy composite is about 45 to 50 ksi, with aluminium alloy 65 ksi and Titanium alloy about 150-160 ksi. Modulus of elasticity for Titanium would be about 16.7 Msi, Aluminium 10.4 Msi and Carbon/epoxy compositr about 7.5 Msi.

 

Do your own math and figure out for yourself to what degree the "modern and fashionable" materials are worth the price (not that a decent grade aluminium or titanium is cheap, what you see in the shops is far cry from what can be had at a price).

 

To all those who want to bash me for being backwards - my CF tripod has just arrived :D

[jaophotography]

I started looking at tripods, and found some very sturdy legs (slik 700dx) for $100.00. I bought a brand new Bogen ball head (3026) for $38.00, and now when I put my 500mm lens on, there is not a bit of shake.

Thanks for the Information.

Jon