Aargh! Tripods! Gitzo 2531, 2541, 3541LS

[chris_werner]

<p>Too many options. Almost makes me wish I just had to take what they offer. As described in this thread - http://www.photo.net/filters-bags-tripods-accessories-forum/00Qeaw - I purchased the ball head I (RRS BH-40) but had to defer the tripod. With Xmas receipts now in (yea!) I want to get the tripod.</p>

<p>In going back over my thought process, what is still paramount is doing this once, i.e. making a purchase I won't regret later. Weight and height are still issues, but I am probably a bit less concerned about that than before. But they're still issues.</p>

<p>The 3541LS gives more height, but weighs 13 oz. or about 1/3 kg. more. Is that enough for me to notice? I don't do long hikes, but I'm also not in good shape, so that probably balances out. The larger capacity would help ensure I don't outgrow it, though I'm not sure that's a risk. I'm not currently into nature photography, so I'm not sure about anything longer than 200mm, but you never know.</p>

<p>At the end of the day, the incremental cost doesn't matter ($75 I think), it's really down to the weight (and folded up length, but that seems ok in any instance, except maybe the 2531) unless I'm missing something. I'm just worried about being "penny wise and pound foolish" on the weight if I go with the 2 series, versus building in a disincentive to using it if I go with the 3 series.</p>

<p>Thoughts? Thanks.</p>

[sattler123]

<p>Try to buy a tripod once and be done with it. The 13 ounces wil not make THAT much of a difference. Get the 3541 tripod and be done with.</p>

[bruce_mattes]

<p>The longer tripod is more versatile..It will allow you to place the leg (s) at a greater number of differing heights w/o having to bend over as far to look through your camera's viewfinder..</p>

<p>I am in the market to upgrade my Giottos MT 9360 aluminum tripod..I purchased the Really Right Stuff BH-55 ball head at the same time that I purchased the Giottos..I knew at the time that I could not afford both the tripod and the ball head that I wished to own..I chose to spend more on the ball head, as at the time I did not require the greater stiffness and load bearing capacity of the Gitzo carbon fiber tripod that I really wanted..Now, several years later, I am able to afford the Gitzo..My needs in a tripod are also increasing as, if all goes well in 2009, I will be purchasing a Pentax 67II medium format camera that demands a better tripod than the Giottos..</p>

<p>I intend to purchase the Gitzo GT3541 XLS carbon fiber tripod legs..Initially, I was leaning towards the Gitzo GT3540 XL, since upgraded to the GT3541 XL..Two years of tripod use has shown me that there is no substitute for height when a photographer truly needs it..I am 5 ft. 9 in. tall, and I still will be purchasing the GT3541 XLS instead of the GT3541 XL..With the Pentax 67II camera I will benefit in average usage situations as the XLS tripod when extended to my normal height will offer greater stiffness and vibration dampening than the shorter XL tripod..This is due to a greater amount of the legs being within one another at shorter height requirements..</p>

<p>I am 54 years old and am currently in the worst shape of my life, weighing more than I ever have..My intentions are to lose weight and exercise in order to bring my body into line with the greater weight of my intended tripod purchase..I too have been worrying about the weight of a heavier tripod than I originally intended to purchase..I finally decided that I could no longer indulge myself by overeating and not exercising as I have been doing for the past several years..The Pentax 67II camera and its complimentary lenses weigh considerably more than my Pentax K10D dSLR..They, and the Gitzo tripod, are going to demand a much fitter photographer than I currently am if I am going to enjoy the purchase..</p>

<p>Purchase the longer tripod..I do not think you will regret having the extra height available at hand..It will allow you to think outside of your current photographic box by opening up camera angles that you can not take advantage of with a shorter tripod..</p>

<p>Good luck with your decision!!!!</p>

<p>Bruce</p>

[ken_yee]

<p>Depends if you're doing long hikes...in that case, every pound counts. If not, get the bigger one and be done w/ it...</p>

 

[bennett_richards]

<p>I have the 3540LS and it's the best tripod I have ever owned. IT's SO light you don't know it's there... but it's ROCK solid with all sections extended. I also have the optional center column.</p>

<p>I don't know if there is any difference between the 3540LS and the 3541LS... I have looked at them and can find no difference at all. I think the 3541 is a year newer but no different.</p>

<p>The XLS is taller but you will have to check it as luggage on flights... the LS can be carried aboard.... This makes a VERY big difference.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>If you plan to spend all that money on your first good tripod, then the GT-3540/3541 LS is a good way to go. It is much stiffer than the #2 series, and there's no signficant penalty in that regard for 4 sections vs 3 sections. The "S" designates a "Systematic" tripod, in which the center section is completely replaceable with a plate (standard), column, leveling platform or video ball.</p>

<p>The XLS is at least a foot taller, but won't fold up to fit a suitcase without disassembly (which is not all that hard). I'm 5'10", and use my 3540LS with only two leg sections extended. I have to stoop a little, but the head and camera add at least 6" to the nominal height. LS or XLS - either one would work for you. The taller version is best suited to video work (over the heads of an audience) or bird photography where you point up a lot.</p>

<p>The 3540/3541 is somewhat easier to carry than the smaller 2540/2541. The legs of the 3540 are far enough apart that you can carry it by one leg, whereas you have to grasp all the legs in the smaller tripod. I do that, use a shoulder strap, or (rarely) fasten it to a backpack. Sometimes I carry it, camera and all, over my shoulder (Arca-type clamps are that good).</p>

[chris_werner]

<p>Guys,</p>

<p>Thanks for all the feedback. You've given me some peace of mind in going with the 3 Series. I think I'm going to stick with the LS, but if Bruce or anyone else is still watching and can amplify the benefits of going with the XLS, I'd love to hear it. Thanks again!</p>

[bennett_richards]

<p>Trust me... the extra length of the 3 series tripod is not worth the extra hassle when traveling. If you look around the nature phtog lists the 3540LS is being used by guys well over 6 feet tall with lenses as big as 600mm.</p>

<p>I still can't find the difference between the 3540 and the 3541... If you can get a better deal on a 3540, take it.</p>

[chris_werner]

<p>Bennett,</p>

<p>Do you mean the XLS? The 3541LS is a 3 Series, and it's 21.7" folded up. But what you say about the 6' plus guys seems to confirm my choice. :-)</p>

[gerard_bynre]

<p>I too have been researching the Gitzo 3541 LS and 3541 XLS - can't decide. I too rationalised the potential stability advantage of the XLS model given that legs are less extended at a given height, but against that I was hoping for a tripod I could carry onto the occasional flight. I posted about this in the LF forum a few weeks ago with limited response. Given there seems to be people in this thread with real experience of these tripods can I take the opportunity of asking two very specific questions:<br>

1. Is the 3541 LS stable enough (!) fully extended for longer lenses - or in my case a light 4x5 with standard & wide lenses?</p>

<p>2. Can you really carry on a 3541 LS for commercial flights? I travel a great deal and this would be a great advantage.<br>

Thanks,</p>

<p>Gerard</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>I use a GT-3540LS with a 12 pound video camera (nearly 20# with the head) and the equivalent of a 600mm lens. It is rock-solid. Video has to be steady ALL the time - whereas you can wait for vibrations to die down in still photography. Needless to say, it is more than satisfactory for small, medium and (occasionally) 4x5 format work.</p>

<p>It is simply not worth the risk to carry any tripod on board. Whether it passes inspection is entirely at the discretion of the particular inspector. Do you want to go back to the ticket counter, retrieve your luggage, pack the tripod and wait in the Security line all over again? As a precaution, I put the head in my camera bag (carry-on) and the legs in checked baggage. I could always find a set of legs if they were lost, but a good head can take weeks.</p>

<p>LF cameras present a lot of area to catch the wind, which is a major issue for steadiness and safety. Most LF photographers recommend an 18# wooden tripod (e.g., Reis) to keep the center of gravity low (then don't venture far from their car). What they really use is another matter :-) I've had to spread the legs to the next notch to keep my Gitzo from blowing over on the Chicago lakefront with a D2x.</p>

[gerard_bynre]

<p>Edward,<br>

thanks for the advice which is really clear. One question - you mentioned in an above post that it's possible to dis-assemble either of these Gitzo's for travel - which is something I'd not thought about. I guess I'm wondering if I could pack the 3541 XLS in regular checked-in luggage if it were easily dis-assembled. Without asking for a step-by-step tutorial, I'm wondering how easy / tricky it is, whether you need many tools, and finally if it's damaging to the equipment to periodically take it apart and then re-assemble etc?</p>

<p>Thanks again,</p>

<p>Gerard</p>

<p> </p>

[mt4x4]

<p>For me, I have found the height of a tripod to be the most important factor, with weight close behind. Anytime I have to bend over to look through the viewfinder, my horizons are off. That's why I am picking up a 3541XLS very soon.</p>

[chris_werner]

<p>Guys,</p>

<p>Don't know if anyone is still watching this thread but I wanted to thank everyone again. I just got the Gitzo 3541LS tripod and set it up with the RRS BH-40 and Pro-II clamp.</p>

<p>It's perfect. I don't know what else to say.</p>

<p>The height is perfect, making me crane upward ever so slightly at its tallest. The rotating locks are easy and intuitive to use. It's built like a tank, but its light weight really surprised me, so much that I dug out the specs on the cheapie tripod I've used for years, the Slik U212 (which has served me well, within its limits). The Slik is 6 pounds with the non-removable head, and rated for 5 1/2 pounds. The new setup is rated for 18 lbs (head - the legs are at 40 lbs), and weighs less than 5 pounds. Unbelievable.</p>

<p>So thanks again for pushing me to the larger legs. I can't imagine I will ever feel the need for anything else. Tripod legs, that is. ;-)</p>