Gitzo or Manfrotto ?

[dave_wilson1]

<p>This is like arguing over Ford and Chevy pickups. I drive Ford F-150s by the way, my neighbor will only buy Chevy Silverado 1500s, across the street, Dodge 1500, down the block GMC 1500. Guess what, when we go to Home Depot for lumber or patio blocks or tow the boat, they all do the same thing! I use Bogen/Manfrottos almost 30 years, beat to death, 3033 and 3021, I hate Gitzos. I could buy either, I want Manfrottos, you can keep your Gitzos and my next truck will be Ford F-150 again guaranteed. I'm in tears, Dave </p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>Dave,</p>

<p>Sorry you seem to take this personally. Perhaps you could let us know why you "hate Gitzos." What is it that makes Manfrotto tripods a better choice in your opinion?</p>

[dave_wilson1]

<p>It's really nothing personal Edward, I'm just throwing some snowballs. I don't care what anyone uses. I just prefer the overall design and leg adjustments of the Bogens compared to the twist collars on the Gitzos, and at the time the Gitzos were also really heavy and IMO too overpriced. I really liked the Bogen 3033 with crank center column and leg rocker levers, I could work real fast with that and a 6x6 camera, plus it was very stabile when I tightened everything down. I also have a 3029 and 3205G, both have graduated leg angles and no center supports so I can set up uneven ground and still use the levers. As for weight, at the time I found the Gitzos quite heavy, today there's the carbon fiber, but I'm OK with my old aluminum pods. Again, besides price it's really what you're comfortable with, and I really prefer the Bogen/Manfrotto stuff for how I work. I also have a tendency to be really rough on stuff and occasionally forget stuff, so I'd rather leave an old $125 treasure than a new c-f $500 one. OK, cheers, enough beat around on this topic.</p>

[dave_wilson1]

<p>And I would be amiss if I didn't correct that I meant 3021 tripod, 3029 is the head on both my 3033 and 3021. I have pretty much retired the 3033 though, I only use the 3021 and 3205G which has a ball head. And what I also meant to add is that Nick could do well with a used 3021 and head of choice if he chooses Bogen/Manfrotto. Sorry I wasn't clear.</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

<blockquote>

<p>"and at the time the Gitzos were also really heavy [...] I found the Gitzos quite heavy"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Just so noone gets a wrong impression: "really heavy" is what you want a tripod to be.<br>

It - mass, and lots of it - is what makes tripods work.</p>

[dave_wilson1]

<p>Q.G., "really heavy" is what "you" want in a tripod. 8-)) Sorry for misleading the sheep....</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

<p>No, no...</p>

<p>Really heavy is what anybody wants who understands why and how tripods work.</p>

<p>Nice and light is what people want who don't understand how tripods work, and value comfort over getting something worth having.</p>

 

[nick_fields1]

<p>Thank you for all your input.<br>

For now i cannot spend a lot of money on anything, so I am looking for the cheapest I can get away with.<br>

For the CONTAX 645, what would be considered an optimum weighting tripod?<br>

Is 5 lb heavy enough to be stable?<br>

What do you think about buying used?</p>

[mizore]

<p>Look at the various used Manfrottos. If you're working from a car, consider a Berlebach wooden tripod. If you're backpacking some days but not primarily a backpacker, consider getting a good set of used legs rated to hold twice or three times what your camera and heaviest lens weighs. You might want to put the money in a better ballhead (several suggestions on that; cheapest of the good ballheads is the rather quirky Acratech Ultimate ballhead). If you're mainly working from a car and in your house or studio, but want a more portable tripod for camping, consider getting the heavier tripod first, then look for a 3001/190X series Manfrotto for a fairly light hiking tripod in aluminum. Carbon fiber will be lighter.</p>

[david_smith35]

<p>Actually, the weight of a tripod is less important than making sure you are using mirror lock up when making an exposure.</p>

[colin_elliott]

<p>Nick,<br>

For not too much money ($125.new) I would suggest a Tiltall. You can get one used for less.<br>

If you can find a used Leitz version, so much the better.<br>

I use one of these with my Contax 645. Rock Solid and around 6 lbs.</p>

<p>Q.G. is right when he talks about mass and weight being a necessity of a tripod, but in addition and of equal importance is the engineering and construction of it. All the weight in the world wont help you if it's sloppy and lacks torsional stability, as many cheap and not so cheap ones do.</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>"Actually, the weight of a tripod is less important than making sure you are using mirror lock up when making an exposure" - Not necessarily.</p>

<p>I recently took some shots using a 1000mm Reflex-Nikkor lens, which unsurprisingly turned out to be <em>very</em> sensitive to vibration. I used the same setup that had previously been successful with refracting lenses up to 600mm, but now I found that at shutter speeds longer than 1/500th of a second all of the shots suffered from some degree of shake. This was on a sturdy tripod using a wireless release, mirror up or otherwise and with very little wind or air turbulance to factor in. The rig just burst into shutter induced vibration whether the mirror was locked up or not, and the only solution was to pump up the ISO rating and raise the shutter speed to 1000th of a second.</p>

<p>I still haven't figured out the physics of it, but there was a very marked difference between even 1/400th of a second and 1/500th. Shots at 1/400th were consistently almost unusable and at 1/500th and above there was no detectable shake. I can only put it down to a resonance effect that's completely independent of the mirror movement. This was using a Nikon D700, BTW. I dread to think what the blast-off of a Bronica shutter would have done!</p>

[mizore]

<p>Rodeo Joe -- medium format cameras and lenses tend to be heavier and less vibration prone than 35mm equipment (I have been shooting today with a 400mm f/5.6 Nikkor which is very light and long and which is quite prone to vibrations). People can use lighter tripods with heavier gear sometimes (I've heard of a man using a Bogen/Manfrotto 3001 with a view camera). Long lenses aren't as common with medium format as they are with 35mm and equivalent digital. Most medium format cameras do have mirror lockup and a fair number have iris shutters.</p>

<p>The 1000 reflex Nikkor has a small mirror inside the main lens which has to be small enough not to create artifacts. The suspensions for this may be the problem.</p>

[david_smith35]

<p>I dread to think what the blast-off of a Bronica shutter would have done!<br>

Well</p>

<p>"I dread to think what the blast-off of a Bronica shutter would have done"!<br>

Well, I do actually use a Bronica, and if you use the mirror lock up facility (which I do as a matter of course) the amount of vibration (and noise) from the leaf shutter in the lens is practically nothing. However, if you have a camera with a focal plane shutter, then things are a little different.</p>

<p> </p>

[david_smith35]

<p>"Really heavy is what anybody wants who understands why and how tripods work."<br>

And anybody who doesn't walk more than 500 yards from there car......</p>