Tripod advice for 5D

[charles_clark1]

<p>I seek some advice about a tripod to use with my cameras. First, about 90% of my shooting is landscape stuff. My photography almost always involves miles of hiking. I have 2 cameras. An EOS 3 and a 5D. I have 4 lenses. 17-40, 24-105, 70-200 f4, and 100 f2.8 USM. I don't have a big telephoto and really don't have an urge to get one. Oh, and I currently have a Manfrotto 3221 WN tripod with a Kirk BH-3. (That combination is a little over 7 pounds!)<br>

With that as background, I plan to upgrade (and down-weight) my tripod. I have been wrestling with choices. My choices right now are Gitzo GT 2830 Basalt, GT 2531, GT 1830 Basalt, and GT 1531. The 1 series are attractive because of their weights, but I do not know if they are enough tripod for my camera/lens combinations. The 2 series offer more wieght capacity at the cost of more tripod weight and much more money.<br>

One last thing I need to add. I live in northern Alabama. Theer are no camera stores anywhere near here that stock Gitzo. As much as I would like to handle the different tripods, I don't think that is feasible for me.<br>

Does the group think that the 1 series are sufficient for my needs? Thanks for the counsel.</p>

 

[ed_okie]

<p>Charles, the first two lenses you have, 17-40 and 24-105 have no means of tripod mounting; the camera itself has to be directly mounted on the tripod (a Swiss-Arca type bracket is best). Unfortunately, the weight distribution (nose heavy) ends up not over the vertical center-line of the tripod which is better for stability. [i own all of these lenses plus the 5D and 50D]<br>

Your other two lenses require special (extra-cost) tripod mounting rings, neither is cheap, but you end up with a solid and balanced camera-lens combination. Unfortunately the mounting rings are not compatible, you have to buy two different versions. The mount ring for the 70-200 f/4 is compatible (identical) with a possible future-buy 400mm f/5.6<br>

Now back to square one: "my photography almost always involves miles of hiking..."<br>

You're carrying way too much gear, unnecessary lenses. The 24-105 and 70-200 will take care of 99% of your needs. For occasional macro work get yourself one lens extension ring, say 36mm.<br>

If you're dead-serious and determined about carrying all lenses plus two bodies... the weight issue of the tripod (or that of buying a flimsy one) is out of perspective and context to what you're trying to accomplish. Possibly you need to rethink your objectives. Likewise, one camera body is more than adequate.</p>

[charles_clark1]

<p>Ed,<br>

I should have been more clear. I listed what I own, not what I carry. Depending on the daily plan, I carry one of 3 configuratinos. First is the 17-40 plus the 70-200. Second is the 24-105 and the 70-200. Third is just the macro lens. I only carry one camera. In fact, the EOS 3 is only used for night shooting with long exposures and an occasional outing with Velvia. I hike with a Lowepro Toploader bag and a Lowepro S&F vest and belt for the second lens and other required gear. <br>

I already have a 3rd party ring for the 70-200 f4. I don't have a ring for the macro, but really don't plan to get one either. I have not noticed that the camera has any problems with it.</p>

 

[carbon_dragon]

<p>I mount my 5D on an older Gitzo G1228 Mountaineer carbon fiber tripod with four sections for easy transport. I replaced the center pole with a small carbon fiber piece that doesn't move up, but also has less weight and put a Bogen 3262QR ball head on top. The result works well and is very light weight. You can't buy a 1228, but the 1228 has a 17.6lb load rating, is 52" with the center column down, and weighs 3.4lbs without the head. So that will give you a data point anyway. I'm sure there is a modern equivalent. I like Gitzo's screw tighten system and the tripod has been very reliable over a number of years. The 5D typically has the 24-105/4L on it while mounted on the tripod (not a 300 or anything really heavy).</p>

[images_in_light_north_west]

Be careful not to go to light, I hike for miles and still take a G3130 and Kirk BH-1 with a 5D2 16-35 II, 24-105, 70-200 f4 IS, I learnt allready not to use to light a tripod, the above is fine if you use a good comfortable backpack and you are in reasonable shape.

Ross

[awahlster]

<p>weigh each setup you might put on this tripod double the weight of the heaviest setup and look for a tripod and head with a rating equal to that number. You will then have a safety factor of two and even if the tripod/head manufacturer used "lab tests" to determin the load you shoul be safe in the real world.</p>

<p>Also pickup a 2-3" long plate that will allow you to move the mounting hole of your camera body under the lens. This will help center the weight on the tripod.</p>

<p>I tend to hump around my Berlebach Wood tripod with me. I like to carry the pod over my shoulder and while it's heavy the wide flat legs with a modified seatbelt pad wrapped around it almost disappear on my shoulder. But then most of my hikes are less then 3 miles one way.</p>

[madwand]

<p>Look into the Benro Travel Angle series. E.g. the TRA-169. There are also carbon-fiber versions. It's very compact, relatively light, and expands a decent height for the compactness. The included head is cheap, but the alternatives tend to be bigger and heavier. You can use other heads of course. The legs are functional and decent for the price/size/weight.</p>

[charles_clark1]

<p>Thanks for the responses.</p>

 

[peter_e]

<p>Charles: I have similar equipment to yours, and four Gitzo CF tripods. I find that the Gitzo recommendations given in their product description are right on target. see <a href="http://www.gitzo.com">www.gitzo.com</a> E.g., a GT 1541 is recommended for up to 200 mm on a DSLR. For extra stability (high wind) go one class up. For extra weight saving, go one class down, although you may not want to extend the legs to full height in this case. Even a 0 series tripod works with a 5D with a short prime lens, or with a zoom when the legs are not fully extended or propped against a fixed object (tree). I personally prefer 4 leg sections over three for a more compact tripod. Select the height based on your height and use. For use on sloped surfaces, a taller tripod may be preferred. Based on the website description, you can safely buy a Gitzo tripod over he internet. I have returned once a non-Gitzo CF tripod because it did not meet the stated support capacity.</p>

[michael_sonshine]

<p>I was browsing through the forums looking for any information about the Gitzo Basalt tripods when I stumbled on this thread. I hope I am not intruding on a private conversation, but I have a comment (and question) about Gitzo.<br>

I have been shopping for a new tripod for my camera and lenses. The equipment I have is not very heavy. I own a Canon T1i with the Canon 18-200mm lens. I also own a Canon 50mm prime, a Manfrotto 486RC2 head and plan to buy the Sigma 150-500mm. None of these combinations are very heavy. The camera/18-200mm combination, along with the head, only weighs about 3 pounds. The camera/150-500mm combination (if I ever get the money to buy it), along with the head, would only weigh about 6 pounds.<br>

When I went to the Gitzo configurator and entered the data for the camera/head/18-200mm lens it listed the GT1830 and GT2830 as good tripods for that combination. But when I entered the data for the camera/head/150-500mm lens(including setting the focal length), it removed both of these tripods from the acceptable list.<br>

This puzzled me since the weights were well within the specified limits for both of these tripods. My first assumption was that the configurator was making some assumption about the lens being prime, but the combined weight was specified as 3 KG for the larger combination and it still pushed the two tripods off of the list.<br>

Since I travel to the National Parks often and like to hike carrying what I can, I wanted as light a tripod as possible given what I use. My first thoughts had been Manfrotto, but their carbon fiber tripods were too heavy. Then I thought of the Gitzo Basalt, but the configurator tells me not to use it with the 150-500mm lens. I was hoping that one of you might have some helpful information. If I can't use Manfrotto because it is too heavy and I can't use Gitzo Basalts because it they not stable enough, is there something else light and sturdy enough for me? Am I misreading the Gitzo information? I have not tried the Gitzo carbon because they are outside of my budget.<br>

Thanks for any help you can give me.</p>