Looking for an inexpensive tripod for field work

[russell_t]

<p>Good Morning,<br>

I am looking for an inexpensive lightweight but decent tripod to carry with me when shooting either nature or something. Since I don't do this too often, I'm not interested in dropping too much money on it, but I want it to be steady. I just shoot a basic DSLR setup, so weight is not an issue.</p>

<p>Thanks!<br>

--Russell</p>

[carbon_dragon]

<p>Pretty tough to get sturdy, lightweight, and cheap in the same tripod. The old rule is pick any two. It is still mostly true, though it depends on your standards.</p>

[Matthew Currie]

<p>One possibility that's still a pretty reasonable price is the Slik 400 DX. It's gone up to about $130, and for that you get reasonably sturdy legs with good quick releases, a three way head that looks a bit small but works very well and smoothly, and a quick release pad on the head. The column comes apart for low shooting, and the legs are individually adjustable, making it useful for macros and the like. I used one for a long time and had good luck with it, and still use it from time to time in preference to my larger Manfrotto. </p>

<p>If you don't mind screw locking legs instead of quick releases, the Slik 300DX is similar (same head) and cheaper. If you need bigger, the 500DX is about the same price as the 400, and a good deal heftier, with a bigger head to match. A lot of bang for the buck in the 500, but it may be inconveniently heavy and tall if you're not very big yourself. B&H has good descriptions of all of them. Make sure you check dimensions. </p>

<p>I think Manfrottos are a bit better made, but the Slik is a real bargain. The 400 is pretty sturdy and still no too bulky to carry, and a nice height for a person of medium stature. </p>

<p>I have seen some Chinese ripoffs of the Sliks, even using the same quick release pads, but I don't think they're as well finished, and I don't know how smooth the head action is. </p>

<p> </p>

[dave_l.]

<p>What is your budget for the tripod and tripod head? What is your camera and lens setup? What do you shoot? How heavy is "lightweight" to you? It's hard to give good advice here without more guidance. </p>

[russell_t]

<p>David, that's kinda what I thought.<br>

Matthew, thanks for that info! I really was hoping to spend under $100 on this. I found a Manfrotto at Brands Mart for about $50 with the ball head, but wasn't completely crazy about it.<br>

Dave L., since I really won't use it too much, I can't justify spending over about $100 on it. I really don't want to spend that much. I have a Canon T2i and will be usually shooting either a 50mm, 85mm, or 15-85 lens - light weight stuff. I like to do hikes with groups and take pictures of the groups overlooking the mountain top, and want to get into longer exposure windows, where hand held won't suffice.<br>

Thanks!</p>

[dave_l.]

<p>Gotcha. I can recommend something like a Slik Sprint Pro for those requirements. I own one like that. Yes, it's a little flimsy. And yes, the ballhead isn't particularly good. But it IS very very lightweight and compact. I backpacked through Asia with one of those and an almost identical lens kit to the one you are suggesting. It's also my ultralight tripod for serious backcountry stuff. </p>

<p>I can tell you that for $100 you aren't going to be crazy about any of the tripods you try. </p>

[david_henderson]

<p>I recall the first tripod I ever bought. In all hensty the photographs I got with it were less sharp than I could get hand-holding. At you stated budget I'd look on eBay for a used Manfrotto 190/3001 and hopefully a decent three -way head from someone who has upgraded. That would not be flimsy- might be a little short, but not flimsy.</p>

[mukul_dube]

<p>I cannot accept "since I really won't use it too much, I can't justify spending over...". Unless, of course, you are willing to put up with inconvenience and instability and poor results on the rare occasions on which you will use it. My suggestion is a set of legs and a separate ball head. Good products can be had for surprisingly little money if you spend some time looking around.</p>

[JamesFarabaugh]

<p>I still use the only tripod I've owned - a Walmart purchase. It's light and cheap. Sturdy? Well I've never used it in a strong wind, but it's sturdy enough to get sharp 30-second night shots. I prefer it over the heavy manfrotto with pain-in-the-ass overly-stiff ball head that my friend lent me.</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>I had my Slik 500dx for over 5 years now. I paid $120 but it's going for about $99 nowat Adorama. It's pretty sturdy, but not exactly lightweight. I had the legs fall right off the body after minimal use. Also some screws needed tightening again after minimal use.<br>

Then again I had the same problem with some Manfrottos. Benro sells some pretty decent Carbon Fibers if you don't mind shelling out $200 or more. <br>

If you really want to go cheap, you can find some pretty decent no-name brands on eBay. I purchased one that turns into a monopod, and the legs can be adjusted every which way all for $79. Unfortunately, I had to throw away the head in the garbage because it was pure junk. Otherwise I had this tripod for 10 years and never had to tighten anything. </p>

[dave_reichert1]

<p>Tiltall.</p>

[kuzzy]

<p>FWIW, If you want inexpensive and it will not get much use, I bought a Slik F143 for about $20 to take on a vacation trip just to use in a pinch. I was not expecting much but it is very small (+1) and very inexpensive (+1) and if it was not usable or if there was no room in luggage to make the return trip I was just going to leave it behind. At $20 it was disposable as far as I was concerned. I was not taking any big heavy lenses or planning on shooting macros so I figured it would be sturdy enough. I still have it and it did the job for me. It is built fairly well considering the price. Good luck with your search.</p>

[jim_jones3]

<p>I'm with Dave Reichert. Unlike many of today's cameras, a good tripod is a lifetime investment. The original Tiltall was designed and built to work well over a long lifetime. Most are still doing that. I have several tripods, but almost always use a Tiltall.</p>

[Matthew Currie]

<p>I agree with Dave too. If you find a nice tripod with a head and quick release mount that you like, you may well end up using it more than you expect. It can often make a small but significant difference in clarity even when you could get away with hand holding, and it allows the use of low shutter speeds when great depth of field is required, as often happens with landscapes.</p>