Carbon Fiber vs Aluminum

[Carl in Louisiana]

I need some help as I'm looking at a new tripod, sometime in the future, and am a bit uneducated when it comes to the two materials used and for what reasons other than weight. Both tripods I am looking at have the same functions and features and same manufacturer. Is there something superior in carbon fiber over aluminum that would make it a better choice? If only 0.8lb is the difference in the two, I think I can handle the short distances I would be carrying around the extra weight for the savings. I can see if I were to be hiking or mountain climbing, then 0.8lb shaved would be a big difference at the end of the day.

Aluminum
0.8lb heavier
$190.00 cheaper than carbon fiber

Carbon Fiber
0.8lb lighter
$190.00 more than aluminum

[Manfred M]

Carl - I just bought another tripod recently and it is another carbon fibre one. Then I put a 862g / 1.9 lb ball head on it (the tripod weighs about 2.25 kg / 5 lb); this is meant for heavy duty shooting. I don't intend to carry it too far, but when I do, at least it will be lighter. I have a lighter (.4kg / .8 lb) ball head for those situations. I already have two light weight (really too small for the D800) carbon fibre tripods that are far better for travel as well as an aluminum video tripod (that I will replace with a carbon fibre one eventually).

Regardless, the carbon fibre is stiffer and is corrosion resistant (aluminum does NOT like salt, whether that be salt water or road salt), so those are two other advantages of carbon fibre. The only downside (other than the cost) that I can see with carbon fiber is the low weight, so I might carry a bit more ballast (a.k.a. my camera bag) on its hook to keep it stable. Being primarily resin, it is more comfortable to handle in extremely hot or cold weather.

As you can see, I really, really like carbon fiber. The only reason I would ever consider buying an aluminum tripod would be if I left it in a studio and did not have to transport it anywhere; and that is unlikely to happen.

[Polar01]

Carl it would help to know the models and make of the tripods to get a better idea than aluminum vs carbon fibre.

Cheers: Allan

[PhotomanJohn]

Carl - I went from a aluminum Manfrotto 055 to a carbon fiber one because of the better damping. I was having a heck of a time getting images with long telephotos as sharp as I thought they should be. I didn't do any good scientific comparisons but I seems that the new tripod is much less springy and the photos are sharper. Of course, extra weight hung on the tripod helps, maybe more so for the carbon fiber.

John

[Carl in Louisiana]

Regardless, the carbon fibre is stiffer and is corrosion resistant

Thanks Manfred,
So would carbon fiber be less prone to vibrations over aluminum?

[Carl in Louisiana]

Carl it would help to know the models and make of the tripods to get a better idea than aluminum vs carbon fibre.

Cheers: Allan

Thanks Allen,

I'm looking at the Manfrotto MT190XPRO3 and MT190CXPRO3.

[Carl in Louisiana]

Carl - I went from a aluminum Manfrotto 055 to a carbon fiber one because of the better damping. I was having a heck of a time getting images with long telephotos as sharp as I thought they should be. I didn't do any good scientific comparisons but I seems that the new tripod is much less springy and the photos are sharper. Of course, extra weight hung on the tripod helps, maybe more so for the carbon fiber.

John

Thanks John,

I will make a strong note on that observation. I may have to save a little longer just with the differences already posted.

[Andrew1]

I've used a friends carbon fibre tripod a couple of times and still prefer the aluminum one. The prime reason is it's has a bit more weight that doesn't move around in the constant wind I deal with. I just like the feel of it. My friend treats his like a baby, as do others, whereas mine gets used as the tool it's meant to be. I've had it for 20 years and it's done so well that I only recently added another with a horizontal arm for a possible sojourn into the macro world. Being 6 feet and well over 200lbs I don't have a problem carrying it around with a sling on the occasional trek through the woods. I do carry a monopod almost 100% of the time and use it regularly. If I somehow lost the tripod (it won't break) I might consider an equitable CF version but I don't have an excess of available discretionary cash and feel the $300 premium just isn't worth it to me.

Whichever you choose, stretch out your effort and make it the best one you can afford even if it hurts a little bit. It will serve your purposes for a longer period of time as you continue to develop your skills and equipment list.

[NorthernFocus]

Hey Carl. I've got the 190CX Pro4. It's really a nice tripod. Others have mentioned benefits of the carbon fiber. I'll add that it is more durable than the Al. Less subject to scratching, galling, bent/dented tubes, etc. The difference it price really is shocking. I've had mine for several years now and don't remember such a difference. But that was one of the first pieces of gear that I really splurged on

[Carl in Louisiana]

@ Andrew, Thanks
price started out making a big difference until I started learning more on the benefits of carbon fiber.

@ Dan, Thanks
I really like the looks of the newer 190 series. At first I was settled on the aluminum but thought maybe I should check with those more in the know and I am glad I did. The MT190CXPRO4 is just $20.00 more than the MT190CXPRO3. But now I feel like I am sitting straddle on the top row of a barbed wire fence.

[muls]

Carl
I have just gifted myself for the New year with a MT190CXPRO4 for less than US$ 350 from Dubai.
I love this tripod for its light eight and practical features.
Wish you and all the members Happy 2014 and joyful photography.
Cheers

[Carl in Louisiana]

Carl
I have just gifted myself for the New year with a MT190CXPRO4 for less than US$ 350 from Dubai.
I love this tripod for its light eight and practical features.
Wish you and all the members Happy 2014 and joyful photography.
Cheers

Thanks Murali
You sure picked it up at a good price there. Everyone I have seen here in the US wants $429.99 for that same tripod. Happy New Years to you and all the CiC members.

[Manfred M]

Thanks Manfred,
So would carbon fiber be less prone to vibrations over aluminum?

Yes, but that really depends on the tripod itself. I used two lightweight Benro units and I bought those when we were shooting with the fairly light D90 cameras (we have hauled the tripods and cameras all over the world). Part of the reason for the low weight direction was that I wanted to minimize the weight I carried because of severe arthritis in my foot.

Post surgery (and recovery) and after I bought the D800 with pro glass, I found that I needed (and was able to carry) a far more heavy duty Feisol CT-3372LV unit with a RRS BH-55 ball head. So, the light duty carbon fibre Benro units are not super rigid, but the Feisol, with its massive 1.5" diameter legs sure is.

Bottom line is that if you have "identical tripods", one with aluminum legs and one with carbon fibre legs, the carbon fibre will be more rigid.

To Andrew's point, the additional weight with the aluminum construction can be viewed as an advantage when trying to stabilize in windy conditions, but I find that the extra rigidity and damping of carbon fibre outweighs that advantage and I always hang my camera gear from the hook, regardess.

Just for the sake of comparison; this image shows the smallest diameter legs of both the small Benro and large Feisol. The Feisol is super rigid, while the Benro is not. Any guesses why?

[Polar01]

Carl I am going with what Manfred as I also use the Feisol but the four section leg, instead of the 3 section leg. With the ones that you are looking at figure in your height, as neither goes above 5ft, without using the centre column, remember when you rise that column you will be more shake in the tripod that will affect the camera and lens mounted on top. I found out the hard way and lost about two hours worth of images, that is when I switched to the Feisol CT-3472LV, with the Feisol ball head and camera mounted I never have to rise column, I am 6ft in height. Proper height is important as you do not want to have to bend over each and every time you take a shot.

Cheers: Allan

[Glenn NK]

In a cold climate, CF doesn't conduct the heat away the hands as quickly.

I live in a quite temperate climate (doesn't often go below freezing), so I often don't require gloves in the winter - the CF makes this possible. My previous tripods were Al and would cool my hands quickly.

CF looks cooler too.

[Black Pearl]

I've had several Manfrotto alloy tripods but my last two have been carbon and I wouldn't go back.
Simple numbers aren't enough to convey the drop in weight when you're carrying the thing around, the warmth in cold conditions is hard to describe but it is significant and in my opinion the extra cost is worth it.

I mate has just been to Switzerland on a ten day photo shoot and called into mine to beg my 055CXPRO3 over his basic 055 before he went. He is off out now to buy one.

[Colin Southern]

So would carbon fiber be less prone to vibrations over aluminum?

Yes.

[Carl in Louisiana]

Thanks everyone for your replies. I will put off buying and save for the carbon fiber. My old aluminum will continue to do for now. I wish everyone a HAPPY NEW YEAR!

[DanK]

Carl,

I actually think the choice of materials is the easier part. The harder part is choosing among the bewildering array of features. I finally created a spreadsheet, listing features on one side and (carbon fiber) tripods on the other. E.g., do you want a center post? If so, one that you can reverse? Or one that you can split? An articulating center post? Do you want a built-in hook for a weight? Maximum height, with and without the center post? Minimum height, for transportation? There are more, but I have repressed the memory. When I looked, there were lots of decent carbon fiber tripods priced between $200 and $300 at places like B&H, but none had everything I wanted, so it was a question of tradeoffs.

The other big decision is weight. That too is a compromise. I opted for light weight, because I hike with mine and have a bad back. Mine (a 3-section Oben) is intermediate in terms of leg width--the large sections are about 1" in diameter, and the smallest about 3/4". When I am out on a windy day, I would prefer a heavier one, but when I am lugging it up a mountain on my back, I certainly don't.

And, of course, then you get to heads...

Dan

[rpcrowe]

I cannot compromise on a single tripod; so I use two.

A full size Giottos MT 8180 tripod with Giottos ball head with Arca Compatible quick release. This is my main, go to tripod. It is solid, articulates and has some very nice features. However, despite being graphite, this tripod is a bit large and heavy for much travel and serious boonie tromping.



My back-up travel tripod is the Slik Pro 330DX modified with a short center column and a Flashpoint ball head with Arca Compatible quick release. At right around one-kilo, total, this little rig can support my 1.6x camera and 70-200mm f/4L IS lens, even in stiff breezes.



The downside is that this rig is quite short. In the interest of stability, I seldom extend the center column on this light weight tripod.



Whatever tripod/head you choose, I strongly recommend getting a head with Arca Compatible quick release system.



Although sometimes a bit pricey, the Arca Compatible Quick Release is great. Once you use one with a camera L bracket you will never go back to a standard ball head with which you need to hang the camera cantilevered over to the side for a vertical shot. I like the type of L bracket that is specific to the camera. Both Kirk and Really Right Stuff carry these brackets and have noticed that there are some Chinese copies on eBay. IMO, you can get by with a lighter duty tripod and head when using an L plate, since the weight of camera and lens is always over the top of the head, not hanging from the side. I use the Really Right Stuff L plates for my cameras.

Oh yes, I almost forgot. I do have a tiny Culliman 'table-top" tripod which weighs less than one pound. I bougth this for next to nothing at a rummage sale and equipped it with a spare A/C quick release. I seldom use it, but it cost me next to nothing and I will sometimes carry it along on a shoot when I don't take a "real" tripod...



While not a true work horse, the little Culliman can support a bit of weight. I leave my lens on IS when shooting with this rig. Accepting its limitations, the Culliman is nice, especially for the couple of dollars it cost me...