Tripod

[aee]

How to choose the right tripod for youself what are the points to consider. Camera is a Sony HX300 50zoom

[Manfred M]

How to choose the right tripod for youself what are the points to consider. Camera is a Sony HX300 50zoom

It depends on what you are planning to use it for (I own four tripods), each one is used for specific types of photography. The smallest lightweight one is used when I'm hiking with my mFT camera, the medium one serves the same roll for my full-frame DSLR or for more difficult shots with the mFT body. My expensive, large tripod is used for really critical work where I can't have any camera motion what so ever, even when shooting long (measured in minutes) exposures. The video triopd is used for video work. All my tripods other than the video one are carbon fibre (low weight and high strength). All my tripods use quick release plates (these are attached to the camera and mounting and removing them from the tripod is fast and accurate. I use a ball head on the non-video tripods and a damped fluid panning head on the video unit.

Important considerations are the height the tripod will go to (without the column), type of clamps, number of sections, diameter or the legs, weight, type of clamp (Arca-Swiss is the most "universal" design). etc. etc.

Good tripods are not inexpensive but will last a lifetime. Poor ones are an exercise in frustration and won't get much use.

[rpcrowe]

I totally agree with Manfred's observations. I own four tripods also.

However, I think that perhaps a decent medium weight carbon fiber tripod with a decent ball head might be suitable for most photography.

One thing that I don't like in a tripod are braces between the legs and center column. These interfere with getting the tripod down to very low levels. However, many video tripods are so equipped...

I seldom extend the center column to any great degree because, with most tripods, extending the center column reduces solidity.

I definitely would always use a quick release on my head. I personally prefer the Arca Compatible type of QR along with an L bracket for camera/lens combinations that do not include a tripod ring. This keeps the weight of the camera/lens directly over the apex of the tripod, not hanging over the side when in the portrait configuration.

A tripod that articulates will help you place the camera in proper positions for some close up shots.

My heavy tripod is a Giottos 8189 which is no longer produced. With a Giottos ball head the tripod combination weighs about 8.5 pounds. Not terribly heavy but, not something I enjoy carrying on boonie treks. I have a lighter weight tripod for that. Here are my two primary tripods...

[Polar01]

Awstin, this is one of the best articles on what to look for when thinking of getting a tripod, as Manfred has stated different tripods for different uses. Here is the link another CiC member posted it before forget who that way however it is a most excellent read. If you start to think I do not need as this info, you are wrong you do need it as it is the only way to help make an informed decision.

http://www.canadiannaturephotographer.com/tripod.html

Cheers: Allan

[aee]

Cheers I can see the reasoning behind multi tripods. New to the hobby a true greenhorn. Thanks

[jcuknz]

I have or have owned several tripods over the years but the one which gets used most is now 50 years old. At the time it cost me NZP 10 'sale price' which was about two thirds the basic weeks wage I was on at the time 1963. It is NOT a good tripod but one learns how to cover for its possible deficiencies. It is a Master by Slick. A couple of years ago buying a tripod basically for my son in the States I paid US$ 120 for a Slick on Amazon and was very disappointed. True I made it work for me but I told my Son I had bought junk .. though even junk can be useful if you do not use the centre column and use the 10 second release ... But I guess you have a DSLR so will need something sturdier than either what I originally bought and my US purchase.
The first tripod I ever bought [c1953] cost me less than a UK pound and was a war surplus Heliograph stand with metal legs about 30" high to which I fitted a Pan and Tilt Head which COST me

[John 2]

It depends on what you are planning to use it for (I own four tripods), each one is used for specific types of photography. The smallest lightweight one is used when I'm hiking with my mFT camera, the medium one serves the same roll for my full-frame DSLR or for more difficult shots with the mFT body. My expensive, large tripod is used for really critical work where I can't have any camera motion what so ever, even when shooting long (measured in minutes) exposures. The video triopd is used for video work. All my tripods other than the video one are carbon fibre (low weight and high strength). All my tripods use quick release plates (these are attached to the camera and mounting and removing them from the tripod is fast and accurate. I use a ball head on the non-video tripods and a damped fluid panning head on the video unit.

Important considerations are the height the tripod will go to (without the column), type of clamps, number of sections, diameter or the legs, weight, type of clamp (Arca-Swiss is the most "universal" design). etc. etc.

Good tripods are not inexpensive but will last a lifetime. Poor ones are an exercise in frustration and won't get much use.

If I may, I would like to piggy back on this post with a Q that Awstin might find useful also. I have a medium range Manfrotto tripod to which I very soon added their larger grip ball head. Very quick to use and great for a camera and standard lenses. However, I'm finding it a bit clumsy with the much heavier load of the Tamron 150-600mm. I am therefore looking gimbal and fluid heads as an alternative, particularly for BIF. The gimbal solution is a given I guess but a fluid head in theory looks attractive because it might replace rather than supplement the grip ball head - but I have no experience to fall back on. Most grateful for any advice.

[Manfred M]

If I may, I would like to piggy back on this post with a Q that Awstin might find useful also.

John - I have never shot with a gimbal head, so I would leave answering that part of the question to others. On the other hand I've done a lot of work with a fluid head and can certainly clarify the applicability of this type of head.

Fluid heads were designed for use in video work to give the shooter the ability to smoothly tilt (up and down motion) and pan (side to side motion) the camera. The head has a viscous damping mechanistic (think shock absorbers in a car) that smooths out all the little bumps along the way. They also have an adjustment that nicely balances the camera / lens combination so that everything more or less is balanced while sitting on the head.

Is this something desirable for shooting stills? I would suggest not as smooth tracking is unlikely going to be of benefit when shooting stills. You want to be able to follow the wildlife or sports action quickly, and the fluid head will definitely prevent that from happening. So if you are planning to shoot video with your long lens, then yes, it should be a consideration, but not for still photography.

[John 2]

.............................. You want to be able to follow the wildlife or sports action quickly, and the fluid head will definitely prevent that from happening. ..............................

That's what I needed to know. Thank you Manfred. A gimbal head it is. Sadly they tend to be the more expensive. Don't know why. Fluid mechanisms must be more time consuming to assemble.

[Polar01]

John also think cold, I believe that is does get rather cool in England compared to here, if the fluid was oil and it was close to or near 0C what happens to the oil in the head it becomes thicker thus smooth movement would be hard to get.

Cheers: Allan

[Manfred M]

John also think cold, I believe that is does get rather cool in England compared to here, if the fluid was oil and it was close to or near 0C what happens to the oil in the head it becomes thicker thus smooth movement would be hard to get.

Cheers: Allan

Allan - that really depends on the design of the viscous head.

I've shot video in the winter at temperatures well below freezing without any issues. My Libec video head is rated at -40°C to 60°C, and while I have not shot at those extreme temperatures, I have shot at -25°C (Canadian winter) to around 40°C (African summer) and it worked well under those conditions.

[Polar01]

You are so right Manfred "that really depends on the design of the viscous head", as your video head is designed to work over a large temperature range. Looking at different heads, I found that most do not give a temperature range, unless looking at those in the higher price brackets. I strongly believe most people would not even think about the temperature range that they might use the head in, or even sales people talking about it before purchase in those smaller stores that might sell those types of heads. It all breaks down to being an informed buyer and doing the research needed. You Manfred are one of those buyers, who does the research, myself I do not need such a type of head, it was your statement (think shock absorbers in a car) that I though about oil or some other fluid that would thicken up in the cold. Good info.

Cheers: Allan

[Milt]

A gimbal head may be used for any sort of still photography, but it is most useful for sports and action photography. I think that they are most useful if a leveler is included in the installation, tripod, leveler, gimbal head. A good quality gimbal head, a Jobu or a Wymberly, is very smooth when used in combination with the friction controls provided, and will lock into any position and the lens and camera are perfectly balanced allowing free movement in all directions after it is leveled. My experience is primarily photography of equestrian events, birding, and other nature shots.

[rpcrowe]

That's what I needed to know. Thank you Manfred. A gimbal head it is. Sadly they tend to be the more expensive. Don't know why. Fluid mechanisms must be more time consuming to assemble.

IMO, gimbal heads are specialty heads for use generally with long lenses for wildlife and or sports photography. IMO, they are not general purpose tripod heads!

Fluid heads are no more difficult to use than any other head but, are designed for dampening any irregularities and making pans and tilts smooth. The problem with most fluid heads is that they are primarily designed for use with video or cinema cameras, therefore do not have a convenient way to use a still camera in the vertical position. Obviously, video and or motion picture photography is not done in the vertical format.

For general purpose use, I would recommend either a ball head or a pan-tilt head. Again, I wish to stress that if you shoot with your camera in the portrait (vertical) position, the use of an Arca Compatible quick release on a ball head will actually allow you to make use of a lighter weight tripod and head because the weight of the camera is always directly over the apex of the tripod, not cantilevered over to the side.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4iOxH5vyCo

[DanK]

With all due respect, I think this thread may be getting way ahead of the OP, with discussion of buying multiple tripods, gimbal heads, and viscous heads. He is looking for a tripod for a fairly lightweight camera without interchangeable lenses.

I own a single tripod with two heads (not counting one that I replaced recently).

I think the starting point should be Manfred's question: what are you going to use this for? The second question in my mind is weight. If you want stability at all costs, heavier is better. If you have to lug it in your back, light is better, particularly if your back, like mine, has seen better days.

In my case, I new I wanted light weight (I hike up mountains with mine), although I did buy one with a hook for a weight bag, which helps offset the lesser stability of lightweight legs. I decided on carbon fiber (light, strong, less vibration than aluminum). Quite a number of companies sell quite good CF tripods at moderate prices, but they differ in features. I ended up creating a spreadsheet with all of the features, indicating which had which. I bought an Oben, but there are others of reasonable quality and similar price.

Which features matter? All depends on what you do. For example, landscape photographers often don't want a center post, or won't use it, because it is less stable then extending the legs. I do a lot of macro, for which a center post is nearly essential, and a reversing center post is extremely helpful so that I can get the lens almost to ground level:



As for heads: personally, I think compromising on heads is more of a problem than compromising on legs. A ball head is the most common option, and larger balls tend to be smoother, but larger balls are heavier. After much fussing, and after buying one cheaper head, I bought a Markins Q3 (not the head in the photo), which is reviews suggested is one of the smoothest small heads. It cost more than my tripod legs, but I love it. I find it fully adequate for all of what I do, other than some macro work for which I use a geared head.

All of my stuff is arca-swiss compatible. not the cheapest option, but extremely flexible.

However, your mileage will vary. It all depends on your uses and priorities.

[xpatUSA]

With all due respect, I think this thread may be getting way ahead of the OP, with discussion of buying multiple tripods, gimbal heads, and viscous heads. He is looking for a tripod for a fairly lightweight camera without interchangeable lenses.

+1

I use a Giottos carbon fiber 3-section goes up to 6ft without extending the center column. The center column can be pulled up and swiveled down to horizontal. The legs can be splayed out to almost flat. It is the cheaper "Silk Road" model made you-know-where. On top, I have their medium size ball head with a quick-release shoe and one quick-release slider for each of my cameras. Additionally I bought spike shoes but haven't used them yet (sandy soil round here).

I consider that set-up really good value for the money.

I have a shorter Giottos aluminum model which I use for table-top/low subjects work, with the same head arrangement.

[Manfred M]

With all due respect, I think this thread may be getting way ahead of the OP, with discussion of buying multiple tripods, gimbal heads, and viscous heads. He is looking for a tripod for a fairly lightweight camera without interchangeable lenses.

True, but my response (and the ones following it) were to John's supplemental question (item #9).

[DanK]

True, but my response (and the ones following it) were to John's supplemental question (item #9).

Got it. I wasn't being critical. Just wanted the OP not to be thinking that he needs this level of equipment right now.

[JBW]

How to choose the right tripod for youself what are the points to consider. Camera is a Sony HX300 50zoom

Awstin, you have received excellent advice about some excellent products. I use a 'Slik U8000. I primarily shoot bugs and flowers. It does not allow for getting right down to the ground but then neither does my back. It is also not so good for shots of moving birds or butterflies.

But it does a good job at a reasonable price. If you are shooting mainly stationary shots between your knees and your head it might work for you too.
brian