travel tripods

[DanK]

A new kickstarter campaign for a Peak Design travel tripod got me thinking about getting a travel tripod that would be shorter and easier to pack than my regular one. The Peak Design looks interesting and has some novel features, but I am not willing to spend $479 (the Kickstarter discount price--the list will be $599) for a piece of equipment that no one has experience using.

One of the other carbon fiber tripods Peak Design uses as a comparison is the MeFoto Roadtrip. MeFoto has a number of models that one can buy for under $300, including a ball head.

I know that this won't compare with my regular tripod, an Oben that I paired with a Markins head. However, I wonder how usable this and other travel tripods are. For example, one reviewer complained that he didn't consider the one he bought to be stable enough for long exposures. Given that I do night photography, that would be a deal-breaker for me.

Anyone have either good or bad experiences with specific travel tripods?

I should add that I much prefer gear with arca-swiss compatible clamps because that is what I have on all of my equipment.

thanks

Dan

[Manfred M]

Dan - MeFoto, Benro and Induro are all made by the same company in the same factory in China. The rest is really just branding and distribution. The last time I looked at them, they use Arca-Swiss compatible mounts.

I own two Benro tripods and had the larger one along on my recent South America trip simply to save space and weight. As we were backpacking and on a group tour that involved transport by plane, private vehicle (anything from a mini-bus to a 4x4) as well as pubic buses (inter-city and local), so space and maneuverability were key considerations.

The downside is that travel tripods are not as stable, due to more segments and skinnier legs. They tend to be shorter to fold into less space, so you may have to use the column and bend over when using it. I was planning to shoot panos so I switched out the ball head for a larger one that I own (with better clamping force) and that worked well. I wasn't looking at doing anything fancy like exposures that ran minutes (or hours) so again, I could live with a bit less stability.

I missed my large Feisol Tripod and the large RRS ball head, but not taking it and sticking with the Benro was the right move. The only time I had a problem was at the Iguazu Falls. The walkways there were an open mesh / grid steel and the tiny tripod feet were so small that they went through the openings so I could not use a tripod to shoot there.

[Round Tuit]

Dan,
I have a MeFoto Roadtrip and I am generally pleased with it. Like all tripods, it looses a lot of stability if you extend the column. When I do, I always use a cable release to minimize the probability of movement. One factor that might be important is that I have "prosumer" crop frame camera which is much lighter than a full frame camera with a metal body.
I use it for all my photo stacking but the best test that I put it through is this panorama that I made a couple of winters ago. The smaller of the two cranes on the right hand side was about one kilometer away. It will give you a good idea of the stability that I was able to achieve with it.

http://web.ncf.ca/andre.lagace/CiC/O...orama%20II.jpg

P.S. Warning large file. This panorama is 15680 x 4335 pixels

[DanK]

Manfred and Andre,

thanks. (Andre: nice panorama.) your comments reinforce my hunch, which is that I would find it to be adequate under most circumstances but not ideal.

I use a light tripod as it is, because I usually end up carrying it substantial distances and sometimes hike with it. It's a four-section Oben (B&H store brand) carbon fiber unit that I paired with a Markins head. The Markins was one of the few small ball heads I could find that is really smooth despite its small size. This is fine in most circumstances, although under some conditions, e.g., in very windy conditions, I would like something heavier. It's light, but it is about 67 cm long with the head and 58 cm without it.

The height is an issue for me. I'm tall, and not having a stable center post would be a nuisance. Despite all the warnings about center posts, the post on the Oben is sturdy and very well damped, and I often use it extended even for long-exposure night photography. It sounds as though this might be iffy with a travel tripod.

Still, all in all, it sounds like a sensible purchase.

thanks again

Dan

[Tri Danimal]

DanK,

I posted the link to the travel tripod I use below. I use it all the time because I like the twist lock instead of the clip lock on my normal tripod. I like that the tripod was only $115 USD, it packs up to about 15" and it easily fits in my waterbottle pouch on my backpack as well as strapped to the bottom side of my waits pack for light quick days. My favorite part of the tripod is at its price it came with 2 lengths of center masts AND it has 3 leg angle positions for all different typed of imaging.

I captured this pano using the same tripod. I have not tried to capture night/long exposure images on it yet. I should be heading out to my astronomy clubs dark sky site this weekend so I can toss it in the truck and test it out while I waiting for my set up to thermally equalize ( i usually have 45 min to waste)





https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...?ie=UTF8&psc=1

[LePetomane]

Dan, you get what you pay for with tripods. I use mine more for my spotting scope than my camera. I have a Manfrotto 290 with a geared head. Cumbersome and fairly heavy. Actually I use my Manfrotto mini tripod a lot when hiking. It is fairly stable.

I had a Mefoto tripod fall apart on me.

[DanK]

Thanks for all the feedback.

I certainly understand that there is no free lunch with tripods. What I am thinking about is whether I can find a lightweight travel tripod that will be an acceptable compromise when I can't realistically take my main one--that is, one that won't fail to work too often. As it is now, I have two combinations: 1) my Oben with a Manfrotto geared head, which I use for macro work indoors but would never carry with me because of the weight; and 2) my Oben paired with the Markins, which isn't precise enough for macro work but is fine for outdoor work, and far lighter. What I am thinking about is whether I can find an even lighter and--particularly important--shorter combination that will suffice maybe 90% of the times that #2 would be sufficient.

What started me on this, apart from a likely trip to two or three countries in September, was this Kickstarter announcement of a new Peak Design travel tripod. It looks very interesting, but even the Kickstarter price is $479 US, which is a lot to pay even for a tried and true tripod, let alone for one that nobody outside of the company has ever used. It has created a lot of interest--they wanted to raise $500,000 via Kickstarter, and they have raised about $4,400,000 with 55 days to go.

[Manfred M]

What started me on this, apart from a likely trip to two or three countries in September, was this Kickstarter announcement of a new Peak Design travel tripod. It looks very interesting, but even the Kickstarter price is $479 US, which is a lot to pay even for a tried and true tripod, let alone for one that nobody outside of the company has ever used. It has created a lot of interest--they wanted to raise $500,000 via Kickstarter, and they have raised about $4,400,000 with 55 days to go.

Dan - I had a look at the Peak-Design kickstarter site and saw a few things in the design that throw up a bit of a red flag when I throw on my design / engineering / production processes hat.

1. The leg shape - I don't have an issue with the aluminum model, as that shape is easy to extrude, but that is not necessarily the case with the carbon fiber version.

Most carbon fiber designs are manufactured by wrapping a carbon fiber / resin mix over a form and building this up layer by layer (this is very much like the traditional process for building up fiberglas products). This process does not do well with relatively sharp edges like the ones shown in the image and delamination is definitely a risk. There is a different carbon fiber process called pulltrusion, which avoids some of these pitfalls (to a point), but the legs in the image don't have the surface look of a pulltrusion product. Anything can be done with low volume knock-offs, but the problems tend to crop up when these processes are run at production scale.

The other issue with the leg design, especially for a travel triopd is that a round tube is much better for clearing sand or other grit than can cause binding when collapsing a tripod in the field. Twisting the legs will often clear the contaminants out and allow the tripod to be opened or closed. The leg design prevents that from being done in both the aluminum and carbon fiber versions.

2. Ball head design - the clamping mechanism is is rather unorthodox and is located well away from the centre line of the ball itself. I have questions as to how well the design actually works and suspect that is more susceptible to "creep" than more traditional designs.

3. Centre column diameter - the centre column looks rather skinny when compared to the rest of the tripod (and other designs that this product is competing against). It looks like another source of instability.

While I love innovative designs, my concern is that this design is more driven by certain marketing parameters (i.e. small size / low weight) rather than features that will work in real life travel photography. It is a bit of a challenge to make a good assessment without having the tripod to test, there are enough red flags here that I would wait to see how well it works before buying one. The second generation is usually superior to the first generation and the "teething issues" new products tend to have.

[DanK]

Manfred,

Thanks. Very helpful. I did notice the center column. I didn't know about the manufacturing issues, but it did occur to me that the flatter the leg shape, the less resistant it is likely to be to flexion. I share your concern that the unorthodox design, while nifty if it works, may not work so well.

All of this would make me reluctant to make a pledge, even if they were not so expensive. They have a lot of pledges already, so reviews are likely to show up soon after they ship, but until then, it seems like a real roll of the dice.

Dan

Dan - I had a look at the Peak-Design kickstarter site and saw a few things in the design that throw up a bit of a red flag when I throw on my design / engineering / production processes hat.

1. The leg shape - I don't have an issue with the aluminum model, as that shape is easy to extrude, but that is not necessarily the case with the carbon fiber version.

Most carbon fiber designs are manufactured by wrapping a carbon fiber / resin mix over a form and building this up layer by layer (this is very much like the traditional process for building up fiberglas products). This process does not do well with relatively sharp edges like the ones shown in the image and delamination is definitely a risk. There is a different carbon fiber process called pulltrusion, which avoids some of these pitfalls (to a point), but the legs in the image don't have the surface look of a pulltrusion product. Anything can be done with low volume knock-offs, but the problems tend to crop up when these processes are run at production scale.

The other issue with the leg design, especially for a travel triopd is that a round tube is much better for clearing sand or other grit than can cause binding when collapsing a tripod in the field. Twisting the legs will often clear the contaminants out and allow the tripod to be opened or closed. The leg design prevents that from being done in both the aluminum and carbon fiber versions.

2. Ball head design - the clamping mechanism is is rather unorthodox and is located well away from the centre line of the ball itself. I have questions as to how well the design actually works and suspect that is more susceptible to "creep" than more traditional designs.

3. Centre column diameter - the centre column looks rather skinny when compared to the rest of the tripod (and other designs that this product is competing against). It looks like another source of instability.

While I love innovative designs, my concern is that this design is more driven by certain marketing parameters (i.e. small size / low weight) rather than features that will work in real life travel photography. It is a bit of a challenge to make a good assessment without having the tripod to test, there are enough red flags here that I would wait to see how well it works before buying one. The second generation is usually superior to the first generation and the "teething issues" new products tend to have.

[rpcrowe]

I use a Slick Pro 330DX ( http://www.thkphoto.com/products/sli...ro330dx-a.html ) modified with optional shorter center column and Flashpoint F-1 Arca Compatible Magnesium ball head. These modifications reduce the weight of the tripod/head from the OEM 3-pounds 8-ounces to a lightweight 2-pounds 4-ounces. The tripod collapses to 23.5 inches. It comes with foam leg covers.

Here is the modified tripod next to my full-size Giottos tripod...


I have used his tripod/head combination in the Canyonlands of Utah with some fairly stiff breezes blowing and it held my Canon DSLR camera and 70-200mm f/4L IS lens quite steady.


However where this combination really comes into its own is with my Sony Mirrorless APSC cameras...

The one drawback of this unit is that it is fairly short. I don't use the center column to extend its height.


I have used this combo for many years and it originally cost me about $150 USD. I have looked at many different travel tripods but am quite satisfied with this one...

[DanK]

Richard,

thanks for the suggestion, but that wouldn't be an improvement over what I have. The Oben folds down to 23" without the head and 26.4" with the head. It extends to 143 cm (56") without the center column and to 178 cm (66") with the head. Because the center column is very well damped, I can often use it, and with a camera added to the top, the eyepiece ends up almost at my eye level. (I'm 6'1", 185 cm). It's heavier than your modified one (1.45 kg or 3 lb 3 oz), but that weight difference doesn't matter that much to me. What I want is something considerably shorter when folded.

Dan

[rpcrowe]

As I was doing some shopping a George's Camera in San Diego, California, I noticed a travel tripod which looked fairly promising. This folds down to 40cm or 15.8 inches and has a recommended capacity of 10 pounds or about 4.5 kg. It weighs about 2.7 pounds or 1.25 kg. The tripod looks decently well made and the price is fairly reasonable at $170 USD.

http://shop.georgescamera.com/spec_sheet.html?catalog[name]=ProMaster-XC525-Professional-Tripod-with-Head---Black-%232696-Tripods-%26-Monopods&catalog[product_guids][0]=1110656

There are slightly more expensive carbon fiber versions of this tripod (XC-525C and XC-525CK) but, I have never seen one of these units. What is confusing is that the carbon fiber model is listed on Amazon.com as weighing more than the XC-525

I didn't look to see if the head had an Arca Compatible clamp. I always want my tripod to be so equipped.

A possible nice feature of this tripod is that one leg is removable and can be converted into a monopod. I don't know how well this concept works in reality but, it seems like a good idea for a person who likes to use both a tripod and a monopod but, hesitates to carry both when traveling...

I didn't look very hard at this tripod since Iam quite satisfied with my modified SLIK...

[Manfred M]

A possible nice feature of this tripod is that one leg is removable and can be converted into a monopod. I don't know how well this concept works in reality but, it seems like a good idea for a person who likes to use both a tripod and a monopod but, hesitates to carry both when traveling...

My Benro CT1691T has this "feature" and in my experience, unless the user is extremely short or is going to use it sitting down, is pretty useless.

The leg is a whole 47" long, fully extended. Add a couple of inches when the ball head is taken off the tripod, which requires an Allen key, and you are looking at a monopod that is just over 4ft tall. I tried it once, in a test situation. It's really not worth the effort as I found the whole setup virtually unusable.

I'm sure the feature helps the marketing people sell more tripods but I suspect the end user will do exactly what I did and won't bother using it again after trying it out.

[Round Tuit]

My Benro CT1691T has this "feature" and in my experience, unless the user is extremely short or is going to use it sitting down, is pretty useless.

The leg is a whole 47" long, fully extended. Add a couple of inches when the ball head is taken off the tripod, which requires an Allen key, and you are looking at a monopod that is just over 4ft tall. I tried it once, in a test situation. It's really not worth the effort as I found the whole setup virtually unusable.

I'm sure the feature helps the marketing people sell more tripods but I suspect the end user will do exactly what I did and won't bother using it again after trying it out.

My MeFoto Roadtrek also has this feature and it works because the removed leg screws on the center column making the monopod fully extended slightly over six feet. Too tall for me!