DSLRUsers.com

Theres been a lot of tripod talk lately- I've been looking to upgrade for a little while- probably go with Benro Carbon.

And I've been thinking- one of the major faults commonly cited with the cheapo tripods (those under $100) is being too light.
However when it comes to paying $300 lighter is a good thing. At what point do people think a tripod is too light?? the model I'm looking at is around 1.6 kg (legs only). Are we having double standards or is it more about rigidty than weight when it comes to having a stable platform?

Robert

carry a small bag with you and fill with rocks when in use hung under the tripod, some have a small hook for this, makes for a more stable shooting platform

Robert,

as Bernie said, put some weight on the tripod to stabilise it or your camera bag will also do. As you say, we don't want something too light and then we pay extra for carbon fibre because it is lighter

The thing with carbon fibre is also that it will usually absorb vibrations better then other materials. For example, the mirror slap of your dslr can induce vibration that can make your photo just that little bit less sharp.

For me, I actually have two good tripods: a car tripod and a bush walking tripod. Depending on where I'm going, I'll decide on one or the other.

Good luck in your quest

André

I don't believe the fault with cheap tripods is that they are too light. The fault is they are not sturdy enough. The requirement is for a sturdy tripod, i.e. one that won't move while you are taking a photograph. A tripod doesn't have to be heavy to be sturdy. Certainly, if you are using it in strong winds, extra weight can help, and that is where Bernie's recommendation comes in.

& when are they too heavy/bulky? when your tripod lives like mine - under the un-used table.

initially i used to use my dad's old Slik 500g tripod for my D70s & SB800.. the head would always creep under the strain but it did an alright job. i never expected much out of it, used the kit outdoors in gusty conditions

-j

It's not about outright weight per se, it's about how that mass is balanced or spread out. Especially if you mount a solid heavy head onto a set of flyweight legs, it then becomes top heavy, and when connected with additional masses of a light box attached to some glass, a moderate gust of wind could bring down your multiple thousand dollar investment to an end, amusing only to onlookers.

Any decent tripods will have a hook on the base of the idiot stick*, to be used as Bernie suggested - for hanging some mass to the end of to lower the centre of gravity and reduce the chance of everything tipping over.


Idiot stick = the centre column. The term deriving from the measurement of the idiocy of the operator in adjusting it. This is usually height adjustable on most tripods, but it is ill-advised to do so. The higher it is raised, the less support is offered to the camera, and more self-defeating the tripod becomes.

Onyx wrote:Idiot stick = the centre column. The term deriving from the measurement of the idiocy of the operator in adjusting it. This is usually height adjustable on most tripods, but it is ill-advised to do so. The higher it is raised, the less support is offered to the camera, and more self-defeating the tripod becomes.