| Author | Post |
|---|
highlander
|
Having knackered another tripod...
Shopping beckons. Are Gitzo tripods really worth it? Seen a used basalt 1series with head for £300, which is a good price compared to new, but still a heck of lot of my money
Or I could get a Manfrotto 190Go (aluminium) for less than half that
|
Gilbert Sandberg
| Joined: | Tue Apr 17th, 2012 |
| Location: | Netherlands |
| Posts: | 196 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
H,
Some people adore Gitzo. (in part for their longlevity).
You should not compare prices of tripods made of metal and other materials.
I don't use my tripods to destruction, my Manfrotto's (more than one) are good enough for me.
Regards, Gilbert
|
jk
|
I only use Manfrotto tripods but there are other makes Gitzo, Benbo, etc that are all very good.
My Manfrotto 190 and CX serve me well and I couldnt recommend more highly.
|
Eric
| Joined: | Thu Apr 19th, 2012 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 4435 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
I have two Manfrotto (one is from the 190 stable) and they are all I've ever needed.
|
Robert
|
JK mentions Benbo, my smaller tripod is a Benbo, now made by Patterson (of darkroom fame) I think. The great advantage for me is the versatility and the fact that the lower legs slide over the upper legs, so if you stand it in mud or dirty water as I often do, the mud doesn't find it's way inside the legs. Thanks to a minor mod I have made, it can do double duty by making one lower leg slide off and using it with the upper arm to turn it into a short monopod.
I bought it about 1986 for my Bronica S2a. It's still in regular use, although one of the slide lock clamps should be renewed, I'm too tight to spend the aprox £15 for a new part, it still works well enough thirty years on.
I have looked at many tripods over the years, they are mostly either heavy, flimsy or very expensive or a combination of those. I feel the Benbo is a good compromise being fairly rigid, not too heavy and not too expensive, even now, thirty years on. The swivel mechanism at the top is very interesting being based on an old field gun undercarriage principle, it is a very robust and versatile joint.
I don't think an expensive, precision tripod would be suitable for robust use in the field. More of a showpiece or a studio thing.
A side note on alternative uses for tripods. I was photographing in a large botanic garden a couple of years ago when a couple turned up, both sporting top of the range Canon cameras with fast pro lenses and a huge bag full of gear on a trolly, they spotted a magnificent Magnolia tree but the best blooms were just out of range of their lenses, they discussed the solution, then reached for their largest tripod, hooked it onto the poor Magnolia branch and hauled it down to shooting range, photographed the flowers but unfortunately the branch snapped. Selfish cretins.
|
highlander
|
There are sadly far to many cretins these days
|
amazing50
|
Picked up a Manfrotto 410 on sale in the early 80's and used it today for my Combo 4x5. It easly holds 4kg -10lb. and is rock solid. Over the years I have purchased various heads and a few smaller and lighter and less steady units, but the old 410 keeps on going.
|
Iain
|
Just replaced my old (broken) tripod with a new Manfrotto from the 190 range. Good solid tripod.
|
novicius
|
Carbon Fiber is the way to go ..
|
Robert
|
Carbon fibre way too light.
Need a large, heavy tripod to achieve the aim of holding the camera rock steady in all (most) conditions. My Bronica S2a was wrecked by a puff of wind blowing my relatively heavy and well spread out Benbo tripod over.
Earlier this year I needed to tie the tripod to my car to prevent the tripod from blowing away. When it blows here it really blows!
|
