-
Cameraderie, a friendly photography forum, join now for free!
This is the tripod I use, wouldn't say I use it to get maximum sharpness, but it's light-weight and has never failed me yet!
Manfrotto 732CY M-Y Carbon Tripod by Taz Spin, on Flickr
Manfrotto 732CY M-Y Carbon Tripod by Taz Spin, on Flickr
I think with tripods a big, strong and heavy metal one is the most stable - but no one wants to carry that around, right? So you have to balance weight and size against the probability you will transport and use it.
Since the XE1 is quite light you can get a rather light-duty tripod (and head) and not worry too much about it. If you shoot a lot in the wind, get a tripod that has a center post hook so you can better stabilize it with a weight like your bag.
Since the XE1 is quite light you can get a rather light-duty tripod (and head) and not worry too much about it. If you shoot a lot in the wind, get a tripod that has a center post hook so you can better stabilize it with a weight like your bag.
bilzmale
Hall of Famer
- Location
- Perth, Western Australia
- Name
- Bill Shinnick
Tripods need to be stable, lightweight and inexpensive - common wisdom is that you usually have to settle for two of these three. Eg a cheap tripod is often light in weight but stability is sacrificed. Expensive tripods as used outdoors are typically stable and can use lightweight materials like carbon fibre.
I've found the Manfrotto range to be good.
I've found the Manfrotto range to be good.
To make Bill's point:
Big, heavy, strong, inexpensive, large
Gear Porn 03 by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr
Medium size, medium weight and medium costs
Bare Neccessities by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr
Small, expensive, light weight
Gear by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr
Big, heavy, strong, inexpensive, large
Gear Porn 03 by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr
Medium size, medium weight and medium costs
Bare Neccessities by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr
Small, expensive, light weight
Gear by Photos By 夏天, on Flickr
- Location
- Jersey Shore
- Name
- Steve
Remember, when calculating the strength of your tripod and head, to take into consideration not only the weight of your camera body but the heaviest lens you will use on it. It's not a bad idea to go one notch up after that. I say that because many ball heads have a habit of sagging just a bit after time - even though they are rated for the weight they are holding.
Not to hijack this thread - it might even help the OP - but does anyone have any thoughts on the cost-benefit ratio of carbon-fiber tripods versus traditional steel? I've had a metal Manfrotto for years but it is on the heavy side.
Not to hijack this thread - it might even help the OP - but does anyone have any thoughts on the cost-benefit ratio of carbon-fiber tripods versus traditional steel? I've had a metal Manfrotto for years but it is on the heavy side.
Joey Wilson
Regular
Everyone has their own ideas about tripods, as it should be. But I can recommend this: Check for used ones. I've recently bought some '70's vintage Vivtar tripods, Made in Japan, fabulous quality, two (the monstrous 1321, and the smaller 1240), both as new for less than 50 bucks total. These are sentimental faves for me for personal reasons. But while I was tripod shopping, there's lots of EBay and CL listings on any and every brand you can think of for way less than new. And if they're like new and complete, why not?
- Location
- Newcastle, NSW, Australia
- Name
- Sue
I have two tripods. One is a lightweight Manfrotto, which is ideal for compacts and the X100, the other is a more solid Inca brand. Both have ball heads, but they aren't fancy or expensive by any means. I just look for stable and reasonably light.
