• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

tripod upgrade (1 Viewer)

jce

John
I am looking to upgrade my tripod to use various lenses from 17mm to 500mm.looking on other threads on this forum Gitzo seem popular but they are rather expensive.I was looking at Manfrotto either 190 series or 55 series.has anyone any experience of any of these any help would be greatfully received.

John
 
John,
Forget the 190, especially if you use a 500mm. The 055 is taller & stronger but also heavier (but not prohibitively so). Dont scrimp on your support. It is as important as your choice of lens or camera. A general rule of thumb i use is to work out the maximum weight you want to support, double it & look for a tripod & head combi in that range.
I own a Gitzo & Wimberley head. Cost an absolute fortune, but i wouldnt be without it!
 
I use a scope not a lens but my Manfrotto Magfiber 055 is wicked for the price I got it for. Tall, damps vibrations, strong and durable, just what I needed.
 
It depends a lot what you're putting on top - if you're using a Sigma/Tamron 500mm zoom lens than a Manfrotto 055 will be fine as support (also look at the Velbon 635 CF). However for a 500mm prime they really are at the limit. I used an 055 with a Sigma 500mm prime for a while and thought it was fine, that was until I tried it on a Gitzo. The difference was amazing, Gitzo are expensive but the support they give is second to none.
 
I have recently upgraded from the Manfrotto 055 proB to the Feisol CF 3372. What a difference :t: the Feisol is a lot more expensive but well worth it IMO. I never thought a decent tripod would make so much difference. There are several people who reckon the new Feisol range is as good as a Gitzo although I have never had a Gitzo so could not verify this.
 
I am happy with my Feisol CT-3372 as well and second Roys opinion. But I guess the lesser expensive Feisol CT-3371 should do the job also.
 
I use the Bogen/Manfrotto 055 Nat (metal, not fiber) and their 393 gimbal with my Canon 500mm f/4 IS. I cannot complain for the money. Fully extended, the tripod is a little shakey with the prime on it, but I don't use it that way in any event. I'm virtually always sitting on my little Walkstool, and extend only the middle segments (not the 3rd segments) and spread them out to the first snap wider/lower than the standard position. This puts it just the right height for sitting comfortably, and is quite stable when used this way.

I must admit the Wimberly, Jobu, etc. gimbel arms look more elegant than the 393, but unless you can justify the expense, they are simply outrageously expensive. Same holds true for the Gitzo tripods. Two of my friends have gitzo fiber legs and both of them are broken/cracked. Not necessarily the fault of the manufacturing, but it makes me leery of spending that kind of money for fiber legs if they seem so easily broken. Perhaps some day I will luck onto a steal of a deal for such kit when somebody wants to upgrade theirs, but I can quite well make do with what I have and glad to have it.

By the way, if you do get the 393 gimbel, take the rubber knob off and put some clear silicon under it, then put it back on. It'll keep it from accidently coming off the metal tension knob that it covers.
 
I am looking to upgrade my tripod to use various lenses from 17mm to 500mm.looking on other threads on this forum Gitzo seem popular but they are rather expensive.I was looking at Manfrotto either 190 series or 55 series.has anyone any experience of any of these any help would be greatfully received.

John

If you go down the Manfrotto route this seems a good deal

http://www.parkcameras.com/10351/Manfrotto-MN055XB-with-128RC.html

Perry
 
Warning! This thread is more than 15 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top