Manfrotto is ruling? (1 Viewer)

jebir · Apr 8, 2004

Hi group.

I am now a happy owner of a very impressive piece of glass - an Optolyth 100 APO TBS !

On my old tripod (Velbon from the 70's), this scope looks like a pumped bodybuilder on high heels! I hardly dare to let it balance on it and taking it outside feels like bringing out a breed race horse in the winter forrests of Sweden to pull lumber.

Now, I have searched for some good sturdy tripods and it appears as Manfrotto rules here. I have a couple of offers on a second hand Manfrotto 144B (which I don't know anything about), a 055CLB. Are these essentially the same tripods?

I have also found a wooden Stabil 2. However, as far as I can figure out, it doesn't have any central post which I find quite handy.

Then there is the option of new tripods where I wonder if Manfrotto 190 is sturdy enough? A light tripod wold certainly ease the burden of the scope somewhat but I am not sure if it will be good enough.
I have also found the Radian Tripod Pro GT which pretty much seems to be equivalent to Manfrottos 190 but much cheaper.

I would be more than happy for any points of views on the mentioned tripods. I will make up my mind during easter. Until then I will have to balance my macho-scope on high heels...

With best regards, Jens.

scampo · Apr 8, 2004

If you are tall (I'm 1.90+), you will find the 055 (any of them) perfect; add on a new 190RC head and you have a very fine tripod indeed. The 190 is not so high.

jebir · Apr 8, 2004

scampo said:
If you are tall (I'm 1.90+), you will find the 055 (any of them) perfect; add on a new 190RC head and you have a very fine tripod indeed. The 190 is not so high.

Hi Steve,

I am only 1.75 and my wife is even shorter so I could trade some height with weight if possible.

190RC you say? I didn't find it on Manfrotto's home page. Do you mean the 700RC? which I think is a quite new design?

Cheers, Jens.

scampo · Apr 8, 2004

I did mean 700RC - silly me! Anyhow - it's a lovely tripod head, light and v-e-r-y smooth in action. Ideal for their crazily expensive CF range, but very nice atop a 190, too!

Andy Bright · Apr 9, 2004

I think the new 700rc head may be a bit too lightweight for a scope as big and heavy as the Optolyth 100, though it's fine with many new lightweight scopes (technically the 700 should hande up to 2.5kg load).... i'd suggest the common all garden 128rc. If you ever fancy a bit of digiscoping, then you may have to think about the 501 head with that scope.

Regards,
Andy

jebir · Apr 9, 2004

Andy Bright said:
I think the new 700rc head may be a bit too lightweight for a scope as big and heavy as the Optolyth 100, though it's fine with many new lightweight scopes (technically the 700 should hande up to 2.5kg load).... i'd suggest the common all garden 128rc. If you ever fancy a bit of digiscoping, then you may have to think about the 501 head with that scope.

Regards,
Andy

Andy,

thanks for that input relating to the specific scope I have.

I will indeed do quite a bit of digiscoping with the scope and counting weight, I get close to about 3.5 kg for scope+eyepiece+camera and adpters. So that definitely rules out the 700.

Do you favour the 501 for digiscoping because of the sliding attachment plate? (BTW, does it slide forward as well as backward?)

There are affordable kits which includes the head 141RC. It has a 6 kg load capability but is designed in another way than the 700 and 128. Does anyone have any experience with the 141?

Is there any difference between 190 vs 055 tripods except for the height? Does anyone know if the leg profiles are of the same dimensions?

Cheers, Jens.

william j clive · Apr 9, 2004

jebir said:
Andy,

Is there any difference between 190 vs 055 tripods except for the height? Does anyone know if the leg profiles are of the same dimensions?

Cheers, Jens.

Hi Jens

The legs on the 190 are of smaller diameter than the 055 and 144. I am a wedding photographer and use the 190 to support a medium format camera and metz 60 flashgun with no problem at all. I have increased the height of the 190 by the simple addition of a 290 centre column that is about 100mm longer.

Clive

Steve G · Apr 9, 2004

Hi Jens,
Before commiting yourself take a look at Gitzo. The Gitzo carbon-fibre Mountaineer tripods are superb & very portable but with an amazing ability to absorb vibration. I use a G1348 for telescope, SLR photography (with a 500mm lens & 2x convertor) & for video. The central columns come separately & some have a basal hook to add counterweights (stones/rubble,etc). There is also a new series of Gitzos with a built in levelling device.
The downside is the price but then there is no point having an expensive monster telescope then mounting it poorly. Check: www.gitzo.com
Cheers,
Steve

GR Triever · Apr 9, 2004

Hi Jens,

I use the 055/128RC combo with a Zeiss 85/CP4500; as long as you don't mind dogging the thumbscrews down fairly tight it works fine.

GR

jebir · Apr 9, 2004

Steve G said:
Hi Jens,
Before commiting yourself take a look at Gitzo. The Gitzo carbon-fibre Mountaineer tripods are superb & very portable but with an amazing ability to absorb vibration. I use a G1348 for telescope, SLR photography (with a 500mm lens & 2x convertor) & for video. The central columns come separately & some have a basal hook to add counterweights (stones/rubble,etc). There is also a new series of Gitzos with a built in levelling device.
The downside is the price but then there is no point having an expensive monster telescope then mounting it poorly. Check: www.gitzo.com
Cheers,
Steve

Thanks Steve,

I agree that a Gitzo carbon fibre pod certainly would match my scope extremely well - I would love one!

However, being an amateur, I am generally skimming the second hand market here in Sweden in order to get the most affordable kit with a minimum of compromise. I found a second hand G1380 with head that was more expensive than the scope (also second hand). So, right now it seems like even a second hand Gitzo carbon fibre is beyond my budget.

Anyway, I'll keep my eyes open for a good deal.

Cheers, Jens.

Andy Bright · Apr 9, 2004

The 501 head is certainly a good head and you can slide the scope forward or backwards to get a better balance...it is a fairly heavy head for general birding at 1.5kg. I have my own balance bar that I can slide the scope along, so pretty much any head is o.k. for me.

I don't think you'd regret buying a 501... the 141 pan & tilt looks a little cumbersome to me, better off in a studio setting?

jebir · Apr 9, 2004

Andy Bright said:
the 141 pan & tilt looks a little cumbersome to me, better off in a studio setting?

Yes, it has the flipping type of mounting plate allowing a camera to be set in both landscape and portrait orientation - which means one more joint that can wobble.

On the other hand. If the handle that is used to lock the vertical movement could be replaced by a longer one, it would be really convenient to guide the scope and being able to lock that movement using only one hand.

I often feel that I need four hands when using a 128-type of head: One hand for each of the two locking screws, one for the focus wheel and one for guiding the scope...

I'll try to have a hands on look when I have the possibility to visit a well assorted store.

Cheers, Jens.

jebir · Apr 9, 2004

william j clive said:
Hi Jens

The legs on the 190 are of smaller diameter than the 055 and 144. I am a wedding photographer and use the 190 to support a medium format camera and metz 60 flashgun with no problem at all. I have increased the height of the 190 by the simple addition of a 290 centre column that is about 100mm longer.

Clive

Thanks Clive.

That is interesting - why didn't you just use a 290?

So the 190 is relly a less sturdy tripod. How about the 290 then? I see that it has 4 sections. Does anyone know if it has the 055 upper sections or the same as the 190? There are very affordable kits with 290+390RC at:
http://www.warehouseexpress.com/BinsandScopes/Tripods/Manfrotto1.html

That is even rated a higher load capacity than the 055+128RC (hard to believe...)

Cheers, Jens.

scampo · Apr 10, 2004

The 055 is easily the most stable of the three in my experience. I tried out the three models: 190, 290 and 055. Admittedly I am taller and need the height, but with the column raised a good deal, stability seemed to suffer with the 190 and 290.

scampo · Apr 10, 2004

My 055 only has one setting for its legs - I think Manfrotto make two or more models within each range.

GR Triever · Apr 10, 2004

scampo said:
My 055 only has one setting for its legs - I think Manfrotto make two or more models within each range.

I was gonna bite the bullet and be the one to ask the stupid "are you sure" question, but then I decided to research it a little first.

Manfrotto does indeed make several variations on a model series, and in this case the -A (lightweight) versions of the 055 tripod legs are single leg position only.

GR

scampo · Apr 10, 2004

W-e-l-l... Not such a stupid question as I had to have a good look when I got it, having already used a 190 very briefly which did have legs that could be angled very low down.

Nope - so far as I can see, there is no way I can adjust the legs unless I am missing something (entirely possible!); there is no clip of any kind to press in as there was on the 190.

GR Triever · Apr 10, 2004

scampo said:
W-e-l-l... Not such a stupid question as I had to have a good look when I got it, having already used a 190 very briefly which did have legs that could be angled very low down.

Nope - so far as I can see, there is no way I can adjust the legs unless I am missing something (entirely possible!); there is no clip of any kind to press in as there was on the 190.

OOPS! Posts crossed... see my edited post from earlier...

GR

jebir · Apr 10, 2004

Thanks a lot for having the effort to clarify things.

It is unbelievable how frustrating it is to sit in front of a computer and having to decide upon something so hands-on like a tripod.

I am still puzzled why nobody is using the 290 here. Since some of you haven't even noticed if there are more than one leg position it can't be a big issue in my oppinion. I never had any problems with my old Velbon in that respect. If the ground was uneven, I simply adjusted the leg lengths.

Cheers, Jens.

GR Triever · Apr 10, 2004

jebir said:
I am still puzzled why nobody is using the 290 here.

One reason is that the maximum weight supported by the 290 series legs is only 4.5kg (10lb) as compared to 6.0kg (13.3lb) for the 055 series. Also, the column max/min height range is greater with the 055 series. This while the 055 is only 0.1kg heavier and 1" longer (closed position) than the 290.

jebir said:
Since some of you haven't even noticed if there are more than one leg position it can't be a big issue in my oppinion. I never had any problems with my old Velbon in that respect. If the ground was uneven, I simply adjusted the leg lengths.

Not a big issue, but what did you do when you wanted a camera height of, say, 10 inches or so above the ground? Or, what did you do when the wind was gusting at 45kph and you had a lot of tripod shake? Just two examples of adjustable leg position (not height) coming in handy.

Regards,

GR

Manfrotto is ruling? (1 Viewer)

Yoda Eagle

Steve Campsall

Yoda Eagle

Steve Campsall

Administrator

Yoda Eagle

Well-known member

RAINBIRDER

Well-known member

Yoda Eagle

Administrator

Yoda Eagle

Yoda Eagle

Steve Campsall

Steve Campsall

Well-known member

Steve Campsall

Well-known member

Yoda Eagle

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread