Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Zeiss - Always on the lookout for something special ‚Äď Shop now

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Benro TMA27C vs Audubon The Birder

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Monday 19th August 2019, 17:23   #1
Boogieshrew
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 512
Benro TMA27C vs Audubon The Birder

Hi all,

Following on from by thread about 2 section tripod legs, I have another question for you on my quest for scope stability.

Benro TMA27C Carbon Fibre Tripod Legs or Audubon The Birder

Which legs are most stable?

With shipping from the States added to the Birder, they work out about the same cost for me.

Are 2 section aluminium legs more stable than 3 section carbon fibre legs?

Best wishes
Boogieshrew is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 20th August 2019, 10:10   #2
etudiant
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 4,422
These seem pretty evenly matched, fold to 24 and 26 inches respectively, leg diameter max 1.1 and 1.25 inches, weight 3 versus 4 pounds.

The Amazon USA reviews of the Benro are generally very favorable, but there are some complaints about quality control.
https://www.amazon.com/Benro-Mach3-C.../dp/B00YEU9GK2
There are no independent reviews of the Audubon unit that I could find, it seems to be an Audubon exclusive.

My $0.02 is that the aluminum unit will be more stable, having only one joint and thicker tubing.
etudiant is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 20th August 2019, 17:31   #3
Boogieshrew
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 512
Quote:
Originally Posted by etudiant View Post
These seem pretty evenly matched, fold to 24 and 26 inches respectively, leg diameter max 1.1 and 1.25 inches, weight 3 versus 4 pounds.

The Amazon USA reviews of the Benro are generally very favorable, but there are some complaints about quality control.
https://www.amazon.com/Benro-Mach3-C.../dp/B00YEU9GK2
There are no independent reviews of the Audubon unit that I could find, it seems to be an Audubon exclusive.

My $0.02 is that the aluminum unit will be more stable, having only one joint and thicker tubing.
Yes they are quite well matched.
I think the deciding factor is whether the extra 1lb is actually worth the possible extra stability of only 2 section legs.
I think I will have a look at the Benro in a local shop to help my decision.

I do really like the idea of 2 section legs though. The internet is full of 4 and 5 section legs which seems like a lot of overkill to me.
Boogieshrew is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 21st August 2019, 14:35   #4
etudiant
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 4,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogieshrew View Post
Yes they are quite well matched.
I think the deciding factor is whether the extra 1lb is actually worth the possible extra stability of only 2 section legs.
I think I will have a look at the Benro in a local shop to help my decision.

I do really like the idea of 2 section legs though. The internet is full of 4 and 5 section legs which seems like a lot of overkill to me.
The weight differential would be small for the whole setup. After including head and optics, the weight is likely to be close to 10 pounds in either case.
I use 4 section tripods only because they fold down small enough for travel, but they are just marginal as a platform. Fewer sections whenever possible is better though, at least imho.
etudiant is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 21st August 2019, 16:32   #5
Alexis Powell
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: LY+DG counties, Kansas, USA
Posts: 3,206
All else being equal, the more sections the less rigid a tripod is expected to be, but design/materials/quality can more than compensate when making specific comparisons. I love the 4 section tripods from RRS. They maintain very large tube diameters in the bottom sections, and the joints are very rigid. In the "Long" models, the bottom section is needed only when the tripod is set extremely high, so they effectively operate as 3 section tripods in most use.

--AP
Alexis Powell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 21st August 2019, 17:57   #6
Boogieshrew
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 512
Quote:
Originally Posted by etudiant View Post
The weight differential would be small for the whole setup. After including head and optics, the weight is likely to be close to 10 pounds in either case.
I use 4 section tripods only because they fold down small enough for travel, but they are just marginal as a platform. Fewer sections whenever possible is better though, at least imho.
I look at the extra lb somewhat differently. From a backpackers perspective. At the end of a long days birding that 1lb will feel like 10!

If I can have the same stability with 1lb less weight Iíll take it. If the price of that lb saving isnít too high of course. Money always being another factor 😊
Boogieshrew is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 21st August 2019, 17:58   #7
Boogieshrew
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexis Powell View Post
All else being equal, the more sections the less rigid a tripod is expected to be, but design/materials/quality can more than compensate when making specific comparisons. I love the 4 section tripods from RRS. They maintain very large tube diameters in the bottom sections, and the joints are very rigid. In the "Long" models, the bottom section is needed only when the tripod is set extremely high, so they effectively operate as 3 section tripods in most use.

--AP
Large section lower sections soun£ good but Shoah their pricey! I bet there nice tripods.
Boogieshrew is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 22nd August 2019, 13:22   #8
etudiant
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 4,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogieshrew View Post
I look at the extra lb somewhat differently. From a backpackers perspective. At the end of a long days birding that 1lb will feel like 10!

If I can have the same stability with 1lb less weight Iíll take it. If the price of that lb saving isnít too high of course. Money always being another factor 😊
I'd not appreciated the backpacking aspect. Every pound does indeed matter when it must be carried all day.
That said, I'd wonder whether the bulk of the Benro or the Audubon would not be as much of an issue. A two foot plus long lump is no fun to hang on a backpack. Perhaps a more compact model such as Alexis pointed out might be more compatible on the trail.
etudiant is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 22nd August 2019, 18:08   #9
Boogieshrew
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 512
I’ve never put in or attached a tripod to my backpack. It’s always on a shoulder strap or actually resting on my shoulder or recently on a mule pack. Size has never been an issue. I’m more interested in the least number leg sections and stability for my Nikon EDG 85. A heavy scope.

If really want to go light it’s a Nikon ED50 on a shoulder stock. Bliss for the shoulders ��
Boogieshrew is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 22nd August 2019, 19:09   #10
St. Elmo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 517
As the only person here who has used a Birder tripod (for a little under 13 years), I'm interested in how this turns out. Please keep us in the loop.
Best,
Mike
St. Elmo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 22nd August 2019, 19:16   #11
Boogieshrew
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 512
Quote:
Originally Posted by St. Elmo View Post
As the only person here who has used a Birder tripod (for a little under 13 years), I'm interested in how this turns out. Please keep us in the loop.
Best,
Mike
Will do. The cost of shipping is high so thatís why Iím asking more questions. Trying to work out if it is worth importing. The cost of importing the Birder is the same as buying the lighter cfBenro.

Decisions decisions.........
Boogieshrew is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 22nd August 2019, 20:38   #12
etudiant
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 4,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogieshrew View Post
Iíve never put in or attached a tripod to my backpack. Itís always on a shoulder strap or actually resting on my shoulder or recently on a mule pack. Size has never been an issue. Iím more interested in the least number leg sections and stability for my Nikon EDG 85. A heavy scope.

If really want to go light itís a Nikon ED50 on a shoulder stock. Bliss for the shoulders ��
I have the ED50 angled and a Cullman shoulder stock.
It works ok, but not great. Possibly an ED50 straight would work better, but for me, the combo only works with the Nikon 16x or at most the 20x eye piece. Anything more just magnifies the jitters, so then it is time for a tripod.

Separately, good on you for the EDG 85! I've often thought of one in the VR version, because it seems to me still the best scope currently available.
Sadly Nikon went out of the alpha scope business and I'm not travelling enough to need one.
etudiant is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Friday 23rd August 2019, 05:41   #13
Boogieshrew
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 512
Yes I use the 16x on the ED50. I love it. Great view. Wide bright contrasts and easy to hold steady. Good on a monopod as well as shoulder stock. I keep the 27x in my pocket just in case but seldom use it.

As for the edg85. It’s fantastic.ive wondered about the vr but it’s even heavier and very expensive. I’d like to have a look through one.
Boogieshrew is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 23rd August 2019, 05:48   #14
Boogieshrew
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 512
Well, I bought last night a secondhand Davis and Sandford Magnum tripod after reading on here that it is the same as The Birder.
I’ll let you know how it is when it arrives. It’s got a D&S head on it.
Hers hoping it’s a goodun!
Boogieshrew is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 23rd August 2019, 07:12   #15
St. Elmo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 517
Are you sure it's the same?
The tripod on my Birder is marked "magnum XT"
St. Elmo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 23rd August 2019, 07:53   #16
Boogieshrew
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 512
Not not absolutely sure but for the price I paid I took the risk.
Perhaps it's an older model.

Last edited by Boogieshrew : Friday 23rd August 2019 at 08:40.
Boogieshrew is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 28th August 2019, 19:00   #17
Boogieshrew
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 512
I got to look at a TMA27C with a Manfrotto 500A head on it. They were supporting a Swarovski ATX85 with binoviewer which is about the same weight as a Nikon edg85. The tripod and head are very nice indeed. The tripod is surprisingly stable given its relatively low weight and the head is very smooth vertically and horizontally. Much nicer than my veil on Sherpa and ancient manfrotto tracker (myold school green antique!).
Boogieshrew is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 28th August 2019, 20:08   #18
etudiant
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 4,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogieshrew View Post
I got to look at a TMA27C with a Manfrotto 500A head on it. They were supporting a Swarovski ATX85 with binoviewer which is about the same weight as a Nikon edg85. The tripod and head are very nice indeed. The tripod is surprisingly stable given its relatively low weight and the head is very smooth vertically and horizontally. Much nicer than my veil on Sherpa and ancient manfrotto tracker (myold school green antique!).
Careful, TAS (Tripod Acquisiton Syndrome) is a virulent, persistent and not inexpensive illness, not easily cured. You appear to be susceptible, based on the evidence.
etudiant is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 29th August 2019, 00:31   #19
Boogieshrew
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 512
Easily acquired, yes, especially if you have had optics acquisition syndrome for many years.
Absolutely no doubt that I am susceptible ��
Boogieshrew is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Paton's birder haven to be sold - Tucson Audubon Society will manage PumaMan Hummingbirds 0 Friday 13th December 2013 16:30
Benro Gimbal GH2 Geats Photographic Tripods / Heads 1 Friday 31st August 2012 01:25
benro gh2 gimbal steve.hinchliffe Tripod and Heads 1 Thursday 3rd May 2012 12:32
Benro C-297 n6 'Flexpod' Tim Taylor Photographic Tripods / Heads 7 Sunday 10th February 2008 20:33

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.15507507 seconds with 33 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 13:41.