• 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.

Help Please - New Tripod Required (1 Viewer)

John Bullfinch

John Bullfinch
Hi

I have used a Slik D3 tripod for years - very sturdy and love the one handle for all movements of the head.

Issue is - that coupled with the Kowa 884 scope is now just too heavy (I have an issue with my knee) so I now need to find a lighter tripod but without losing the sturdiness of the Slik D3.

I have not kept up-to-date with what is hot and not with regards tripods so dont really know where to start. I would want a tripod that has the one handle for all movements feature, but anything else, open to ideas.

I would probably push my expenditure to 200.00 if I had to.

Many thanks for any advice offered.

Good birding,

John
 
John,

No way, I'm afraid.
Your Kowa scope weighs around 1,9 kg and your tripod and head about 2,5 kg. For a significant total weight saving the tripod would have to be a lot lighter and there are no materials on this earth which would give you adequate stability.

My Kowa 883 is usually mounted on a Berlebach 552 head and a Sirui carbon fibre tripod with 32 mm dia. top leg segments, together also about 2,5 kg. Under adverse conditions though, these are not without their limitations. I am off on a birding trip to the North Sea coast tomorrow and expecting strong winds, so the Berlebach/Sirui combination is going along for my wife to use with an ATM 65HD and I have dug out an old aluminium Gitzo Series 4 for the Kowa - total setup weight 6,7 kg. However I won't be walking far with that!

Regards,
John
 
I'm afraid as John said your out of luck. I have two Induro tripods from the days before they went up scale and the little carbon 204 with a gimbal head is fine for nice days with no wind. During duck migration and shore bird season literally by the shore where the wind always blows it the big 5 series Induro with a Manfrotto 502 head and that combo is over eight pounds. Good as the Kowas are they are useless if they can't be held steady. seems like you need to see if the Silk is up to the 884 and if not you'll have to replace it with a heavier one and bird close to the car.
Steve
 
If your current rig is ~2.5 kg, and depending on the height you need, I think you could reduce the mass by about 0.5 kg with an appropriate series 2 or series 3 set of legs from Really Right Stuff and a good Gitzo panning head, but the combo would cost over $1000.

--AP
 
As Alexis says I also think you will be looking at RRS/Gitzo to get any weight reduction and have reasonable stability.

However, as you live in the UK, RRS are simply out of the question - but a Gitzo may not be. I have had half a dozen different Gitzo tripods over the last decade or so (mostly bought new) and none have been silly money! Two of them (used) were well below the £200 mark. Keep an eye on Fleabay for something like a Gitzo GT2531 or it's earlier incarnations. You will have to be patient to get one at a really good price though.
There is a decent looking G1329 up for grabs on Fleabay at the moment but it is a bit heavy for your needs (I used to have the 3 leg section version) - VERY stable viewing with one of these but they are not light at a little over 2 kilos without the center column.
 
Consider a much smaller angled scope to start.
A small angled scope allows you to use a shorter, much lighter tripod and head.

My lightweight scope set up is a Nikon ED50 with either a DS16x or MC20x EP mounted on a Markins Q3 ballhead atop a Benro C1158 carbon tripod

Scope w EP = 1.4 lbs
Tripod w head= 3.3 lbs

4.7 lbs total or 2.08 kg.

For a high quality, stable set up, you couldn't get a lot lighter.

Also, in my experience the 50mm scope does quite well up to 27x.
The small Kowas probably perform similarly.
 
Last edited:
Hi

Apologies for the belated acknowledgement of your comments, many thanks. Looks like I will have to continue to limp around as the day goes on!!

Best wishes, John
 
Hi

Apologies for the belated acknowledgement of your comments, many thanks. Looks like I will have to continue to limp around as the day goes on!!

Best wishes, John

Maybe not? Keep an eye on this one:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/GITZO-CA...264562?hash=item441b07af32:g:PdkAAOSwY4taxLb1

A bit thinner than ideal but it would do the job, don't go above £200 - there will be others along. A more recent 2 series would be nicer, like my GT2531, but will cost a bit more.

Just a thought? You have a no compromise scope (jealous!) so why are you skimping on support? You have the best scope (IMO) so get the best out of it.|:d|
 
Just a thought? You have a no compromise scope (jealous!) so why are you skimping on support? You have the best scope (IMO) so get the best out of it.|:d|

Indeed, and don't forget that little 1,5 kg Gitzo is still going to need a head.
If JB is taller than about 165 cm he's going to have to extend the centre column and those 16 mm (?) dia. bottom leg sections are of very limited stability.
The 24 mm bottom leg sections of a 3-section Series 3 would be 3,4 times as rigid and the tripod would only weigh a few hundred grams more.
To paraphrase an old saying, there's no substitute for tube diameter except more tube diameter. It plays a much more significant role than the material used.

John
 
Indeed, and don't forget that little 1,5 kg Gitzo is still going to need a head.
If JB is taller than about 165 cm he's going to have to extend the centre column and those 16 mm (?) dia. bottom leg sections are of very limited stability.
The 24 mm bottom leg sections of a 3-section Series 3 would be 3,4 times as rigid and the tripod would only weigh a few hundred grams more.
To paraphrase an old saying, there's no substitute for tube diameter except more tube diameter. It plays a much more significant role than the material used.

John

I know where you are coming from - I normally use a Gitzo GT4542LS for scope work, though my GT2531 is also good (but not as good!). I pointed the OP at that one as it is the only one that looks like it might sell within their budget at the moment and is still vastly superior to what most local birders seem to use for their Alpha Scopes - sad isn't it!

Ideally I would suggest something like a Gitzo GT3530LS (very light and rigid) but even I would struggle to get one of those within or near the OP's budget these days. Don't get me wrong I am a complete Shi%ehawk when it comes to Gitzo tripod prices! So much so that I cannot afford the copies - they are just too expensive, even my 4 series (bought new) was only £375 inc postage.

To the OP, I would suggest raising your budget a bit as there are some good tripods out there that will significantly improve your scope viewing.
 
Indeed, and don't forget that little 1,5 kg Gitzo is still going to need a head.
If JB is taller than about 165 cm he's going to have to extend the centre column and those 16 mm (?) dia. bottom leg sections are of very limited stability.
The 24 mm bottom leg sections of a 3-section Series 3 would be 3,4 times as rigid and the tripod would only weigh a few hundred grams more.
To paraphrase an old saying, there's no substitute for tube diameter except more tube diameter. It plays a much more significant role than the material used.

John

Tripods are always a conundrum, especially when travelling.
Getting something tall enough that does not wobble requires compromises.
Weight is to me the least concern, stability and folded length are key drivers.
So the ideal tripod would fold to 16" or less and go to 60" without the center column. Nobody makes such a unit, which I find hard to understand.
 
...the ideal tripod would fold to 16" or less and go to 60" without the center column. Nobody makes such a unit, which I find hard to understand.

The Velbon Ultra series (e.g. 455, 555, 655) come the closest, as far as I know. They fold under 16" and go to over 50" without center column, and over 60" with it. The UT and UTC series are taller and fold even shorter, but they have some unavoidable center column extension as part of the design. Given the number of leg sections needed to cover such a range as you want, I think the eccentric profile twist-locking leg design of these Velbon tripods is the only practical way to do it.

--AP
 
The Velbon Ultra series (e.g. 455, 555, 655) come the closest, as far as I know. They fold under 16" and go to over 50" without center column, and over 60" with it. The UT and UTC series are taller and fold even shorter, but they have some unavoidable center column extension as part of the design. Given the number of leg sections needed to cover such a range as you want, I think the eccentric profile twist-locking leg design of these Velbon tripods is the only practical way to do it.

--AP

Thank you, Alexis, for this input. I use an older model Velbon, the Ultra Luxi M. It is light and folds nicely, but is not stellar in windy conditions, even at less than full stretch. So the search continues...
 
While it's over the OP's budget, I currently use a Manfrotto 055 CF tripod with an old Manfrotto 501 fluid head for my Kowa 883. The whole combo is in the 11# range so it's not something I hike with but a short walk is no big deal. Not for nuthin' but I tried that head and scope on my Gitzo 1545T (which weighs about two pounds less than the Manfrotto but has a higher weight capacity rating). More than stable enough but deserves a lighter head than the Manfrotto 500 series. As I use the scope mostly at home around the property, I keep it mounted up on the 055 in my dining room. Now sure how my wife feels but it's a thing of beauty.
 
The Manfrotto Element or 190Go carbon fibre might work for you. Almost as good as a Gitzo, twist locks instead of the usual horrid finger-mangling Manfrotto flip-locks.

Another option, thinking laterally: could you get a wheeled golf caddy bag to lug the tripod and scope around?
 
Hi,

I think if you want to get below 2.5kg for tripod and head for a full size scope around 80mm, you either loose stability or a lot of money.

The question is: are 4.5kg really too much weight for the knee in the o.p. case (and would shaving off a pound of this actually make a difference) or is it just very uncomfortable to carry in hand or on the shoulder.

In the latter case, I would recommend a scopac or clone which allows you to carry the whole assembly as a backpack (some extra space for snacks and a guide is available too). I find this very comfortable to do (no problem walking 10k plus with this) and since I'm fairly tall I can even let the legs extended while doing so, which allows for very quick setup times.

Joachim
 
Hi,

I think if you want to get below 2.5kg for tripod and head for a full size scope around 80mm, you either loose stability or a lot of money.

Joachim

Yes, that's true: a full size 80(+)scope needs some weight under his body. Low weight tends to unstable standing, be careful. I don't want to go under the weight of the scope with tripod+head - one wrong touching and you loose money. Better a smaller scope für daytime viewing or the carry solution.

Manfred

(DiaScope85, 3530, 2380 - low light; MM4-60, 2532S, 2180 - low weight)
 
Thanks everyone.

Lots to think about here.

If the weight is not going to be significantly reduced from what I already have, then I may have to stick with what I have got, but will defo look into trying out some of the tripods you have suggested.

I do have a scopac and to be honest I should use it more, I have in the past found it a bit uncomfortable when using my binoculars, but maybe I just need to mess about more with how I have the straps etc set up. spreading the load is going to be better than having a strap over one shoulder.

The knee is better than it was but will be a constant battle to stay on top of it - up to me to do the exercises as part of my normal day, but 30-40 mins spent on this is a bit of a push when you have 2 young kids!!!

Happy birding everyone.

John
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 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