[Recovered Thread: 114010]

[Jedfordski]

Hi guys,

I'm looking for a new tripod that has a horizontal centre bar option. I'm looking to spend around £100 - £150 ish, including head. Any suggestions?

Cheers,

Jed.

[inness]

Jedfordski wrote:

Hi guys,

I'm looking for a new tripod that has a horizontal centre bar option. I'm looking to spend around £100 - £150 ish, including head. Any suggestions?

Cheers,

Jed.

Well it really depends on what you are going to do with it, and what you are going to put on it, having said that the one I use is a Manfrotto 055 PRO B (which will turn into a horizontal bar) on top of this I have a Manfrotto 488 RC0 head the legs cost £108 and the head is £ 59.95 at Warehouse Express.

On mine the largest set up I have on it is a 20D with grip and a 100-400mm L, I have been known to add both a 1.4 TC and 2TC when shooting the moon, oh and the angle finder C as well, it holds it quite well once it is locked up, the legs are very stable, but it is heavy if you plan on walking with it.

Bob

[Jedfordski]

Well, I'm looking at both the Manfrotto 190 Pro and the 055 Pro. The heads I'm looking at are the 486 and the 488. What are the different RC values? I've seen an RC2 and an RC4 ...

My camera at max weight is a 400D with BG-E3 grip plus Sigma 90-300 APO DG lense. Would a 190 Pro plus 486 head be able to hold this, or would I need to go up a level to the 055 Pro?

[BillDrew]

If you are going to put the centerpost horizontal, often you will have to counterweight it. So figure on the tripod having to support two or three times the weight of your heaviest camera & lens.

[Jedfordski]

I'd have thought the only time I'd really use the horizontal position is during macro shots, so my Canon 60mm reduces the overall weight ... could probably get away without the BG-3E as well if push comes to shove.

[inness]

Jedfordski wrote:

Well, I'm looking at both the Manfrotto 190 Pro and the 055 Pro. The heads I'm looking at are the 486 and the 488. What are the different RC values? I've seen an RC2 and an RC4 ...

My camera at max weight is a 400D with BG-E3 grip plus Sigma 90-300 APO DG lense. Would a 190 Pro plus 486 head be able to hold this, or would I need to go up a level to the 055 Pro?

If you look on Manfrotto's site it will give you the info you need. I believe ( could be wrong here ) that most of them will carry the weight you are looking at but it is a case of which one damps down the vibrations as it were, I have seen silly pictures from sales people who sit on them to prove how strong the tripod is, well nobody's bothered to that extent it's how well it dampens the vibrations and how quickally that matters. Hope you understand me, no doubt someone will come in and clarify it a bit better.

If you place it in a horizontal position if at all possible have it in line with one of the legs if you get my meaning, that way it will be more stable.

Bob

[Chickenhawk]

Hi there,

I'm in the same position as I want one for outdoor nature photography. I've looked at a few and like the look of the Benbo. Check the following review

http://www.burren.cx/photo/trekker.html

[BillDrew]

I have the Gitzo Explorer (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=2636&A=details&Q=&sku=206491&am p;is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation) and like it a lot. Not a light tripod, but about US$200 cheaper than the carbon fiber version.

I really have not found much use for the horizontal "center post" near the ground. With a SLR (digital or chemical), at that point your belly is in the mud to be able to use the viewfinder. Then a beanbag, log, rock, backpack, ... to rest the camera on works for up to a one second exposure. I find a use for the horizontal reach is shooting just about straight down. Then of course the camera cannot be extended over a leg and does need to be counterbalanced. If you are using a fairly wide lens and are a bit off the ground (flower bed), you want the camera extended and really need a counterbalance. All to the good - the counterbalance adds to the stability, but does mean the tripod has to hold more than the camera, lens, and head.

Just saying your tripod neads to hold the head plus your gear with a good bit to spare. I figure nearly three times the weight of your heaviest gear is about right. Could be argued down to twice, but not lower than that.

[BrierS]

Great point about the weight capacity . . . I am in the market for a new tripod and hadn't given enough thought to the balancing weight factor. Having never worked with a camera and situation needing it I just hadn't thought of including that (enough) in my equation. Thank you.
Steve