Hi Brad / Rob, On Fri, 01 Nov 2002 09:02:23 +1000, Rob Studdert wrote:
>> So I looked at the carbon fibres, and I had the >> money, but I didn't like them, too light. I wanted something strong, heavy, >> where I can plant it in heavy winds and not worry about it. The 055CB is that >> old? Interesting. Anyhow, it's all I want in a tripod, sure light is nice if >> you have to carry it far, but I like 'em heavy ;-) No pain, no gain. > >Brad, > >You gotta think outside the square dude, light means that you can get where you >need to go with more of the gear that actually makes the photos. My feelings exactly, I have been carrying arround a 055NAT for a few years now, and I sometimes leave it behind because of the wheight and size! Also, the size (3 legs) makes it hard to carry with you on plane trips. So for the occasions where wheight and size matter, I decided to get the 4-leg carbon tripod Manfrotto makes (440), it is noticably lighter and small enough to fit in standard carry-on luggage (50 cm without a head). >Carbon tripods >are better at dissipating vibrations and if it is too light (which can be the >case) then it can easily be weighed down. > >Manfrotto make a triangular apron that you fit between the legs that you can >either dump photo gear or water bottle or rocks in to weigh down the pod. I might consider that, I am currently using the 405 geared head on it which is slightly heavier than the tripod itself (1.6 Kg versus 1.4 Kg). I use for both 35mm gear and the 67II ... Regards, JvW ------------------------------------------------------------------ Jan van Wijk; http://www.dfsee.com/gallery
