Sunny Chung wrote:
I'm sorry for using the word silly and unintentionally offending
many people :-0
I guess the word came to mind because I was partially baffled at the
ridiculous
prices I was seeing for these tripods (ex: $200 - $500) I guess if
I had a full time
job, that would be
I recommend looking at the Slik 300DX instead of the Bogen 3001.
We have both in our household. The Slik gets a little taller, is
cheaper, feels sturdier and comes with a nice pan/tilt head. What I
like about the most, though, is the legs occupy a lot more area; it is
far less tippy than the
If i stay with the tripod i have now, its not here but i think it is the
Manfotto 28, big
double aluminum tube
legs thing, is there a recommended head for macro. I don't think this tripod
closes down
much below
24-26 but i would need to get closer obvisously.
Is there a head with a slide
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tripod Dilemma
Any head reccomendations or would one be better of buy a second pod
specifically for
macro.
If it's the tripod you loaned me at GFM, it's an 028 with some sort of
little boy head on it.
I did appreciate
suited.
I have the 486RC2 ball head on my mono pod.
That should be sturdy enough then to handle rails.?
Dave
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tripod Dilemma
Any head reccomendations or would one be better of buy
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tripod Dilemma
I have the 486RC2 ball head on my mono pod.
That should be sturdy enough then to handle rails.?
That should support a rail quite nicely.
William Robb
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
A good one, appropriately chosen, can last a lifetime, and can
be used with long, heavy lenses, medium format as well as
35mm. The worst investment I ever made was an inexpensive
tripod.
Yes, been there. Very poor investment a cheap tripod, and one I won't
repeat.
I'm sorry for using the word silly and unintentionally offending
many people :-0
I guess the word came to mind because I was partially baffled at the ridiculous
prices I was seeing for these tripods (ex: $200 - $500) I guess if
I had a full time
job, that would be a reasonable price but
From: Sunny Chung [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/01/18 Wed AM 09:52:24 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: Tripod Dilemma
I'm sorry for using the word silly and unintentionally offending
many people :-0
I don't think people were offended as much as concerned that you didn't
Check out ebay. I bought both of my tripods used for less than half the
cost of a new one, and they're both quite excellent.
Paul
On Jan 18, 2006, at 4:52 AM, Sunny Chung wrote:
I'm sorry for using the word silly and unintentionally offending
many people :-0
I guess the word came to mind
I'm sorry for using the word silly and unintentionally offending
many people :-0
I guess the word came to mind because I was partially baffled at the
ridiculous
prices I was seeing for these tripods (ex: $200 - $500) I guess if
I had a full time
job, that would be a reasonable
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, mike wilson wrote:
_Everyone_ has a tight budget, they are just different. Find the one you want
and then look for the best price you can. Unlike some other photographic
equipment, tripods can often be found in (functionally) as good as new
condition.
I second that;
The newer Promaster tripods are really worth a look. Construction is
decent.
They're less expensive and lighter than Bogen/Manfrotto stuff.
And for some of them the center post is also a monopod.
And, if you're out walking a lot at night, consider investing in a high-$$$
light-weight tripod.
Rob Studdert wrote:
What you have to consider is that if you make the right choice in choosing your
silly tripod it will likely outlast all your other photo gear. It's worth
thinking about and spending money on, the cheap ones generally don't do the
intended job very well and will fall apart
From: Krisjanis Linkevics [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/01/18 Wed PM 12:15:35 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Tripod Dilemma
I'm sorry for using the word silly and unintentionally offending
many people :-0
I guess the word came to mind because I was partially baffled
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They're less expensive and lighter than Bogen/Manfrotto stuff.
I am not an authority, but I think that lightness is a drawback for a
tripod: it is just not steady enough.
Kostas
Kostas Kavoussanakis
Wed, 18 Jan 2006 05:20:29 -0800
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They're less expensive and lighter than Bogen/Manfrotto stuff.
I am not an authority, but I think that lightness is a drawback for a
tripod:
it is just not steady enough.
Kostas
Generally
A tripod that stays at home or in the trunk of the car
because it's too heavy to carry comfortably is worse
than no tripod at all: The money is spent, but there
is no benefit.
For years I used a very sturdy, 3.5kg Slik tripod, but
usually left it behind! A few years ago I got a
Velbon Maxi
Rick Womer wrote:
A tripod that stays at home or in the trunk of the car
because it's too heavy to carry comfortably is worse than no
tripod at all: The money is spent, but there is no benefit.
A heavy tripod is just natures way of telling you to get fitter.
Malcolm
Subject: RE: Tripod Dilemma
I'm sorry for using the word silly and unintentionally offending
many people :-0
I guess the word came to mind because I was partially baffled at the
ridiculous
prices I was seeing for these tripods (ex: $200 - $500) I guess if
I had a full time
job
My experience with Promaster gear has been mixed. I'd suggest looking very
carefully at any product carrying that name.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote re: Promaster tripods:
They're less expensive and lighter than Bogen/Manfrotto stuff.
I
Look for a photo swap-meet. Not knowing what size lenses/bodies you
plan use on it, can only suggest you look for something fits your
definition of substantial.
My primary tripod is a Bogen 3021 with their Pro ball head. Also, own a
light weight 3001 with a mini-ball head for those times when much
the Velbon.
HTH
Don
-Original Message-
From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 8:37 AM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: Tripod Dilemma
I don't think anyone was offended. Certainly not me.
If you can't afford a new tripod, but a good
What do you think about the 190DB+141RC combo? I'm also looking for a
tripod, but I'm not sure if I should go with this combo or spend a
little (my budget is very tight right now) more for the Pro version.
I would like to experiment with macro, maybe being able to mount the
center column
On Jan 18, 2006, at 7:12 AM, Don Sanderson wrote:
Bogen 3001, Light but very sturdy, one of the least expensive
full height tripods.
Bogen 3021 BPRO, Heavier, sturdier, center column can be
mounted horizontally (Very handy), a bit more expensive.
Those were the two tripods that came to mind
I don't know why you should complain about 3.5 kg.
The Manfrotto 75 I use weighs 5.3kg and I carry it
around the forest all the time. Of course I
usually have a backache that last a week
afterwards. But what a difference it makes with
the 400mm Sigma APO. I haven't used this lens on
the *ist
and pretty solid.
Don
-Original Message-
From: Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 9:27 AM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Tripod Dilemma
What do you think about the 190DB+141RC combo? I'm also looking for a
tripod, but I'm
I was in the same situation not too long ago. I had an older tripod that
I purchased when I was in college, a heavy Sears jobbie. The legs
worked ok, and it was sturdy, but it was mainly the head that drove me
crazy. With a heavyish lens, it would droop a little once you locked it
and let
Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote:
What do you think about the 190DB+141RC combo? I'm also looking for a
tripod, but I'm not sure if I should go with this combo or spend a
little (my budget is very tight right now) more for the Pro version.
I would like to experiment with macro, maybe being able to
PROTECTED]
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: Tripod Dilemma
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 07:59:51 -
cheap tripods are a false economy. The best way to buy a tripod is to take
your equipment into a shop that has a large range, and try them out. It's
particularly
In that case a $12 tripod works wonders! :-)
Tom C.
From: Sunny Chung [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: Tripod Dilemma
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 04:52:24 -0500
I'm sorry for using the word silly and unintentionally offending
many
Hello Sunny
A tripod isn't silly! Very often it's a better investment than an expensive
lens and will provide you with sharp images for much less money, since you
can get rid of unsharpness caused by movement/motion and/or allow you to use
the optimal aperture for the job. If you don't want to
I have borrowed a friend's manfretto tripod with a 322RC2 head once,
and I did not like how the grip obstructed you from tilting the camera
too far back. So if you were shooting up at something, you had to
have the camera mounted a certain way, with the grip to the side or in
the front. Is this
Taken with the setup I described, Bogen 3xxx + 322RC2 head, pointed up.
http://www.g0nz.com/4imgs/data/media/3/IMGP6113.jpg
It is hard to point higher up than this, but do you need that? If you
often do, then a 3 way head might be better.
Sunny Chung wrote:
I have borrowed a friend's
-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Tripod Dilemma
I have borrowed a friend's manfretto tripod with a 322RC2 head once,
and I did not like how the grip obstructed you from tilting the camera
too far back. So if you were shooting up at something, you had to
have the camera mounted a certain way
On Jan 18, 2006, at 10:18 AM, Sunny Chung wrote:
I have borrowed a friend's manfretto tripod with a 322RC2 head once,
and I did not like how the grip obstructed you from tilting the camera
too far back. So if you were shooting up at something, you had to
have the camera mounted a certain way,
I haven't read all the posts on this thread so I don't know if
this has been mentioned. No doubt you've gotten a lot of tripod
recommendations (if the list isn't being silly today).
I recall someone once writing -- and this has been my experience
-- that people tend to own either no tripods
Message-
From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 January 2006 14:37
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: RE: Tripod Dilemma
I don't think anyone was offended. Certainly not me.
If you can't afford a new tripod, but a good used one. As
Bob Walkden suggested, look
On 18/1/06, Malcolm Smith, discombobulated, unleashed:
A heavy tripod is just natures way of telling you to get fitter.
Mark!
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 18/1/06, Malcolm Smith, discombobulated, unleashed:
A heavy tripod is just natures way of telling you to get fitter.
Mark!
I thought a heavy tripod was nature's way of telling you to work
overtime so you can afford carbon fiber!
--
Mark Roberts
Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote:
What do you think about the 190DB+141RC combo? I'm also looking for a
tripod, but I'm not sure if I should go with this combo or spend a
little (my budget is very tight right now) more for the Pro version.
I would like to experiment with macro, maybe being able to
On 18/1/06, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed:
I thought a heavy tripod was nature's way of telling you to work
overtime so you can afford carbon fiber!
LOL
Mark!
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
On 18/1/06, Carlos Royo, discombobulated, unleashed:
I have got the 190B, 141 RC 3-D head and 486 RC2 ballhead. Unless you
have a reason to prioritize the purchase of the 141 RC, go for a
ballhead. It is lighter, more compact and faster to use. Since I got the
ballhead, I don't use the 141 RC
On 18 Jan 2006 at 8:45, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Spending $200 to $500 on a quality, solid, carbon fibre unit for a hiker
shooting
medium-lenth or wide angle lenses on 135 or medium may be suitable.
For 4x5 8x10, when there's any wind at all, the big video unit comes out.
The beauty of
On 18 Jan 2006 at 12:49, Joseph Tainter wrote:
I recall someone once writing -- and this has been my experience
-- that people tend to own either no tripods or several. One
can't do all jobs. I currently have four tripods and two monopods.
LOL, yes, I have four tripods, one monopod, five
://www.jensbladt.dk
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Carlos Royo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 18. januar 2006 22:50
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: Tripod Dilemma
Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote:
What do you think about the 190DB+141RC combo? I'm also looking for a
tripod, but I'm not sure if I
A heavy tripod is just natures way of telling you to get fitter.
Or get a sherpa!
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: Malcolm Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 9:34 AM
Subject: RE: Tripod Dilemma
Rick Womer wrote
In a message dated 1/18/2006 6:07:22 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
For years I used a very sturdy, 3.5kg Slik tripod, but
usually left it behind! A few years ago I got a
Velbon Maxi 343E, and I carry it often. Not as sturdy
and stable as the Slik, for sure, but with the
On 18 Jan 2006 at 0:30, Sunny Chung wrote:
I know its hard to believe with all the night shots I have in my
gallery, but I still do not
own a tripod. Now that I'm looking for one, I'm extremely stumped.
Should I buy a generic
$12 tripod, or invest in a name brand like bogen/manfrotto. I
cheap tripods are a false economy. The best way to buy a tripod is to take
your equipment into a shop that has a large range, and try them out. It's
particularly worth experimenting with the way the legs lock unlock. It can
be very annoying and frustrating if you don't get on well with the
Tripods aren't silly. That you choose to call them silly indicates that
you don't appreciate how valuable they can be. They are valuable tools for
almost every photographer. A good one, appropriately chosen, can last a
lifetime, and can be used with long, heavy lenses, medium format as well as
51 matches
Mail list logo
