Lightweight/Traveling Tripod

I have pretty much decided my next piece of gear will be anew tripod. I am currently using an oldaluminum Bogen/Manfrotto 3504B tripod. It has served its purpose, but adds more weight than I’d like whilehiking and adjusting the head can be cumbersome. The end result is I often leave it at home.
In doing a little research, it seems that there are two maintypes of tripods that I will eventually want: a tall, incredibly strong tripod(such as a RRS TVC-34, etc) and a lightweight travel/backpack tripod. As I do a fair amount of travel and hikinginto waterfalls, I am planning on focusing on the lightweight travel/backpacktripod. I plan to use this mostly forlandscape/waterfalls (7D and the EFS 15-85), but will also use it at times withthe 7D and EF 100-400 L.
I’ve put together a list of potential tripods and ballheadsthat I wanted to run by everyone to see if you had any thoughts orrecommendations (ranked in order I am leaning):
Tripod:
1. Gitzo 1542T (~$450, 2.2 lbs, packs to 16.7”, Maxheight 58.7”, min height 8.6”)
2. Manfrotto 190CXPro4 ($210, 3 lbs, 19.7”, max57.5”, min 3.2”)
3. Gitzo GT1541 (~$599, 2.5 lbs, 21.3”, max 62.6”,min 6.7”)
4. RRS TQC-14 ($850, 2.7 lbs, 17.8”, max 59”, min3.2”)
Ball heads:
1. Gitzo GH1780QR (~$180, 0.8 lbs, 3.7”) orGH1781QR—same specs
2. RRS BH-30 LR ($275, 0.7 lbs, 2.9 inches tall) + plate($55, 0.1 lbs)—total ~$330 and 0.8 lb (maybe upgrade to the BH-30 LR II)
3. Gitzo GW2781TQR ($160, 0.9 lbs, 4.5”)
4. Manfrotto 496RC2 ($65, 0.9 lbs, 3.9”)
5. Manfrotto MH054M0-Q2 ($170, 1.3 lbs, 4.6 tall)
Any thoughts? Pleasefeel free to propose new tripods or ball heads.

Thanks,
Brant

No first hand knowledge yet with those posted, but I have had that light Gitzo on my list for some time. Maybe you will get it and give us a report back.:)

I went through the same process earlier this year. The dilemma I found myself in again and again, was to get the stability of a mastodon at the weight of a feather.First I bought the Benro C-2691EX (I don´t think that exists anymore, but it is the speedlock version of the 2692, I think), with the Benro B-2 head. Carbon, light and compact, 5 section legs, speedlock and the option to use one of the legs as a monopod. And the price is competitive. If I was on a tight budget, I am sure I could live happily with this tripod. In your case it would probably work well except on the longer end of your 100-400.

But I am used to the Gitzo GT3542LS/Wimerley Gimbal II for +400mm use and the Benro simply felt shaky. So a couple of months ago I bought the Gitzo GT2540F ($799) with a GH1780QR ball head ($220). It is not on your list, but it might be that you should add it. Yes, it is more expensive and yes, it is slightly bigger (just over an inch) and slightly heavier (like 4 AA batteries), than the Benro, but it is in a different league on everything else. I have carried it on longer hikes and also in planes. It is easy to set up, stability is excellent and it gives you that special will-last-forever-feeling. I have used it, with the ball head, on everything from 14mm to 400mm and it just feels right. I even mounted the Gimbal head with the Canon 1DX and a Canon 400mm f2.8L IS II, with the 2x III extender on it. And it worked so well that I will repeat that combo on most trips with long walks or high climbs in the future.

The number of tripods out there are enormous and it is not easy to make the right choice.
Good Luck!

I am in pretty much the same boat as you. I have a nice old Gitzo Reporter aluminum tripod that is very sturdy, bit it must weigh over 10 pounds, and is bulky, no way I would attempt to bring it on a hike. On top of that, I moved across the world, and that was one of the things I just didn't have room to take. I've been borrowing this crappy little tripod from a friend, and it's better than nothing, but I really need to invest in a nice lightweight tripod. I started looking at my options shortly before I left, comparing Gitzo and Manfrotto and a few others at the local camera store. From that I decided I wanted to spend the extra money to get the Gitzo.

For a short while I was looking into getting the GT1542T, but from everything I read online it just didn't make sense to get since I plan to shoot at anything from 10 to 400mm. I started looking into the GT2541 and GT3541. From the countless reviews and forum posts I have read, it sounds like the GT2541 would probably do what I wanted, but be on the marginal side for the long exposure stuff I like to do. The GT3541 is 620g heavier (~1.36lbs), but packs up very slightly shorter, and extends 8cm higher. But then I read more, and many recommend the systematic version. I really like having the option of to use a column at times, and the column add-on for the systematic is over $200. I think I have finally decided on the GT3541L, which is the long version. With the center column removed it should be slightly shorter than the GT3541, and weigh a little less, and be usable without the column. Slight compromise on weight and packability, but at ~4lbs it should be easy to strap to my pack and take on hikes.

Brant:

I went through all this last year. It is difficult swimming through all the different brands and options, and there does not seem to be any standards on load ratings which just makes it worse. Some of the cheaper ones have the same rating as the higher cost legs and heads, but in the end they just don't hold the wieght.

For what it is worth, I have not read a lot of good reports on Gitzo heads (however, there seems to be a lot of bad reports). Although they make top of the line legs, but they do not have near as good a reputaion with their heads. For me, the choice of heads was between RRS and Arca Swiss. The RRS is a little shorter profil and has two slots to turn the camera 90 degrees (but you should use an "L" bracket anyway). Brian had a nice write-up on the Arca Swiss... that write-up and the lower cost pushed me towards the Arca Swiss, and I have never regreted it (what a solid mount). I can have my 7D, grip, two bateries, and 100-400mm mounted and throw the tri-pod over my shoulder with all the gear cantilevered out there, and it holds great. The Arca Swiss may be heavier though, and I do not think you can go wrong with a RSS either.

As far as the tripod goes... I end up with something not on your list. I was looking for something stiffer and taller. Be careful with the spec's... the two Gitzo's you are looking at give the hieght with the column extended (not how you would ideally want to shot). Without the colmns extended, the hieghts are 45.87" and 52.4". That is going to be pretty short if you put your 100-400mm on it and have to point it up, or if you are on the side of a hill. If I was to chose from what you have listed, I would be looking at the gitzo 1541T since it has a smaller column (so you can get lower), and it is still taller w/o the column extended.

I did not go with the Manfrotto because it had the flip locks on the legs. My previous tripod had those, and I came to hate them because I would find they needed to be tightened when I was in middle of setting up a shot... the legs would slip. It just got irritating. I did not look at RSS tripods to much because I could not justify the cost (when I looked, it was higher than Gitzo).

Good luck with your choices.

Pat

For a few years I used the Manfrotto 190CXPRO4 as my main tripod, first with a 488RC2 head (equivalent to the 498RC2, one step larger than the 496RC2 on your list), then with a 468MG head. Either setup is fine with a gripped body and 100-400 or 70-200/2.8. Pat, not sure if your bad flip-lock experience was with Manfrotto legs, but I've never had them slip on mine.

As Pat states, load ratings aren't that useful. Different manufacturers have different standards, and they don't explicitly say what 'load capacity' means to them. A 10-lb capacity from one maker might mean 'supports at least 10-lbs rock-solid' and realistically does fine with a much heavier load, while from another it might mean 'a 10.1-lb load will make the ballhead flop over'. So, load ratings are a good guide within one manufacturers lines, but less useful comparing across manufacturers. I do appreciate that RRS lists some specific lens combos in their descriptions.

I recently got a RRS TVC-33, BH-55, and PG-02 side gimbal - the quality of RRS gear is truly excellent. I've tried out Gitzo gear in shops, it's very good, but the RRS stuff is just slightly better built, IMO. But also costlier...

For the head, I'd skip Gitzo - their legs are great,their heads don't have nearly as good a reputation. The other issue with both Gitzo and Manfrotto heads is they come with clamps that use their own, proprietary plate systems. I'd really recommend going with an Arca-Swiss system (I have a Wimberley C-12 clamp on my Manfrotto 468MG head for that reason). If you add a monopod, the full size tripod+head, etc., you can mix and match several brands. With the AS system, I use a mix of Wimberley and RRS body plates, lens plates, an L-bracket and a replacement lens foot with Wimberley, RRS, and Kirk clamps.

I'm currently using the 190CXPRO4 as a travel tripod. It's light enough, but with the head on, it's too long to fit in carryon luggage, so I need to remove the head for air travel. For that reason, I'm actually considering the RRS TQC-14 with BH-30 LR.

One downside to RRS gear is that there are no distributors - unless you visit their shop in CA, it's buy-then-try, and pay return shipping if you don't like. But if you go that route, I suspect you'll like.

I was overwhelmed by the choices especially when I have no where to really compare side to side. I ended up with the 3LT Brian CF tripod.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...on_Carbon.html

A new version is coming out, so the one I have is now $120 off, $340 for tripod and head. 3.8 lbs total, folds to 17". 80.3" Maximum Height.

I am sure others are better, but I thought it was a good mix of features and price for my usage. You can also use it as a monopod. I hiked Zion with it and found the weight and setup great.

Brant

Just got back in, and will share a few thoughts.

I have the GT2541, it is the most versatile tripod I have seen at its size. It is sturdy and the leg and arm mechanism can be structured in many ways most tripods can't. It's flaw is that it weighs over 4 pounds. So it is one reason I have been thinking about the 1541T for backpacking. The build quality of Gitzo legs are excellent and I am a fan after owning two. I don't think you will go wrong with the Gitzo legs, although the 1541T will be the lightest and will be also the flimsiest that Gitzo makes. I think if you bought one of the light versions and it didn't work for you, no light version would and you would need a heavier tripod. I do not think I would want a light 1541T if I intended to use it for every day use, it would be for packing and traveling light only.

Gitzo heads, the GT2541 came with a GH2750 off center head. The Gitzo heads noticeably creep when locked down. They are sturdy once set but not as good as Arca-Swiss or some other brands. As others have said stay away from the Gitzo head line.

Good Luck

Brant,
I'm facing the same question (see my thread here http://community.the-digital-picture...ead.php?t=7054)
Sirui seems to be an interesting brand and gets good reviews. I'll probably go with the aluminum version M-3004 to save some money, I don't do too much hiking. The CF version is the M-3204
You can check their distributor's website for local dealers if you want to check them out in a local store: http://www.sirui-photo.us/Sirui/Siru...A-(Sirui).html

Here is a video were the tripods are tested (in German, but at least you can see how it handles): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETUTJvNAWrw
Ballheads seem to test well, too. Even the smallest holds a 1D body with 300 f/2.8 in the vertical position.

I might drive up to the city next week to see them in a store

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

Pat, not sure if your bad flip-lock experience was with Manfrotto legs, but I've never had them slip on mine.

---

Your right... mine was a Vangard. I have only tried the Manfrotto in the store and it seemed to work good, but was worried about past experiences. If it worked good for you, I am sure it is fine. In fact, from what I have read, most people who have had the Manfrotto 190CXPro4 have enjoyed them and had good things to say about them.

I just made the same mistake a lot of new buyers seem to make when buying their first tripod... I trusted the ratings to much. I should have known better to. I am always telling design engineers that work for me not to believe all the spec's in catalogs or what sales people tell you. If it looks cheap, it probably is. Anyway, after the Vangard wore in a bit, I ended up with legs that slipped all the time and the ball never would hold position. The ball was also frustrating... I would pain stakingly line something up and then when I would tighten up the ball it would move it. However, that does not nessesarily mean that my experiences transfers to the Manfrotto flip locks.

My current experience with an Induro CT414 twist locks is that they are rock solid. I really like my new tripod because it is tall, solidly built, and very stiff... but it is heavy.

Thanks everyone for the feedback and suggestions. You've given me a lot to research over the weekend.

@Eldarhua I'll check on Benro's equipment as I expect the vast majority of my use to be <100 mm. I had missed Gitzo's "safari" line of tripods as they were under the "bird watching" category. But, while they look similar to some of the others, they are interesting. It is also good to hear that you liked the GH1780QR ball head.

@Poik/Eric I've wondered if I'll end up as you did...starting off thinking small and light but finally getting a very solid, and a little heavier, set. For now, I am still planning on eventually having two set ups and want to definitely distinguish between the two. So, at this time, I am still thinking small and light.

@Conropl/Pat: I hadn't heard the "bad reports" on Gitzo heads. I guess this is why it pays to ask. I had looked at the Arca Swiss ball heads and was concerned about their weight. When I build the bigger system, I bet I use the Arca Swiss or RRS ball heads. How do you like the Induro tripod?

@Neuro/John: Thanks for the feedback. I worry about things like load ratings, which is why I've tried to stay with what I consider known brands. But the RRS video on the TQC-14, rated at ~25 lbs, did crack me up when the presentor suspended his entire body weight with the tripod. Both you and Pat have me rethinking the Gitzo ball heads. Actually, right now I am thinking the RRS BH30 is a better way to go. Granted, almost double the price.

@Eric: I appreciate the real world experience and this is one of the brands that I hadn't heard about and will look into....

@Rick/HDNitehawk: Well, this may seal the Gitzo head's fate. Noticable creep is something I want to avoid with the new system. I'll definitely let you know what I think of the GT1542 if I end up getting it. It is good to hear the GT2541 is solid. I had been considering that, but it is a bit heavier.

@Arnt: Let me know what you think of Sirui....I first heard about them in your thread. They actually have a tripod lighter than the GT1542.

Again, thanks for the feedback. It sounds like a number of us have been trying to wade through all the options recently. I appreciate all your help.

Happy New Year!
Brant

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by conropl

The ball was also frustrating... I would pain stakingly line something up and then when I would tighten up the ball it would move it.

---

The Manfrotto 488RC2 ballhead has a similar issue. After locking the ball, it 'settles' a bit, varying with the load. The Manfrotto 468MG doesn't move, which was one reason I upgraded (the other was that the 488RC2 cannot be converted with an AS-type clamp, whereas the 468MG can).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by conropl

I should have known better to. I am always telling design engineers that work for me not to believe all the spec's in catalogs or what sales people tell you.

---

This sounds like my job, except I am always explaining to clients that the design engineer bought in to a salesman's bill of goods or believed spec's that weren't realistic. Usually most engineer's will see through the spec bs, and then some are sold on the "I can deliver in 6 weeks" promise. The delivery time is almost never met.

I to bought a Vangard tripod a few years ago. For the money it performed well. It had the quick lock type leg locks, similar to Gitzo's. They performed well but took several turns to tighten. What failed on mine was the lock that holds the tripod legs at the right angles. It lasted as a tripod for just short of two years. It is a great light stand now. It was a bit over $200, you really get what you pay for.

Brant;

There is one complaint that you see occasionally on the Gitzo legs, and it is true so I will throw it out so you are not disappointed if you go that way and it happens to you. The feet of a Gitzo are screwed in. If you are not careful and pay attention, they work themselves loose. Probably by brushing against something. I have lost one before and it would have been frustrating if not for the fact I have a Gitzo monopod and just pulled the foot off of it. I have heard some people say they use locktite to hold theirs on. I just ordered a three pack of replacements and through them in my pack.

Rick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kayaker72

@Conropl/Pat: I hadn't heard the "bad reports" on Gitzo heads. I guess this is why it pays to ask. I had looked at the Arca Swiss ball heads and was concerned about their weight. When I build the bigger system, I bet I use the Arca Swiss or RRS ball heads. How do you like the Induro tripod?

---

I have never regretted getting the Induro. It is a well built tripod, and I bought one big enough that I can still use it for a 500mm someday if I get the opportunity (I went a bit overboard with the CT414). Also, the legs are stiff enough to hold well on ice (they do not splay out especially with the spike feet installed), and it holds up well to wind (it also has a weight hook if you need more weight to hold up to the wind). Mine is a bit heavy for what you are looking at. However, they have smaller ones; but compared to what you are looking at, it might be a little heavier at 2.8 lbs, and the small ones only fold up to just under 20". However, I have not tried a small ones.

Another consideration is maintenance. RRS (and maybe Gitzo - Rick?) legs can be easily disassembled for cleaning/drying - very useful after shooting at the beach, in the rain, etc.

Just to throw another option out there for ballheads since I haven't seen it mentioned, I've been looking at the Acratech GP. There is a review of the GV2 below, but the GP is basically the same but gives you the option to flip the head to use as a leveling base for panoramas. Seems like Arca Swiss, RRS, and Acratech are three of the best brands you can get.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ad-Review.aspx

They have a bunch of videos on their website demonstrating the use and durability of their ballheads:
http://acratech.net/pages.php?pageid=7
http://acratech.net/home.php?cat=1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

Another consideration is maintenance. RRS (and maybe Gitzo - Rick?) legs can be easily disassembled for cleaning/drying - very useful after shooting at the beach, in the rain, etc.

---

I have never had to break it completely down. But the legs can be separated easily. It would be a simple process if you wanted to do a thorough cleaning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

The other issue with both Gitzo and Manfrotto heads is they come with clamps that use their own, proprietary plate systems. .

---

This is a good point. Unless you only use one tripod, preferably also one body directly mounted, this will cause some irritation. Fixing the clamp to the Gitzo head is also somewhat cumbersome, with a flip lock, with a lock adjustment and a well hidden button underneath. The clamp can only be slided in from one side also. But when that is done, the head operates very well and it holds on to whatever I have loaded it with. I can carry it over my shoulder in rough terrain, with a Canon 1DX and 70-200mm f2.8 and 2x extender, without any slippage. The sales person convinced me, but if I were to buy a new head, I would go for one with a standard clamp/plate solution.

Eldar

The Manfrotto 190CXPro4 with the Manfrotto 496RC2 make up my travel tripod kit. It nicely fits in the suitcase we usually check when we travel, and it fits in a backpack. It does very well with the size of lens you said you mostly use. However, I have found the head slips a bit when I mount my 100-400. All in all, I am very pleased with it.

Larry

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HDNitehawk

Brant;
The feet of a Gitzo are screwed in. If you are not careful and pay attention, they work themselves loose.
Rick

---

It´s true that the legs are screwed in, but on the two I have, you need tools to get them off. A very solid spike tip, which is nice to have available on ice and rocks, is tightly screwed in. For normal use, a high quality rubber cap is fitted over it, with a snap-in-to-place design. That rubber cap can be turned, but with limited friction on the spike. I saw the same comment you make Rick, in an earlier review I read, but I will be very surprised if anyone get this problem with the current design.

Ok, I am convinced, there are a lot of good options out there. :D

In case anyone is interested, a few articles/semi-endorsements I found:
http://darwinwiggett.files.wordpress...ingtripods.pdf
https://www.thecamerastore.com/how-c...perfect-tripod
http://jefflynchdev.wordpress.com/20...ation-tripods/
http://www.bythom.com/support.htm

Thanks again for your comments, they are very much appreciated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eldarhau

It´s true that the legs are screwed in, but on the two I have, you need tools to get them off. A very solid spike tip, which is nice to have available on ice and rocks, is tightly screwed in. For normal use, a high quality rubber cap is fitted over it, with a snap-in-to-place design. That rubber cap can be turned, but with limited friction on the spike. I saw the same comment you make Rick, in an earlier review I read, but I will be very surprised if anyone get this problem with the current design.

---

Perhaps the newer versions fixed it. For me it is just something to watch. It wouldn't deter me from buying a fine Gitzo tripod.

The reason I thought I should point this out to Brant, is the lowest review on B&H for the 1542T is a complaint about loosing a foot. Especially with this tripod, the idea of owning this tripod is that it is so light you would carry it several miles in to the mountains to a remote area. Check your gear and be prepared, I am meticulous that way as anyone doing a long hike in to the wilderness should be. I would rather Brant know the possibility exists that it could happen, rather than recommend the Gitzo then he loose the foot on a 20 mile hike in to the wilderness.

I will eventually buy a backpack tripod, the 1542T is what I would buy if I ordered today. The foot thing is a non for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HDNitehawk

Perhaps the newer versions fixed it.

---

Well, I should be able to answer the question by the weekend. The GT1542T is ordered. :D

So, now onto the ball head. In reading through things, it appears that the RRS BH-30 and Markins Q3T were specifically designed for the GT1541T (predecessor to what I just bought) so that the legs can fold around the ball head. The Kirk BH-3 may have been as it seems to fit the general criteria. It doesn't appear Arca-Swiss makes a lighter ballhead and that RRS, Kirk, and Markins are all very good. Anyone familiar with Markins or Kirk?

In the end, I hope to have a very lightweight and portable set up. Eventually, I'll add a more typical/slightly bigger set as well. BTW, while I love taking photos, another great thing about photography is all this really cool gear. :cool:

I looked up the Markins, and lost interest when I saw the Phillips head screw used to stop the plate from sliding. Maybe I am wrong but my first thought was "cheap".

Are you going to try and do Pano with this setup?

You could do Pano's with the a single ball like the RRS BH-30 if you are careful in the setup.

If so I would look at the weight of the combinations I would be using;

If you stacked a RRS PCL-1 Panning Clamp on top of the RRS BH-30 it would add 10.2 ounces. Total weight of 21.6 ounces.
I own a version of this Arca-Swiss which would give you the same function and the weight would difference would be less than an ounce if you were stacking the two RRS components,
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/469926-REG/Arca_Swiss_801113_Monoball_Z1_dp_with.html
Of course with the Arca-Swiss you have the heavy duty ball head for later. This head is like a little chunk of metal though, and ultra-light really can't be used to describe it.

I think for a light setup, the RRS BH-30 is the one I would vote for.

Hi Rick,

Very cool Arca-Swiss ball head. Currently, I don't take panning shots. Maybe I should. Actually, maybe I will now with a better tripod. But I am wondering, what would the double pan action gain you?

Regard the Markins, I am not seeing a screw....maybe I am missing something, but I am looking here:
http://markinsamerica.com/MA5/Q3T.php?req=Q3TSK

It was mentioned several times in the user reviews (3 on the first page) for the GT1542T on BH and I've found a couple of other references to Markins being one of the top brands (http://www.bythom.com/support.htm).

That said, I am pretty sure I'll end up with the RRS BH-30. I just haven't looked at all the ball heads enough to satisfy my various disorders ( :) ) and am busy getting ready for tonight. I think much of my debate will be between weight/performance and a little on cost. For example, RRS BH30 LR is 0.71 lbs at $275 and the RRS BH40 is 1.05 lbs at $375 and the Arca-Swiss Z1-sp is 1.3 lbs at $410. Giving 0.1 lb for the plate, the difference in the set up weight would be 3 lbs with the BH30 up to 3.6 lbs with the Arca-Swiss. But I like how the BH-30 is designed to fit within the Gitzo traveller legs and, ultimately, the BH-30 is rated for about the same weight as the GT1542T. All these trade offs.... :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kayaker72

...But I am wondering, what would the double pan action gain you?

---

Your tripod is rarely level... so you set your camera relitive to the horizon with the ball. Now the camera is at a different angle from the base of your ball head. Therefore, if you rotate the camera under the ball, then the camera changes angles relitive the the horizon constantly as you rotate. However, if you rotate above the ball, then the camera retains its orientation relitive to the horizon as you rotate 360 degrees.

Pat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kayaker72

Actually, maybe I will now with a better tripod. But I am wondering, what would the double pan action gain you?

---

These legs are lightest of the light. Pano's might be a bit more difficult using them. But maybe not.

The double action pano, the second pano has a level in it as well. Your ball can be slightly off, you can make all of your adjustment pivoting the ball head and get the top pano perfectly level. You can then have a nice level pano action from side to side that is level. Where if you are just turning the ball head from its lower pano, if the ball isn't perfetly level it will tilt your camera as you swing. All you would need with the double pano head for a single row pano is a nodal slide to move your camera foward and back.

Thanks Pat and Rick....That makes complete sense and is a great feature.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kayaker72

Thanks Pat and Rick....That makes complete sense and is a great feature.

---

I have a pano plate on my ball head - works really well. I use the electronic level in the camera vs. the bubble to set level. Takes a moment but it works for my foggy eyes :) (have to set level then rotate 90 degrees and set again, and then return to double check but it is usally spot on)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HDNitehawk

I looked up the Markins, and lost interest when I saw the Phillips head screw used to stop the plate from sliding. Maybe I am wrong but my first thought was "cheap".

---

I finally came across an image with the screw. Looks like an old website (the newer websiteseems to be markins.com/4.0/…) and I haven’t seen the screw in any other plateimage nor heard it mentioned in any of the threads I’ve read on ballheads. Thus I doubt it is part of thecurrent design, if it ever was, but here it is:

http://www.markins.com/2.0/eng/feature_01.html

Everything I can tell is that Markins is a favored brand, andperhaps the "top" pairing with the Gitzo traveler series. This may be more of the case with the 1541T, 1544T, and 2542Tas the head could actually fit within the legs. The design changed with the1542T as they extended the center column to get some additional height and nowthe head is either just beyond the feet with the column fully extended, or, withinthe feet but the center column sticks out the other side. To keep the most compact set up, this designchange, which many do not seem to like, favors shorter ball heads for the 1542Tvs narrow ball heads on the 1541T. For example, the RRS BH-40 is shorter but wider than the Markins Q3T. So, for the 1542T, without modification, the BH-40 would likely result in a more compact final collapse travel kit.

Here is a picture of the GT1542T without a ball head-- http://www.flickr.com/photos/chub84/5838235248/and the GT1541T with the markins Q3T http://www.flickr.com/photos/jerryart/3386113601/. Actually, I wonder if I they are phasing outthe GT1542T in favor of the GT1544T, which again seems to have room for theball head within the legs. But I amworking on a fix for the the GT1542T. Seems the center columns for Series 1 tripodsare interchangeable, so I’ve emailed Gitzo to see how much a “replacement”center column for the GT1541T would cost. First I have to decide how important it is to have the head between thelegs.

Some of the more interesting links regarding Markins I’vecome across:
http://www.hossedia.com/reviews/gitzo-traveler-markins-q3t/(later-- lost the tripod combo and replaced with RRS BH-40 and legs-seecomments—preferred the BH-40)
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=538298
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/archive/index.php/t-999885.html
http://www.nikonians.org/html/resources/non-nikon_articles/markins/index.html
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/610121/0
http://photo.net/filters-bags-tripods-accessories-forum/00YCLS
http://adaynotwasted.com/2010/08/the-perfect-travel-tripod/
http://www.wilsonism.com/Default.aspx?tabid=53&EntryID=19

It may seem that I am trying to sell, myself or you, on Markins, I am not. They simply kept coming up in my searches, even for RRS, and I hadn’t heard of them before and, from what I can tell the Markins Q3T and RRS BH-30 were the only ball heads designed for the Gitzo traveler series with most people I can find selecting the Q3T between the two.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kayaker72

Actually, I wonder if I they are phasing outthe GT1542T in favor of the GT1544T

---

Someone can correct me if I am wrong but, I think the 1,2 and 4 digit are the release dates. The GT1544T being the newest and replacing the older models. This may be why the GT1542T is $484 and the GT1544T is $739.00, the cheap price is probably a clearance price. I looked at the GT1542T last summer before I went to yellowstone, I thought it was priced over $700 at the time.

I think I would still stick with the RRS head because of reputation. The other brand may be great, and sometimes I am the last to move on a great new item. I tend to let others be the test subjects. But I read many good reviews about the RRS head, and honestly this is the first time I have ever even looked or heard of Markins.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HDNitehawk

Someone can correct me if I am wrong but, I think the 1,2 and 4 digit are the release dates. The GT1544T being the newest and replacing the older models. This may be why the GT1542T is $484 and the GT1544T is $739.00, the cheap price is probably a clearance price. I looked at the GT1542T last summer before I went to yellowstone, I thought it was priced over $700 at the time.

I think I would still stick with the RRS head because of reputation. The other brand may be great, and sometimes I am the last to move on a great new item. I tend to let others be the test subjects. But I read many good reviews about the RRS head, and honestly this is the first time I have ever even looked or heard of Markins.

---

Rick, I think you are dead on, the 1, 2, and 4 are the sequence that they were released. What I want to know is what happened to the GT1543T? I can only find a reference to it in old ebay sales. Must have been pretty short lived.

Regarding Markins, I've convinced myself that even though I've never heard of them before, that they are one of the established high end brands. That is one of the reasons that I posted all the links. I am preparing another post on the ball heads (waiting on RRS website to work again), but I'll steal the following from it:

I did a quick survey of the GT1542T reviews on BH to see what it was paired with and the Markins Q3T came out on top. Of the 44 reviews, 19 people identified theirball head:

1. Markins Q3T: 6
2. RRS BH-40: 4
3. Arcatech GP-s: 3
4. Different Manfrotto: 2
5. RRS BH-30/Gitzo/Kirk BH3/Markins M20: 1 each

I did a similar search through the BH comments on theGT1541T:

1. Markins Q3T: 7
2. Gitzo 1780QR: 4
3. Misc Gitzo: 4
4. RRS BH-25: 3
5. One each for Markins Q3E, RRS BH-30, and KirkBH-3

Ok, as I was finalizing this post, my GT1542T just showed up. Oh, first impressions are very good. It is so small and light, yet, fully extended, it is much more solid than my old tripod. :D:cool:

As for the ball head...I am going to test a few things with the tripod, but where I think I am at is BH-40 if I don't replace the center column and Q3T if I do so that it can fit within the legs. I am also toying with the idea of buying both and returning the one I don't like.

I've spent some time the last couple of mornings and nights looking into as much as I could find about ball heads for the GT1542T that I just purchased. I made the table below to help me keep track of the different physical characteristics of the ball heads I was reviewing and the Joby, just as a reference as I own it with my gorillapod:

Ball Head	Price ($-Jan 2013)	"Rated" Weight (lbs)	Ball Diameter		Ball Surface Area	Ball Head Weight		Ball Head Height		Base Diameter
			(mm)	(in)	(in2)	(g)	(lb)	(mm)	(in)	(mm)	(in)
Small Ball Heads
Joby BH1	$40	6.5	25	1.0	3.0	150	0.3	63	2.5	42	1.7
RRS BH-25 LR	$175	8.8	25	1.0	3.0	221	0.5	66	2.6	33	1.3
Gitzo Traveler Series Ball Heads
RRS BH-30 LR	$275	15	30	1.2	4.4	324	0.7	75	3.0	41	1.6
Markins Q3T	$310	65	38	1.5	7.0	375	0.8	89	3.5	50	2.0
Mid-sized Ball Heads
Arcatech GP-s	$430	25	38	1.5	7.0	400	0.9	98	3.9	53	2.1
RRS BH-40	$375	18	40	1.6	7.8	479	1.1	76	3.0	53	2.1
Markins M10	$370	100	44	1.7	9.4	490	1.1	98	3.9	62	2.4
Large Ball Heads
Markins M20	$410	110	48	1.9	11.2	555	1.2	102	4.0	68	2.7
Arca-Swiss Z1	$410	122	54	2.1	14.2	680	1.5	101	4.0	--	--
Kirk BH-1	$385	50	54	2.1	14.2	850	1.9	115	4.5	74	2.9
RRS BH-55 LR	$455	50	55	2.2	14.7	862	1.9	94	3.7	74	2.9

Of course, the "rated" weight is random as methodogies for determining the weight are often not known and seem to vary considerably between manufacturers. Also, base diameter doesn't include knobs and levers so it isn't representative of the total diameter of the ball head.

I found several who regarded ball size being a critical feature in terms of load bearing and stability. In fact, looking at the above table, regardless of the brand, the consensus seemed to be that people liked their ball head as long as it was 38 mm/1.5 in in diameter or greater. Which makes sense as that is about where you start seeing rapid jumps in the ball heads surface area. For example the RRS BH-30; everyone really likes (loves?) RRS, but I had trouble even finding very much online about the BH-30 and what I found was fairly evenly split between those that upgraded/thought it slipped too much and those that thought it was a great hiking/travel ball head. But as soon as you cross that 38 mm diameter line the significant majority of people liked whichever ball head they owned. Matter of fact, I only recall reading a few nit-picks (one thought the BH-40 sagged a little, another didn't like the tension in the pan control of the Markins, a few thought RRS weren't as smooth, etc). No real complaints.

Anyway, this wasn't an exhaustive evaluation, but I thought I'd share. It seems like there are several good brands out there but the secret is to get a good enough brand and a ball that is 38 mm or greater.

As I mentioned in my last post, I am focusing in mostly on the Markins Q3T or the RRS BH-40 as a combination of ball head size, general regard in what I read, and weight. There is still an off chance I'll get the BH-30 or even the BH-25 if I want to save weight and money. After all, I have taken several 30 second exposures with the Joby BH1 on a gorillapod that have come out just fine and I am sure the BH-25 and BH-30 are big improvments, especially mounted on a gitzo.

Thanks...Brant

Edit--it took me awhile to get the table in here and I lost most of my formating. Does anyone know how to get a formated table into a post? I tried uploading an image, but I seem to be limited to ~20KB, which isn't enough file size.

Could you save it as a jpeg/bmp and post it that way.

Thanks. Happy to hear it. I am still working on resolving a few things, but promise to follow up with my thoughts on the final set up.

I wanted to update this thread on the Arca-Swiss plates and the tripod. I am still evaluating two ball heads, the Markins Q3T and the RRS BH-30. I'll post about those soon. But for now, a few thoughts on what this amateur photographer learned in assembling a traveling tripod system.

First, I have taken the advice given earlier in this thread and both ball heads I am evaluating mate with Arca-Swiss style plates. I have read that if you are going to use plates from multiple manufacturers (RRS, Kirk, Arca-Swiss, Markins, Wimberley, etc) that it is important to use the screw in release for the plates and not the quick release clamp. Even though they are all Arca-Swiss style, it appears that there are significant enough differences in plate dimensions between the manufacturers that the quick release clamp will not mate with all plates whereas the screw in clamp is essentially adjusted to each plate each time you screw it in. For example, RRS, whose quick release clamps are not adjustable, recommend that you only use RRS or Wimberley plates withthe RRS ball heads. Markins, whose quick release clamp is adjustable, still recommends that use only one brand of plate so that you do not have to adjust the set screw each time you switch plates.

With this in mind, I decided to use RRS plates. Their plates seem to be held in high regard. At some point I will likely buy a “L-plate” right now I am using a borrowed B7D plate (thanks Greg) for my 7D and the L84 for the 100-400L.
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8518/8...f99f3228_b.jpg
RSS Plates-1462 by kayaker72, on Flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8465/8...4a95e79d_b.jpg
RSS Plates-1459 by kayaker72, on Flickr
The plates are impressively light. I also like that there is a place for my Black-Rapid strap to screw right into the bottom of the plate. The B7D can also have straps attached. The only item that surprised me was that you need an allen wrench to screw the plate into your camera. Both plates came with allen wrenches, but that is something that I will now have to remember to keep with me at all times. My understanding is that RRS feels that this is a more secure design as you can better tighten the screw.

Also, coming from Manfrotto/Joby plates, which are universal in that they can be adapted to anything that fits a 1/4" screw, I learned during this process that RRS and certain other plate manufacturers I looked at customize their plates to fit each camera/lens. The key is the vertical edge that should help prevent rotation if the camera/lens is ever at an angle. This needs to be a specific distance from the screw, which is specific to each camera. This is nice as I often fought rotation with the Manfrotto/Joby plates. But it seems like several manufactuers also make universal plates.

I purchased the Gitzo GT1542T traveler tripod. There are a couple of “traveling” tripods out there. In addition to the tripods mentioned earlier in this thread, I would also take the time to look at the RRS TQC-14, Feisol 3441s,and others in the Gitzo traveler series (GT1544T, etc). Of course, there are many other tripods that are very close to the “traveler” types. In the end, my decision came down to the GT1542T and the GT2541, even though it isn’t a “traveler” it seemed to be a favorite tripod for hikers/backpackers (3 lbs, closed length of 21.85”) and is rated to support more weight.

In the end, I went with the GT1542T as it closed to the smallest length (16.7” with the legs folded back over the ballhead/extended center column), was among the lightest I found (2.2 lbs), and it was going for the “reasonable” price of$448 after rebate. These factors were important to me as I decided I wasn’t only trying to replace my old aluminum Bogen/Manfrotto tripod, which only traveled with me occasionally, but also Iwas trying to replace my gorillapod, which travels everywhere with me. I also decided that not only did I want to have my tripod fit in carry-on luggage, such as a suitcase or my pelican storm im2500, but also, potentially, on the inside of a backpack. I don’t know if I’ll ever do that, but I’d like the option. Looking around, the longest backpacks I found were about 20” with it more common around 17”. Of course, this will never happen with my current Lowepro Fastpack 350, but I am already planning on getting a second backpack later this year.

So, with all that I bought the GT1542T, and I am very impressed and happy with the purchase. It seems very well made. It is very light. It is much more stable than my old aluminum tripod. Below are a few pictures:

Set up with withe the RRS BH-30 and center column at it’s highest point
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8188/8...78169945_b.jpg
Gitzo-1432 by kayaker72, on Flickr

Set up as close as it can get to the ground with center column removed
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8215/8...cf284c6d_b.jpg
Gitzo-1434 by kayaker72, on Flickr

Of course, I went with the traveler because of its weightand collapsed size (with and without the BH-30 attached):
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8080/8...3972d754_b.jpg
Gitzo-1441 by kayaker72, on Flickr
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8367/8...95b33a42_b.jpg
Gitzo-1442 by kayaker72, on Flickr

A few posts ago, I mentioned I was leaning toward the RRS BH-40. My mind began to change as I started considering ways of getting the ballhead to fit within the 16.7” and not stick out. So, I know this is a little crazy as ~20” with a ballhead attached is still very compact, much more compact that most tripods. Also, if I ever needed it to fit within 16.7," I could just take the ball head off and travel with them separately.

The ball head fitting between the legs when the tripod was collapsed was the design of the other Gitzo traveler series, as their center columns are shorter. It seems that with the GT1542T they extended the center column to 15.7” to get additional total height which I don’t need. I’ve read that the center column of the GT1544T/GT1542T is 12.7”. So, while I don't necessarily need to be able to fit the ball head between the legs while traveling, I decided that would be nice and moved off the BH-40, as it is too wide to fit between the legs, and started looking for ways to decrease the length ofthe center column.

I’ve come up with thefollowing:
· The center columns from other Gitzo series 1 6xcarbon fiber tripods are interchangeable. So, the shorter center column used on the GT1541T/1544T/1541/1531 can be purchased from from Gitzo, www.gitzospares.com, or B&H. The part number is d1155.08 and costs about$120. Even if I bought this, I would still have spent less on my kit than a new GT1544T currently costs.
· Gitzo sells a “Low to medium level” centercolumn (GS1510KB). It is available at adorama/B&H/amazon for about $71 new. It is about 2 inches shorter than I would like, but does work and also gives me ~3-4” to adjust the column height when working close to the ground.
· Go with a DYI option and cut the current GT1542T center column to the length I would like. The primary issue I see with this is the plug that allows you to screw the hook into the bottom of the center column is glued in. So you would either lose the hook, need to buy and glue in a new plug, or somehow cut/dremel out the current plug and re-glue it. I haven’t been able to get Gitzo to respond about selling me a new plug, but I have found some glues for carbon fiber. I know DYI may seem crazy, but as an engineer that designs and builds remediation systems, it actually seems pretty easy to me.

But, in the end I found a used “low to medium level” center column on amazon for $35, bought it and intend to use the kit as it is for a while before trying either of the other options. I am 5’9”, and wish the smaller center column was about 2” longer. I used this set up last Friday to take the long exposure pictures in Boston and it worked really well.

A few pictures with the GS1510KB and Markins Q3T:
At full height (about 52.2 inches with the Markins, 48.7 inches without)
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8087/8...ee2f77c4_b.jpg
Gitzo-1450 by kayaker72, on Flickr

At it's lowest height; the short center column will provide ~3" of height adjustment:
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8498/8...ec4910bb_b.jpg
Gitzo-1448 by kayaker72, on Flickr

And in the collapsed setting with the Markins Q3T:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8378/8...33006b3e_b.jpg
Gitzo-1444 by kayaker72, on Flickr

Below are a comparison of the center columns. Top, what comes with the GT1542T, the GS1510KB, and then the two ends that can be combined to eliminate the center column.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8083/8...21a7dfbd_b.jpg
Center Column-1453 by kayaker72, on Flickr

I also bought a "snoot boot" from Op/Tech to cover the ball head, especially when between the legs so as to not wear on the legs and vice versa.

Thanks,
Brant

Edit: To answer a few questions from earlier in the thread. The legs and feet do detach. As of now I am not too worried about the feet detaching as they seem very solid but I guess that has been a concern for others.

Brant,
thanks for sharing your research and first impressions. Especially your analysis of ballhead size vs customer satisfaction helped speed up my decision.

I finally bought the Sirui M-3004 with the Sirui K-30x ballhead, but my requirements were different than yours: Hike-ability and minimum weight was less important, I wanted more height (

58.3"

without column extended), but still wanted a short folded length. I went with aluminum over CF for a better price. So far I'm pleased, but cannot really compare to other brands since I have never used one before (other than gorillapod). The whole thing with ballhead folds to about 20''.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kayaker72

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8465/8...4a95e79d_b.jpg
RSS Plates-1459 by kayaker72, on Flickr
The plates are impressively light. I also like that there is a place for my Black-Rapid strap to screw right into the bottom of the plate. The B7D can also have straps attached. The only item that surprised me was that you need an allen wrench to screw the plate into your camera. Both plates came with allen wrenches, but that is something that I will now have to remember to keep with me at all times. My understanding is that RRS feels that this is a more secure design as you can better tighten the screw.

---

Why would you want to take the plates of the camera? Ideally they stay on the camera all the time, and you just plug them into another clamp.