Tripod leg supported weight: how much do I *need*?

[GmwDarkroom]

I've searched and searched and read dozens of specific suggestions when people ask "what tripod should I buy?" which gets muddied by discussions of the head. I'm wondering what I need for tripod legs only in terms of supported weight.

How much "supported weight" is enough for the legs for an 8# - 10# rig (camera, grip, 100-400 lens)? I realize that many manufacturers inflate their numbers and there's no standards. Anyone have any suggestions to offer for manufacturers that under or over estimate their ratings to excess?

I'd like to keep this venture in the $400-600 range including the tripod head, so any thoughts are welcome. While I don't want to have a monster heavy tripod, I am not necessarily needing fold-away size or deep woods trekking light weight. I'm also trying to avoid cheap Chinese junk which seems to be hard these days.

Things I've noticed in shopping:

B&H has a really good deal on the Manfrotto 055CXPRO3 and PRO4. Manfrotto also has a new MT190 series out. That would mean a ~15# - 17# rated limit, though.
Induro (Chinese, I know) has some good looking and well-reviewd options. "Only" 3 leg angles.
Gitzo - very nice, but will stretch my budget. I'd probably need to wait on this or drastically cut the quality head I get.

And maybe the answer is "wait". My old tripod finally stopped clamping well (old Pro Albinar from the 80's) and it is time to upgrade but it's not a "must have now" item.

[neuroanatomist]

I can tell you that Really Right Stuff definitely underestimates their tripod load ratings. Their TQC-14 is their lightest set of legs, and it's rated for 25 lbs. I think that RRS owner Joe weighs a little more than that...



I'm 180 lbs., and I've tried that with my TQC-14.

FWIW, RRS recommends their Series 1 (TQC-14, equivalent to Gitzo 2-series) for up to 200-300mm, their Series 2 (TVC-2x, 40 lb rating) for up to 300-400mm, and their Series 3 (TVC-3x, 50 lb rating) for up to 800mm. They now have a Series 4 with a 100 lb load rating that could probably support a small car.

[Sean Setters]

That's a great picture. :-)

I just got done upgrading everything relating to support - tripod, ballhead, new plates, new pano setup, everything. In all, I'm sure I spent in excess of $1,200 (but I refuse to add it up).

I owned an old Induro aluminum tripod that had served me decently for several years. I decided to save some money and buy the Induro CT314 instead of the similarly spec'd Gitzo. The most important attribute for me, though, was maximum height (I like a tall tripod) and the ability to compact down to a [relatively] small size (which is why I went for 4 leg sections instead of 3).

I've been fairly impressed by the Induro tripod. I don't know how well it's going to hold up over the long haul, but so far I don't have any reservations about purchasing it.

If you've kept up with the news posts here on TDP, you'll know that I also purchased an Arca-Swiss Monoball Z1. While I'm very happy with my purchase (after having the QR clamp replaced), I'd suggest taking a good look at the Sirui K-40x Ball Head. DPReview recently tested a bunch of ballheads and found the Sirui K-40x to be an excellent value when compared even the most expensive models.

[Dave Throgmartin]

Manfrotto's 055XPROB is really nice. It's my general use tripod as a compromise of stability, cost, and weight. Stability is good, cost is low, and weight is relatively high

The link below is old, but informative.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=529785

Best of luck to you whichever way you go.

Dave

[conropl]

Everyone seems to go through the same questions when getting a tripod. There are no standards, so the you have to search through the quagmire of spec's and decide which to believe. One general comment: If a company has a good reputation... they did not get that reputation by inflating the spec's and not following through. You have hit on some good choices. RRS and Gitzo are top of the line and the cost is commensurate. However, I have not heard of to many complaints about those. The Induro and Manfrotto also have a good reputation, but the costs are less.

Neuro use to have a Manfrotto, and used to recommend that until he bought the RSS when he got the 600mm lens. There are many others that seem to be happy with them.

I have the Induro and like it a lot. They are not cheaply built, and are very sturdy. I have the larger CT414 which has four section legs. I usually only extend three section (and a few inches of the fourth) unless on a hill or when my 100-400mm is pointed upward (at birds usually) and I do not want to bend over to look into the eye piece. In other words, I like the extra hieght. If you find a lower cost high end Gitzo or RSS, then they tend to be shorter... that was not acceptable to me. The Induro CT313 would probably be perfectly fine as far as weight rating goes, and it would be a bit lighter (I still would not give up my CT414 though). Another consideration is whether you can tear down the legs easily for cleaning. The Induro is easy to tear down and clean if I get into sand at the beach and people near oceans can tear down to flush the salt out. Neuro has said in the past that the RSS tears down for cleaning as well.

Pat

[GmwDarkroom]

Thanks for the ideas. I am taking a long look at Induro. And I did see the article on the ball head roundup on DPReview. Very interesting stuff. Anyone have any experience with Sirui's tripods? I know it's another Chinese manufacturer, but it seems to have a decent reputation. I wish I could go the RRS route, but the price-point for my needs is wildly out of my budget.

[ahab1372]

I do. I have the Sirui M3004 (aluminum), which has now been replaced with the M3004X. The 3204 is the carbon version.
I like it because it is high (without center column raised), and still folds down to a little more than 20''. For me it is "good enough stuff" if you don't want to spend more money on the really right stuff or Gitzos. It seemed to be the only viable option for me that is tall enough, folds to a compact size, and has decent quality.
I also went with their ballhead, and again, cannot complain (but also cannot compare to any of the other ball heads out there).

[Bill W]

Check out Feisol.....many choices. I have had the (classic) CT 3371 for 5 years now. With the Markins Q-ball (3) the pair handled the 7D and 100-400 w/out any issues. Plenty of height (w/out center post) and stabilization for my 68 inch eye level. Also I have had no issues w/the tripod's build.

I've since upgraded to the 500mm lens and added the Wimberley gimbal.....the 3371 is still rock solid.

I've put the Q-ball on my very old and cheap traveling tripod and the Q-ball handles the 7D and 70-200 IS 2.8 v2 very well. I'll be purchasing the Feisol Traveler CT 3441T for an upcoming trip.

Maybe a little over your budget, but it will be a one time purchase for the tripod.

Bill

[ahab1372]

IMO, with a limited budget, I would get one of the "good enough" tripod legs options mentioned above that fits your height requirements, and then try to get a better ballhead. I went with the Sirui over the Manfrotto mostly because of the height (58'' vs 48'') and shorter folded length - the latter may be irrelevant for you, but I wanted to be able to put the tripod into a carry-on.

[Busted Knuckles]

Reputations are earned. I have a promaster chinese and HAD to retro fit gitzo rubber/spike feet. (epoxy & double nuts) so I don't recommend it. The tube material was sooo thin it cut right through rubber feet.

I do recommend convertible feet as a standard - an indicator of quality (not a guarantee but a good start)

Tube diameter is really important and the way the legs join the center plate, those models w/o a center tube are the most stable.