PH: Lighweight tripods for walking

Paul Saunders said:

However, I can't honestly claim that these are good tripods, and I would
prefer something of better quality, but still light, so I've been having
a look around.

Thanks for the heads-up Paul.

SteveO
--

Paul Saunders said:

As you've probably noticed, I advocate the use of a lightweight tripod
for walking and backpacking. I recently mentioned my use of a cheapie
Jessops tripod.

However, I can't honestly claim that these are good tripods, and I would
prefer something of better quality, but still light, so I've been having
a look around.

I came across this page which is quite useful, although a little out of
date;
http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2gkrc/Tripod-Test.html

The best (according to the author's criteria) was this, at 3.2 pounds;
http://www.adorama.com/VNEFL4K.html

The best for lightest weight was this, at only 2 pounds;
http://www.minitripods.com/Velbon_MAXi_343E.html

I've got one of those. Very light and compact when folded but not
really useable at full leg extension as it will then wobble if a gnat
sneezes somewhere in the vicinity. I need to rig up a bit of bungee
cord - or rather a hook for it - so I can stabilise it at higher
extensions by putting my foot through the loop to hold the tripod to
the ground by the tension in the cord. The included ballhead isn't too
bad and a light tripod that gets taken on a walk is better than the
heavy tripod that sits in the boot of the car.

Whilst we're on the subject of tripod based photography, why have
camera manufactures taken the moneygrabbing route with remote
releases? £35 for a bit of wire with a two stage switch on it is
tantamount to daylight (or moonlight) robbery. Stuff 'em I'm off to
build my own. At least my KM A2 has a self timer that doesn't need
umpteen button presses to select and change from 2 second to ten
second delay unlike my old Canon compact.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

Phil Cook said:

Quoted message said:

The best for lightest weight was this, at only 2 pounds;
http://www.minitripods.com/Velbon_MAXi_343E.html

I've got one of those. Very light and compact when folded but not
really useable at full leg extension as it will then wobble if a gnat
sneezes somewhere in the vicinity.

Hmm... My 1 pound tripod is ideal for backpacking but very flimsy. Not
very tall either, that's why I thought the above tripod may be better,
for the extra height.

Quoted message said:

I need to rig up a bit of bungee
cord - or rather a hook for it - so I can stabilise it at higher
extensions by putting my foot through the loop to hold the tripod to
the ground by the tension in the cord. The included ballhead isn't too
bad and a light tripod that gets taken on a walk is better than the
heavy tripod that sits in the boot of the car.

Indeed.

Quoted message said:

Whilst we're on the subject of tripod based photography, why have
camera manufactures taken the moneygrabbing route with remote
releases? £35 for a bit of wire with a two stage switch on it is
tantamount to daylight (or moonlight) robbery.

Ridiculous, isn't it? Mine cost £25 I think and the one for the 20D
costs nearer £40 I think. Interestingly, the connector is slightly
different, so if I upgrade to the 20D I'll have to buy a new one. Is
that a con or what?

Quoted message said:

Stuff 'em I'm off to
build my own. At least my KM A2 has a self timer that doesn't need
umpteen button presses to select and change from 2 second to ten
second delay unlike my old Canon compact.

Fortunately I now have the mirror lock which also acts as a delay, so I
can do most of my tripod photography without having to mess about with
the self timer or the remote. The remote is only necessary for
exposures longer than 30s. There's no way of "locking" the shutter open
on B mode without the remote (one of my complaints with the camera when
I bought it - why not allow you to specify an exposure time? then you
could set it and forget it).

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk

Paul Saunders said:

Phil Cook said:

Quoted message said:

The best for lightest weight was this, at only 2 pounds;
http://www.minitripods.com/Velbon_MAXi_343E.html

I've got one of those. Very light and compact when folded but not
really useable at full leg extension as it will then wobble if a gnat
sneezes somewhere in the vicinity.

Hmm... My 1 pound tripod is ideal for backpacking but very flimsy. Not
very tall either, that's why I thought the above tripod may be better,
for the extra height.

Well if I don't use the third section of legs it is usable. That third
section is no thicker than my little finger so no wonder it wobbles.
Two sections plus a little centre column is about mid-chest on me so
not too much stooping required to look through the viewfinder, but
then I have the advantage of being able to use my v/f or the LCD
screen as a waistlevel finder.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

Phil Cook said:

Paul Saunders said:

Phil Cook said:

> The best for lightest weight was this, at only 2 pounds;
> http://www.minitripods.com/Velbon_MAXi_343E.html

I've got one of those. Very light and compact when folded but not
really useable at full leg extension as it will then wobble if a gnat
sneezes somewhere in the vicinity.

Hmm... My 1 pound tripod is ideal for backpacking but very flimsy. Not
very tall either, that's why I thought the above tripod may be better,
for the extra height.

Well if I don't use the third section of legs it is usable. That third
section is no thicker than my little finger so no wonder it wobbles.
Two sections plus a little centre column is about mid-chest on me.

Oops. It's got four section legs. So I don't use the fourth and "three
sections plus a little centre column..."

It's in the car at the moment, otherwise I'd set it up and give you a
figure for how high I use it.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

In Article <[email hidden]>,"Paul Saunders"

Quoted message said:

The best for lightest weight was this, at only 2 pounds;
http://www.minitripods.com/Velbon_MAXi_343E.html
http://bermangraphics.com/coolpix/velbon.htm

I've owned this tripod for the last three years or so and it's still my
first choice when I'm trying to keep weight down. However, couple of
warnings. Firstly, whilst the potential height on this tripod is good, it
becomes pretty unstable when extended, there's no hook on the centre column
to hang weight for extra stability (and don't even think about using this
centre column!). It is possible to improvise with a stone bag, but again
this can cause the legs to flex quite a lot when extended to any great
height.

Secondly I now have problems with a number of the leg-locks. If, after
locking the legs, I put any significant downwards force on the tripod there
is a tendancy for them to slip.

Having said all of that, if you don't extend the legs too far, it is quite
usuable and tips the scales at a touch over 1kg with QR plate.

I think if I was looking for new lightweight legs I'd also take a look at
the new Velbon Ultra Maxi/Luxi range.
http://www.velbon-tripod.com/ultra_maxi.htm

Regards,
Richard G.

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

There's no way of "locking" the shutter open
on B mode without the remote (one of my complaints with the camera when
I bought it - why not allow you to specify an exposure time? then you
could set it and forget it).

No reason to complain - If you need exposures that long you'd use a
remote anyway. Even the "old" cable release allowed you to lock the
shutter open for "Time" shots.

That was always the option "Bulb" or "Time"

Even if you could set a time on the camera, releasing the shutter using
the button would cause some shake.
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
| Phil Cook wrote:

<snipped!>

| > Whilst we're on the subject of tripod based photography, why have
| > camera manufactures taken the moneygrabbing route with remote
| > releases? £35 for a bit of wire with a two stage switch on it is
| > tantamount to daylight (or moonlight) robbery.
|
| Ridiculous, isn't it? Mine cost £25 I think and the one for the 20D
| costs nearer £40 I think. Interestingly, the connector is slightly
| different, so if I upgrade to the 20D I'll have to buy a new one. Is
| that a con or what?

Yes, my one for the 20D cost £40, RS-80N3. I originally bought the one that
you had Paul, thinking it would be the same, but it had a different
connector! What a con, I was not pleased as it's the same 'thing' but with
a different plug. But not having the nouse to make my own like Phil is
going to do (and a friend told me I could do for a few quid), I just paid my
money.

| > Stuff 'em I'm off to
| > build my own. At least my KM A2 has a self timer that doesn't need
| > umpteen button presses to select and change from 2 second to ten
| > second delay unlike my old Canon compact.
|
| Fortunately I now have the mirror lock which also acts as a delay, so I
| can do most of my tripod photography without having to mess about with
| the self timer or the remote. The remote is only necessary for
| exposures longer than 30s. There's no way of "locking" the shutter open
| on B mode without the remote (one of my complaints with the camera when
| I bought it - why not allow you to specify an exposure time? then you
| could set it and forget it).

If you've got £100 to spare, you can buy thes remote switch TC-80N3 which
has a digital timer from 1 second to 99 hours. It'd be nice, but I thought
I was pushing the boat out by forking out £20, never mind £40; so I
certainly wasn't going to spend £100!

| Paul

Ste

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Phil Cook said:

Quoted message said:

The best for lightest weight was this, at only 2 pounds;
http://www.minitripods.com/Velbon_MAXi_343E.html

I've got one of those. Very light and compact when folded but not
really useable at full leg extension as it will then wobble if a gnat
sneezes somewhere in the vicinity.

Hmm... My 1 pound tripod is ideal for backpacking but very flimsy. Not
very tall either, that's why I thought the above tripod may be better,
for the extra height.

Quoted message said:

I need to rig up a bit of bungee
cord - or rather a hook for it - so I can stabilise it at higher
extensions by putting my foot through the loop to hold the tripod to
the ground by the tension in the cord. The included ballhead isn't too
bad and a light tripod that gets taken on a walk is better than the
heavy tripod that sits in the boot of the car.

Indeed.

Quoted message said:

Whilst we're on the subject of tripod based photography, why have
camera manufactures taken the moneygrabbing route with remote
releases? £35 for a bit of wire with a two stage switch on it is
tantamount to daylight (or moonlight) robbery.

Ridiculous, isn't it? Mine cost £25 I think and the one for the 20D
costs nearer £40 I think. Interestingly, the connector is slightly
different, so if I upgrade to the 20D I'll have to buy a new one. Is
that a con or what?

Quoted message said:

Stuff 'em I'm off to
build my own. At least my KM A2 has a self timer that doesn't need
umpteen button presses to select and change from 2 second to ten
second delay unlike my old Canon compact.

Fortunately I now have the mirror lock which also acts as a delay, so I
can do most of my tripod photography without having to mess about with
the self timer or the remote. The remote is only necessary for
exposures longer than 30s. There's no way of "locking" the shutter open
on B mode without the remote (one of my complaints with the camera when
I bought it - why not allow you to specify an exposure time? then you
could set it and forget it).

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk

I use 1 of 3 methods depending on the distance I intend to walk -

1) Use a high ISO setting (I have a 10D and 20D), thereby negating the use
of a tripod altogether
2) Velbon Mini CX - it's ok, although not as versatile (or heavy as)
3) Benbo Trekker
....

--
Regards

Craig Cooke

www.storm-imaging.co.uk
Exciting, Fun, Creative and Informal Digital Wedding & Portrait Photography

W. D. Grey said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

There's no way of "locking" the shutter open
on B mode without the remote (one of my complaints with the camera when
I bought it - why not allow you to specify an exposure time? then you
could set it and forget it).

No reason to complain - If you need exposures that long you'd use a
remote anyway. Even the "old" cable release allowed you to lock the
shutter open for "Time" shots.

That was always the option "Bulb" or "Time"

Even if you could set a time on the camera, releasing the shutter using
the button would cause some shake.

Given the amount of "elastic trickery" and computing power built into
a modern camera there is no reason why they couldn't build in a
variable long exposure setting. Set the exposure and after pressing
the shutter button it would click open after the self timer delay for
the set length of time.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

In article <[email hidden]>, Phil Cook
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Even if you could set a time on the camera, releasing the shutter using
the button would cause some shake.

Given the amount of "elastic trickery" and computing power built into
a modern camera there is no reason why they couldn't build in a
variable long exposure setting. Set the exposure and after pressing
the shutter button it would click open after the self timer delay for
the set length of time.

I hope Camera manufacturers are reading this
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

Phil Cook said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> The best for lightest weight was this, at only 2 pounds;
>> http://www.minitripods.com/Velbon_MAXi_343E.html

Quoted message said:

It's in the car at the moment, otherwise I'd set it up and give you a
figure for how high I use it.

I've fished it out now. Without the last leg sections and no centre
column extension it is 95cm. Using half the centre column it is 110cm.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

Phil Cook said:

Given the amount of "elastic trickery" and computing power built into
a modern camera there is no reason why they couldn't build in a
variable long exposure setting. Set the exposure and after pressing
the shutter button it would click open after the self timer delay for
the set length of time.

My thoughts exactly. But then they couldn't sell optional bits of wire
for £25 and £40.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk

W. D. Grey said:

No reason to complain

I think the price they charge is a good reason. And my G3 came with an
infrared remote, not even optional. Why couldn't they include one of
those?

Quoted message said:

- If you need exposures that long you'd use a
remote anyway.

With a film camera yes, but there's no need for it with a digital
camera. DSLR designers are still copying film cameras in many respects,
and aren't thinking in digital/computing terms yet.

For example, with exposures why can't they provide a meter option to
detect the brightest part of a scene and set the exposure not to
overexpose? The auto-levels function in computer software has no
problem with this sort of thing, what would be so hard about building it
into a digital camera?

Quoted message said:

Even the "old" cable release allowed you to lock the
shutter open for "Time" shot

Exactly, that was the "old" way of doing it. Now the "new" way is to
copy the old way and charge £40 for the lead!

Quoted message said:

Even if you could set a time on the camera, releasing the shutter
using the button would cause some shake.

Nope. Either use the self timer or the mirror-lock up, which has a
built in delay. I take all my mirror lock shots by pressing the button,
except when I have to use B.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk

Craig Cooke said:

I use 1 of 3 methods depending on the distance I intend to walk -

1) Use a high ISO setting (I have a 10D and 20D), thereby negating
the use of a tripod altogether

Okay if the extra noise is not an issue. But even then, you can't hand
hold twilight and night shots, no matter how high the ISO.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk

In article <[email hidden]>, pvs1
@wildwales.fsnet.co.uk says...

Quoted message said:

W. D. Grey said:

No reason to complain

I think the price they charge is a good reason. And my G3 came with an
infrared remote, not even optional. Why couldn't they include one of
those?

I assume you are aware, but the 300D also can use an IR remote. I do it
all the time as I resent/can't be bothered to pay for the electric
remote. when I bought the 300D I got them to throw in a spare IR
remote they had lying around. I think it was for an Ixus originally,
but it works fine. And it's far lighter/smaller/easier to carry when
out.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

- If you need exposures that long you'd use a
remote anyway.

The IT works great for long exposures, especially with the mirror lock
up (BTW, any new firmware releases recently - not checked for while)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Even if you could set a time on the camera, releasing the shutter
using the button would cause some shake.

Nope. Either use the self timer or the mirror-lock up, which has a
built in delay. I take all my mirror lock shots by pressing the button,
except when I have to use B.

IR works great for that two :-)

--
Darren
mail to darren not ng

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Craig Cooke said:

I use 1 of 3 methods depending on the distance I intend to walk -

1) Use a high ISO setting (I have a 10D and 20D), thereby negating
the use of a tripod altogether

Okay if the extra noise is not an issue. But even then, you can't hand
hold twilight and night shots, no matter how high the ISO.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk

On the 20D noise is *very* low, regarding night and twilight shots, I can
stand extremely still :-)

As ever, you must use the correct tools for the job to be undertaken.
(I don't go out walking much at night, I'm scared of the dark :-) )

--
Regards

Craig Cooke

www.storm-imaging.co.uk
Exciting, Fun, Creative and Informal Digital Wedding & Portrait Photography

Phil Cook said:

I've fished it out now. Without the last leg sections and no centre
column extension it is 95cm. Using half the centre column it is 110cm.

Hmm... Thanks. I've just checked my 1 pound tripod and it's 85cm high
with no column extension, so yours isn't much higher without using all
the leg sections. Mine's a tad low for some things, but then again it's
also very flimsy, although still useable with care, so maybe yours is
also useable at full height, with care? (i.e. no wind, mirror lock
etc.)

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:crv68b$cea$1
@news6.svr.pol.co.uk:

Quoted message said:

Hmm... Thanks. I've just checked my 1 pound tripod and it's 85cm high
with no column extension, so yours isn't much higher without using all
the leg sections. Mine's a tad low for some things, but then again it's
also very flimsy, although still useable with care, so maybe yours is
also useable at full height, with care? (i.e. no wind, mirror lock
etc.)

When I used to drag 120mm kit across hill and glen, I adapted a light
tripod using a hook from a DIY shop, and a jubilee clip, (the metal ratchet
type), fixing it to the centre column.

When I was setting up a shot, I'd hang my pack from the hook to aid
stability.

Some lightweights aren't/weren't suitable though, the centre column would
slide due to the poor locking. If it was a return visit, specifically for a
repeat shot, I'd suffer the Benbo or the Manfrotto.

HTH

--
"Whit's fur yi, will no' go by yi"