|
A good tripod is the
essential to take sharp photos. Of
course, in some situations I handhold
the camera, but whenever possible I
prefer to use the tripod: a stable
support is very important, in particular
for landscape, flora and macro
photography. The tripod eliminates the
blur due to hand shake, and it allows to
compose carefully the photo; other than
that, it is a great help for heavy
telephoto lenses as the 400 f/2.8, 500
f/4 or 600 f/4.
The tripod
|

The Canon 1D
MarkIIn with Sigma 12-24 EX HSM, mounted on Bogen 3021
tripod (a.k.a. Manfrotto 055PROB).
|
There is not a right tripod for everyone:
it is necessary to choose the model that
fits your necessities, evaluating the main
features. Personally, I've two tripods, an
heavy Manfrotto 055 WNXB that I use when I
don't have to walk a lot and bulk is not a
problem, and a smaller Manfrotto 190MF4,
easy to carry everywhere and sturdy enough
for landscape and macro.
The first
thing that I'd recommend is to avoid the $15
pocket-sized tripod from your local
superstore...they have pencil-thin legs and
they are close to being practically useless.
If you are serious about photography, don't
mount a $700 camera on a $15 tripod. You
don't need to spend a lot, but I'd recommend
at least a good tripod as the Bogen 3021
($150), otherwise you will lose a lot of
good photos due to camera shake.
The
weight should be a good
compromise between stability and
portability: a 10kg tripod might be as
stable as a rock, but it is quite useless
for nature photography if it is too heavy to
carry it around. Usually, the ideal weight
is between two and three kg.
The
maximum load capacity
indicates the maximum weight that can be
carried "comfortably": the higher, the
better. If you want to be 100% sure to get a
stable support, choose a tripod that has a
capacity considerably higher than the weight
of camera and lens. The majority of the
tripods can carry a weight much higher than
the capacity stated in the specifications,
but they don't give the necessary stability,
if the loaded weight is excessive.
The maximum and minimum height
are both very important. The max.
height should be at least 1.3-1.4 meters,
without extending the central column. If you
extend the column, you lose stability - I
recommend to keep the column at the minimum
height, unless it is strictly necessary to
raise it. The min. height is even more
important. The majority of the tripods does
not allow to get low enough, only some
professional models have a min. height of
15-20 centimeters. If the minimum height is
not low enough, it is very difficult to do
macro photography and to photograph from a
low angle. I'd never buy a tripod that
doesn't allow to get al least 30 centimeters
from the ground. Some manufactures states
that you can get very low angles placing the
central column reverted, i.e., upside down.
It is practically impossible to do with
short lenses, and it is a very cumbersome
way to work even with long lenses that have
tripod collar.
The majority of tripods has a
central column. As already
said, you should try to use it as less as
possible, because raising the central
columns decreases the stability of the
camera; moreover, often the column doesn't
allow to get low enough. I'd recommend to
substitute the "standard" column with a
short one or, even better, to choose a
tripod without central column.
The
tripods can be made by various materials :
usually, they are made by aluminum or carbon
fiber. The carbon fiber tripod are more
expensive, but they are equally robust and
nearly 30% lighter than their aluminum
equivalents. The number of leg sections
influences stability and portability. I
recommend to choose tripods with 3 or 4
sections. The models with just 2 sections
are too cumbersome, the ones with 5 or more
sections are usually less stable that 3-4
section tripods.
The tripods that I
have used
Currently, I use a customized Manfrotto
190MF4 and a Manfrotto 055XWNB. I think that
there is not a right tripod for everyone -
you have to evaluate with one is better for
your exigencies. Here, I describe the pros
and cons of the tripod that I have tried
(and sold).
Bogen/Manfrotto
055 NAT (Maximum height without
column: 135 cm; minimum height: 27cm;
length: 64cm; weight: 2.4 kg; load capacity:
6kg; price: discontinued): it has been my
first tripod, and I have used it for years
with great satisfaction. It was a sturdy,
well built tripod; its only downside was
that its minimum height was 27 centimeters -
good, but not low enough for some macro
subjects.
Bogen/Manfrotto
190 MF4
(Maximum height without column: 113 cm;
minimum height: 11cm; length: 46cm; weight:
1.6 kg; load capacity: 4kg; price: $290) :
the 190MF4 is a small and lightweight tripod
that I bought for the most difficult
mountain trips, when I don't want to carry
with me bigger tripods. Until my Florida
trip, I have been quite happy with the
190MF4, it is sturdy enough for lenses up to
1-1.5kg as the Canon 100-400 L IS, if you
don't extend the legs, or with no more than
one section extended. On the other hand, its
maximum height (113) sometimes can be a
problem - I have lost some good photos
because the tripod was not high enough for
some subjects. Other than that, after using
it for three weeks in harsh environments in
my Florida trip, it has lost one of its
small rubber feet in a swamp (a leg got
stuck in the mud, and when I toke it out I
lost the "foot" of the tripod leg); after a
couple of weeks the legs became dirty with
sand, and they often got stuck. Considering
the price, the built quality is not very
realiable, if you are going to use it in
difficult conditions.
Gitzo
GT 1548, now discontinued and
replaced by the 5540 (Maximum height without
column: 153 cm; minimum height: 14cm;
length: 60cm; weight: 2.8 kg; load capacity:
25kg; price: $810) : this is the top of the
line Gitzo tripod, and it is the successor
of the similar Gitzo 1548, that I have used
for about one year. It is unbelievably
sturdy and well built, and it is a good
tripod for the heaviest lenses as 400 2.8,
600 f/4 or even the recently announced 17 kg
Sigma 200-500 2.8. That said, it is
extremely expensive - at $810 I think that
it is quite overpriced - and, as all Gitzo
tripod, has a rotating collar leg locking
system that in my opinion is worse than
Manfrotto knob system (in low temperatures,
I find the Gitzo system more difficult to
use than Manfrotto).
The tripods that I
currently use
|

Left: the
customized 190MF4 and the 055XWNB side by side. Right: legs
without feet.

Left: the
055XWNB in the field. Right: the retractable rubber feet
with steel spikes.
Bogen/Manfrotto 190 MF4 - customized
(Maximum height without column: 52 cm;
minimum height: 10cm; length: 37cm; weight:
1.1 kg; load capacity: 10kg; price: $290):
after the Florida 2008 trip (when the legs
become stuck due to mud and sand) I have
removed the last two sections of the legs,
greatly reducing weight and length, and
improving the load capacity. Of course it is
very, very low - it can be used only for
some macro and landscape work. The main
advantage of this customization is that is
can really be carried everywhere - at 1.1 kg
and 37cm, it fits easily every backpack and
suitcase, and it is extremely easy to carry
around. Moreover, now I can use it in every
condition without worrying about stuck legs:
with just two sections, it is difficult that
a leg becomes stuck, and anyway it is easy
to clean; it has not feet so there is no
risk to lose a foot ;-) Since the two
legs are the larger ones, it is more sturdy
that the normal 190MF4 with all leg
extended; I estimate that it has a load
capacity of about 10 kg.
Bogen/Manfrotto 055XWNB
(Maximum height without column: 137 cm;
minimum height: 7cm; length: 61cm; weight:
2.3 kg; load capacity: 7kg; price: $160):
currently, this is my workhorse. It is
pretty cheap, but it has very good built
quality - it is much sturdier than more
expensive tripods as the 190MF4. It is
relatively heavy and pretty large - 61cm
takes a considerable space - but for me it
is not a problem, since I can use, as
lightweight alternative, the super small
190MF4 customized instead of the 055 when I
need a small tripod. It is ok even for large
lenses, and it is a dream for macro
photography - it gets super low since the
central column is completely removable, and
when the subject is high it can reach 137cm,
that it pretty good. At its maximum height,
it is 25 centimeters higher than the
standard 190MF4, and it is way more stable. A fantastic feature of the 055XWNB, that
I have seen only on few other tripods, is
that it has retractable rubber feet with
steel spikes - they are much better than the
conventional rubber feet used on all other
Manfrotto tripods, and they are designed for
outdoor use, even in harsh environments. In
other words, there is no risk to lost a
foot, as it happened with my 190MF4 in the
swamps of Florida. This is the same design
of the first tripod, the 055NAT, and having
used it for many years I can guarantee that
it is a great design; sometimes the
rubber/steel feet may get loose or slightly
stuck, but they never come out as it may
happen with simple rubber feet. If you want
a sturdy tripod for outdoor use, and you
don't mind size and weight, the 055XWNB is a
great choice at a good price.
The head

1) gear head
2) ball head 3) gimbal head 4) three-way
head.
There is not a perfect head for everyone:
the "right" head depends by your personal
preferences and your purposes, and you may
have to try various heads until you find the
perfect one. I've tried a lot of heads, and
I ended up buying two: the small Manfrotto
486 RC2 and the precise Manfrotto 410. There
are many different types of head and many
brands; personally, I'm a fan of Manfrotto:
they offers a wide lineup, high quality
products and competitive prices.
The
three way head is one of
the simplest type of heads; it has three
handgrips that control the movements in
every direction. I have used one of these
head in the past (I had the Manfrotto 141 RC
NAT, now replaced by the 804 RC2), but I
wouldn't recommend it for nature
photography; it is too slow and cumbersome,
in particular for moving subject as bird,
wildlife and action. The three-way heads may
be ok for landscape and other static
subjects, but they are not as precise as the
geared heads, nor as fast as the ball head.
Moreover, these head are quite big due to
their large handgrips, so they may be a
problem if you plan to travel and you have
limited room in your backpack or luggage.
The ball head is a good
"general purpose "choice. This head has one
or more knobs that allows to free or to
tighten the ball; usually there is also a
knob for panning movements. When you loosen
the knobs, you can move the camera on each
axis - vertical, horizontal and lateral -
easily and quickly. This is the most
versatile type of head, it can be used for
every subject, from landscapes to wildlife.
If you want a good stability, avoid
excessively small heads; a good head should
have at least a load capacity of 5-6kg. The
main disadvantage of the ball heads is that
it is difficult to make precise adjustments;
if you want the maximum precision and you
don't need quick movements, a geared head is
a better choice (Indeed, for macro work I've
sold my professional 468MG for a geared
head). It is essential to choose an head
with mounting plates (small plates that can
be attached under the camera or lens) They
allow to mount quickly the camera on the
head. I always keep a mounting plate
attached on the camera and on every lens
that has tripod collar. Depending by
your budget and you necessities, three good
choices are: the Bogen/Manfrotto 486 RC2,
($60), a very cheap, small and light ball
head that is study enough for DLSR and
lenses up to 400mm f/5.6; the
Bogen/Manfrotto 488 RC2 ($110), a relatively
cheap but sturdy ball head; the
Bogen/Manfrotto 468MG RC2 ($300), an
extremely professional, sturdy and well
built ball head. Other good pro choices
are the Arca Swiss B2 or the Really Right
Stuff BH-55; that said, if you need an head
for very heavy lenses (as the 600 f/4), even
the best ball head are not a good choice:
for these heavy lenses, you need a gimbal
head. I use the ball head only for small
lenses, so I've chosen the Manfrotto 486 RC2
- it is small and light, and it is my choice
when I want to travel light. Other than
that, it has only one knob to lock all
movements; some photographers don't like
this design, while personally I consider it
very easy to use and straightforward.
The geared head is, in some
aspects, similar to the three way head, but
it has several improvements. Like the
three-way, it has three knobs to control the
movements on every axis, but you don't have
to lock and unlock the knob - you rotate
every knob until you have reached the
desired position, and the head stays still
without having to lock anything. Even though
you can make quick movements on each axis
with a second knob designed for fast
corrections, this is not an head for action
- it woks well only with static subject. The
big advantage of geared head is precision:
you can make micrometric adjustments on each
axis! This is by far the best head for macro
work: in the past, I've tried both three-way
heads and ball heads, but I was never happy
with their precision. Moreover, with these
head, when I locked the knobs the head moved
slightly - I've noticed this behavior even
on high end ball heads and, while the
movement is just a millimeter or less, it
bothered me a lot at high magnification in
macro photography. In May 2007, I had the
opportunity to try the Manfrotto 410 geared
head (thanks to my friend Simone Tossani),
and I immediately loved it - this head is
the macro-photographer's dream! The
Manfrotto 410 ($210) is the less expensive
geared head manufactured by Manfrotto, but
it works perfectly - I wouldn't recommend it
with a 300 2.8 or 500 f4, but it work well
with my 180 Macro. It is relatively big and
heavy, but smaller than other geared head -
in conclusion, highly recommended for macro!
The only alternative is the Manfrotto 405
($370); this is a newer version with even
more precise movements and 50% higher load
capacity...it is an awesome head, but in my
opinion it is an overkill for a DSLR with
180mm lens.
The gimbal head
is completely different from any other type
of head. Currently, the best gimbal head is
by far the Wimberley WH-200 ($595). This
head can be used only with large lenses that
have a tripod collar, I highly recommended
it for lenses as the 400 f2.8, 500 f4, 600
f4. The WH-200 gives an incredibly freedom
of movements; heavy lenses as the 600 f/4
feels weightless when mounted on this head,
thanks to its gimbal design. It has two
knobs to control pan and tilt, and you can
use the tripod collar of the lens to rotate
it in vertical or horizontal format. Most of
the time you can use it without locking the
knobs: it is always perfectly balanced and
the lens stays still in every position, even
if the knobs are not locked.
The only (minor and unavoidable)
downside of the Wimberley is that every time
that you mount of remove a teleconverter,
the flash or every other accessory you have
to repeat the balancing; this operation is
accomplished by sliding the lens/camera
combo backward and forward in the clams
until it stays perfectly balanced (without
locking the tilt knob). The balancing is
easy and fast, but I recommend to pay much
attention when you do it, because it is easy
to drop the lens, in particular the first
times that you do it.
Do you have
comments or questions?
If you have comments or questions about
this article, feel free to ask in the
Juza
Nature Photography Discussion Forum!
|
|