This new tripod is now finally listed on the RRS site and is priced at a bargin basement $850
It's been in the 2012 catalogue for a while but not yet available to order (it is still currently backordered). I went all out and spent the RRS cash on my main tripod (34L/BH-55) and I don't regret it for a minute but does anyone see the value in spending this type of cash on a travel tripod that only extends to 48in without the quick column and only 59in with it I'm 6'3" so height is important to me. I need to buy a travel tripod so I was waiting to see the price on this one before deciding. Right now I think I will be going with the Feisol CT-3441T (which is only available from Really Big Cameras as a special make) http://reallybigcameras.com/Feisol/Tall_Traveler.htm . To this I will likely add the Markins Q3T ballhead and lever release clamp. The Feisol with the anit-rotation legs is only $414 and extends without any column to 56.7" (67.9" with it), folds down 1" longer than the TQC-14 and weighs a 1/2 lb less than it.
arbitrage wrote:
....I'm 6'3" so height is important to me. ....Any takers out there for this tripod
It sucks to be tall, huh?
I really like the engineering and build of the RRS tripods---it's the only tripod that I think rivals its Gitzo counterparts, and in some respects exceeds them. No problems with height for me getting the smaller TQC, but my best friend is 6'9"------he opted for the Feisol to accompany his Gitzo 5 series, and really likes the Feisol (and we're both picky and selective). The Feisol is probably not quite up to Gitzo/RRS level, but as a travel tripod it's not a bad choice.
Wow ... your timing couldn't be better, for me. I just ordered the Benro C1190T "Traval Flat" legset, but I think I will take a look at this new one from Feisol. Thanks for the heads up!
If you search the POTN forums there is a large thread on the Feisol 3441T. It's been out for a year or two and was pieced together from the legs of the 3442 but the spyder/frame from the smaller 3441S which allows it to be less in "girth" than the 3442. Specifically made for taller people as they still recommend the 3441S for average height like up to 5'10".
I think I am liking the CT-3401 better as it has a decent height of 51.9" w/o the center column (I am not very tall) and is significantly less expensive!
Do check out my post on the Benro "Travel Flat" C1190T. It's very compact and it extends to 52.6" w/o the center column:
arbitrage wrote:
Right now I think I will be going with the Feisol CT-3441T (which is only available from Really Big Cameras as a special make) http://reallybigcameras.com/Feisol/Tall_Traveler.htm . To this I will likely add the Markins Q3T ballhead and lever release clamp.
I don't think the RRS is in my budget, mostly because I have a Gitzo Traveller already. But it does look good if the height works for the user - not looking like the best value though.
I have the Markins Q3T, the version before they fixed the knob placement and it's a fine ballhead. I don't like the Q3T panning knob, which is too difficult to lock down. If I were buying now, I'd probably opt for the cheaper Photoclams at Reallybigcameras as well. They looks similar at a better price.
The Photoclams do look nice, especially the Pro Gold II series. I have a Markins Q3 (non-T) and I am told they are fine with the Feisol legsets but not the Gitzos.
surf monkey wrote:
I don't think the RRS is in my budget, mostly because I have a Gitzo Traveller already. But it does look good if the height works for the user - not looking like the best value though.
I have the Markins Q3T, the version before they fixed the knob placement and it's a fine ballhead. I don't like the Q3T panning knob, which is too difficult to lock down. If I were buying now, I'd probably opt for the cheaper Photoclams at Reallybigcameras as well. They looks similar at a better price.
Hey, no doubt that RRS is the best out there. My 34L is simply beautiful and solid as a rock. Zooming in to 10X LiveView and then giving one of the legs a good shock and watching how fast the image stabilizes again is truly impressive. I'm sure Gitzo are at the same level but I bought the 34L as it just had better specs to fit my height than the comparable Gitzos. This is the exact opposite when I compare the new 14 to the Feisol as the Feisol fits my height requirements much better than the RRS. If the RRS had the perfect specs then I would strongly consider it despite the $850 price tag.
I do have a question about the BH-55 ballhead. I'll ask here and see if I can get some answers before wasting space with a new thread. I was hoping that with the price I paid for the BH-55 that when tightening the knob to lock the ballhead there would be no change or droop in positioning but I do get a small droop when tightening down the ballhead. Is this typical with the BH-55? I'm wondering if I should contact RRS for a replacement. The droop is very small and once tight there is absolutely no movement but the motion of tightening does change the framing vertically very slightly. I would appreciate anyone else's experience with the Bh-55 and this issue.
I picked up an Arca-Swiss Z1 with the RRS lever clamp and I love it. According to TDP, it is smoother than the BH-55. And it doesn't take much effort at all to lock the ball DEAD with no creep or droop. IMO it is the best ballhead that you can buy regardless of price. Check out the TDP review:
arbitrage wrote:
I was hoping that with the price I paid for the BH-55 that when tightening the knob to lock the ballhead there would be no change or droop in positioning but I do get a small droop when tightening down the ballhead. Is this typical with the BH-55? I'm wondering if I should contact RRS for a replacement. The droop is very small and once tight there is absolutely no movement but the motion of tightening does change the framing vertically very slightly. I would appreciate anyone else's experience with the Bh-55 and this issue.
I have no experience with the RRS ballheads, but none of the high quality ballheads from RRS, Markings, Arcatech, Arca-Swiss or Kirk should have any sag after being positioned. Also, you should be able to setup the ballhead so you don't need to re-tighten it. Set it with just the right amount to move it with moderate force and it should be rock solid when released. My heavy-duty Arca-Swiss Z1 and lightweight Markins Q3T both work this way. There's no reason the RRS heads shouldn't do this as well. You should probably send it in.
surf monkey wrote:
I have no experience with the RRS ballheads, but none of the high quality ballheads from RRS, Markings, Arcatech, Arca-Swiss or Kirk should have any sag after being positioned. Also, you should be able to setup the ballhead so you don't need to re-tighten it. Set it with just the right amount to move it with moderate force and it should be rock solid when released. My heavy-duty Arca-Swiss Z1 and lightweight Markins Q3T both work this way. There's no reason the RRS heads shouldn't do this as well. You should probably send it in.
Yeah, there is no droop once tightened but the motion of tightening moves the ball slightly. I will try upping the pretension and trying as you say. I believe this would work at least with lighter camera/lens combos. Not sure about my 100-400 extended to 400?
The TQC-14 w/BH-30 appears to be available as a 'package purchase' vs. just the tripod alone. I'm considering it for when I travel to Italy which is 2-3 times a year. My only reservation is the stability as the the bottom forth section looks very thin. I'm not tall so it may work out just fine for my needs.
My light weight tripod is a Gitzo, and that will serve me well for now. I do have a TVC-33 which I like very much, and have a BH-55 on it. I have been using Really Right Stuff products for many years, and love it all.
There is no visible droop on either of my BH-55 ball heads, so the mention of it above is unusual. Droop should be checked for very carefully, because in some cases you can see what appears to be ball head droop which is actually slight lens flexing or flexing at the tripod collar, or image movement from tripod movement due to forces you change on the clamping knob as you clamp. If you are going from loose to tight on a ball head, you normally need to be supporting things in some way with your hand. The removal of that support can allow some flexing to show up as creep.
If you can balance a long lens and camera very well on the ball head and with it all on a very rigid tripod, and adjust the main clamp tension very very low so that it is just holding things, and get everything to sit still with that very low tension until you can remove your hands completely from the lens and camera and tightening knob, you are ready to test. Use live view if you have it, or the viewfinder if you do not, and without touching the camera or tripod find a reference object you can align with a frame edge or other camera related mark. You then need to very carefully tighten the main ballhead clamping knob, and then very carefully remove your hand from the knob. The final position after your hand is off compared to what it was when you started with the main knob mostly loose is your tightening creep. While in this tightend condition, you can apply some support to the lens or camera to get an idea of how much flex you have in the whole assembly that can kind of show up as creep. You can also get an idea of movement caused by tightening the knob that is related to the hand forces you apply to the knob by testing that action.
If creep exists even with careful testing, you may have a bad ball head, and you should talk to Really Right Stuff about the problem. It seems possible that damage to the shaft of the main knob that has bent the shaft might cause creep, and it is also possible the BH-55 was made with some defect like a slightly bent shaft.
Thanks for the info Roland. I will experiment after work today and get back to you as I'm still confused if what I'm seeing is normal or not. Should my pretension setting be strong or loose when testing, I have it around 6.5 that allows me to move the camera but doesn't allow the camera to move even when the main knob is loose. I probably don't even need to tighten the main knob after repositioning but I always do and this is when I see a slight change in the vertical framing as the main knob is fully locked down.
Try it with the pretension loose first, and only use the main knob to check what its effects might be. Then include the pre tension setting into the mix, and see if it responds differently. It is very possible that things are different between the two ways of usage. I happen to prefer only using the main knob, and usually leave the pre tension loose. I do my framing with the main knob loose, and then go from loose to finger tip tight to set my position. The large silky smooth knob on the BH-55 is a joy to use, and it is easy to find by hand and positive to identify without taking your eye away from the viewfinder. I never did like setting pre tension and moving my framing around with it set, but I do still do that in some cases.
Well after some more experimenting (what a way to derail my own thread!!), I think that the small shift in the image is actually when I release my hand from the camera/grip. I seem to be putting some minor upward force on the camera that is enough to flex it upwards. As I lock it down (and yes I love the knob on the BH-55, actually the reason I bought it over the 40) I also release my grip on the camera and thats where the small droop is coming from (and watching in LV at 10X magnification the droop is only ~1mm or so). However, I was framing for macro shots so it was bugging me. I tried with a strong pretension of around 8 (this is with the 5DmkII and 24-105L) and then I can position it (although not overly smoothly) and not even touch the main knob and it stays wherever I leave it. So I think the ballhead is working properly but I need to watch my right hand!
I'm 6'3" so height is important to me. I need to buy a travel tripod so I was waiting to see the price on this one before deciding. Right now I think I will be going with the Feisol CT-3441T (which is only available from Really Big Cameras as a special make) 