Register · Software · Search · Image Upload · Buy & Sell · Reviews · Hosting

	Moderated by: guardian
	Username   Password Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell FM Forum Rules FM Forums | General Gear-talk | Join Image Upload end

MorrieC Offline Image Upload: Off Feisol vs Induro Tripods Recently I have seen several postings comparing Gitzo tripods to Feisol tripods but have not seen anything about Induro tripods. I'm in the market for a carbon fiber tripod that has a load capacity of around 17 lbs. I would like something with an overall length of around 20" so it will easily fit into luggage. I'm not looking for the lightest weight legs but would like to keep the weight reasonable. I presently use a couple of Gitzo tripods one is a 1325 with a gimbal head and a 1348 with a ball head on it. The 1348 set up is great but a little heavy and awkward for carrying around. I really like Gitz0 tripods but cannot justify the cost of another set of legs that may not get much use. This is why I am looking at the Feisol's and Induros. Any suggestions and comparisons are welcome. Thanks MorrieC Aug 04, 2008 at 04:02 PM

sjms Offline Buy and Sell: On Feisol vs Induro Tripods actually there has been some colorful updates on enduro. unfortunately for them they seen to be dark in nature and none too kind. Aug 04, 2008 at 04:07 PM

DIS Ottawa Offline Image Upload: On Feisol vs Induro Tripods I've been using an Induro C214 for over a year now and think it's an excellent tripod. It fits in my suitcase for travel and hasn't given me any trouble at all. It holds my gear steady and since I've added a RRS ballhead it's even better. It seems to be very well designed and built. I'm not a pro so don't give it the kind of use that a pro would. On this forum most people seem to favour Gitzos over everthing else. No doubt excellent tripods but very expensive. There have been some few reports of problems with Benro tripods and there is some thought that Induros are rebadged Benros. I don't know if this is true or not - I can only tell you that my Induro has been first rate and trouble free. DIS Aug 04, 2008 at 05:18 PM

ReallyBigCam Online Image Upload: Off Feisol vs Induro Tripods Morrie, I can't help you with the Induro products as I haven't used that brand. I would be happy to answer your questions about the Feisol tripods. There are a couple Feisol tripods that will meet your needs and have a folded length of less than 20" with a center column and ballhead installed. The most compact Feisol tripod is the CT-3441S Traveler Tripod. As the name says, it was designed with travel in mind. The legs fold upward 180 degrees. So, the folded length remains a very compact 16.9" even with a ballhead installed. Of course, the Feisol CB-30C fits within the reverse folded legs of the CT-3441S. Another head the fits within the reverse folded legs of the CT-3441S is the popular Markins Q3. The folded length of the CT-3441S + Q3 combo remains at 16.9". However, with the Q3 installed, the legs on the CT-3441S won't fold together quite tight enough to fit in the supplied Feisol carrying bag (which is very tight fitting, even with Feisol's own CB-30C ballhead installed). However, the CT-3441S + Q3 is still a very compact combo that easily fits inside a carry-on size bag or a backpack. The second option is the Feisol CT-3442. Like the CT-3441S, the Feisol CT-3442 also has reverse folding legs. When reverse folded, the legs of the CT-3442 completely engulf Feisol's CB-50D medium size ballhead. The Markins Q3 also fits with one caveat - the panning base knob leaves a tiny cosmetic blemish where it makes contact with the metal housing at the top of one of the legs when they are reverse folded. Here's a little known fact that may be of interest to you. The highly regarded Markins M10 ballhead will not fit within the reverse folded legs of the Feisol CT-3442 - unless you have the optional Feisol center column installed. However, with the center column installed, the Markins M10 fits within the reverse folded legs of the Feisol CT-3442 and the entire system (CT-3442 + center column + M10) has a folded length of 18.9" and fits within the carrying bag that comes with the tripod. This is a great everyday set-up that weighs less than 4 lb. total (tripod + center column + ballhead) that also serves double duty as an excellent travel tripod. It's larger in diameter than the CT-3441S + Markins Q3, but that's the price you pay in order to accommodate the larger M10 head. In addition to the Feisol CB-50D and the Markins M10, I'm sure there are other medium size ballheads that will fit within the reverse folded legs of the CT-3442, I just haven't had a chance to try them. For example, my older ARCA-SWISS B1, while larger in diameter than the Markins M10 also fit within the reverse folded legs of the CT-3442. The legs don't fold up as tightly together as they do with the CB-50D or the M10, but it still fits within supplied bag. I suspect the newer, smaller ARCA-SWISS Z1 would fit even better, and from photos, the Acratech heads also look promising. I'm working on a Feisol FAQ, and as I try more heads, they will be added to the list. I'll also be taking some photos of the various tripod and ballhead combinations for that FAQ. If I get a chance in the next day or two, I'll post some of those photos here as well. If I can answer any more questions about the Feisol products, just let me know. You can post them here, or send them via PM or email. Kerry Thalmann Really Big Cameras Aug 04, 2008 at 08:10 PM

JohnJ80 Offline Image Upload: Off Feisol vs Induro Tripods DIS Ottawa wrote: I've been using an Induro C214 for over a year now and think it's an excellent tripod. It fits in my suitcase for travel and hasn't given me any trouble at all. It holds my gear steady and since I've added a RRS ballhead it's even better. It seems to be very well designed and built. I'm not a pro so don't give it the kind of use that a pro would. On this forum most people seem to favour Gitzos over everthing else. No doubt excellent tripods but very expensive. There have been some few reports of problems with Benro tripods and there is some thought that Induros are rebadged Benros. I don't know if this is true or not - I can only tell you that my Induro has been first rate and trouble free. DIS Induro is Benro marketed by MAC (Mamiya) in the US. There were press announcements to that fact, IIRC and it was reported by Michael Reichmann (Luminous Landscape) among other places. sjms is right, there have been numerous posts, most of them pretty dark. A fair number of failures, difficulty getting parts, returned calls and emails etc... I think it is fair to say that if money isn't an object, then Gitzo is the choice and is the standard right now. For more cost conscious folk, Feisol has been doing pretty well, they have been improving their designs, and their customer service and support seems to be very good. J. Aug 04, 2008 at 08:21 PM

DIS Ottawa Offline Image Upload: On Feisol vs Induro Tripods "sjms is right, there have been numerous posts, most of them pretty dark. A fair number of failures, difficulty getting parts, returned calls and emails etc..." Interesting. Are these problems with the Benro or Induro products? While they may be produced by the same company, they look quite different and may have different materials. I have heard of some reported problems with Benro but not with Induro (that's not to say they don't exist, of course). I've also heard of problems with Gitzo tripods on this very forum - anything mechanical can and will eventually fail. DIS Aug 04, 2008 at 08:47 PM

JohnJ80 Offline Image Upload: Off Feisol vs Induro Tripods Well at the risk of lighting off the typical flames - here's one after a quick look: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=3886852&postcount=20 J. Aug 04, 2008 at 09:42 PM

DIS Ottawa Offline Image Upload: On Feisol vs Induro Tripods Not to worry - no flames. I really am curious to know if there are problems with the Induro line as that has not been my experience. If they are prone to fail, I'd like to know before dropping my 5D and 100-400 on the ground! DIS Aug 04, 2008 at 09:49 PM

sjms Offline Buy and Sell: On Feisol vs Induro Tripods its mostly small failures due to handling over time and the improper use of adhesives and such. i have to say when feisol first came about i was one of its harshest critics. they did a complete redesign and what a different product they produce now from then. i have the 1471 monopod and the original 3371 tripod. both working very well. Aug 04, 2008 at 11:45 PM

Mitchell Carter Online Buy and Sell: On Feisol vs Induro Tripods Hi Kerry Thalmann: You wrote: "with the Q3 installed, the legs on the CT-3441S won't fold together quite tight enough to fit in the supplied Feisol carrying bag" Yet you still recommend reverse folding it? The 3442, as well. That sounds pretty risky -- if the ball head makes any contact at all won't it act as a fulcrum, turning the leg into a crowbar that could be snapped with mild pressure at the foot? I have the CT-3342 and Q3 and it will reverse fold with the head attached but only with some contact. Therefore I remove the head when I travel. (I never take the center column.) Obviously you speak from experience. Is my situation, with the 3342, much different? Thanks. edit: added email notification Aug 05, 2008 at 12:29 AM

ReallyBigCam Online Image Upload: Off Feisol vs Induro Tripods Mitchell, I definitely need to add some photos to this thread. In the case of the CT-3441S with the Markins Q3, the contact is between the knobs of the Q3 and the rubber twist lock grips of the CT-3441S. The rubber grips act as a cushion. I'm not sure I understand your comment: "if the ball head makes any contact at all won't it act as a fulcrum, turning the leg into a crowbar that could be snapped with mild pressure at the foot". The area of contact is near the bottom of the tripod legs. So, if there is any torque involved, the lever is VERY short and the carbon fiber leg tube at the point of contact is cushioned by the rubber grip and further protected by the metal twist lock collar under the rubber grip. Folded in this way, there is no direct contact between the ballhead and the carbon fiber leg tubes of the tripod. Here's a photo of the Markins Q3 nested within the reverse folded legs of the Feisol CT-3341S. To me, it doesn't look like the tripod legs are vulnerable to damage in this configuration. The Markins M10 fits within the reverse folded legs of the Feisol CT-3442, with the center column installed, in a similar fashion - with the point of contact between the ballhead and the tripod legs being the rubber covered twist lock grips. I'll try to get a photo of this configuration to post tonight or tomorrow. Oh, and in the case of the CT-3442, with the center column installed and the Markins M10, it easily fits within the padded Feisol carrying bag that comes with the tripod - providing an additional layer of protection. Kerry Thalmann Really Big Cameras Aug 05, 2008 at 01:25 AM

Mitchell Carter Online Buy and Sell: On Feisol vs Induro Tripods Ah, sure, that's with the center column attached. I thought that you meant without the column, so that the head would be at the other end, where the legs attach. Thanks for clarifying with a picture. Aug 05, 2008 at 02:05 AM

ReallyBigCam Online Image Upload: Off Feisol vs Induro Tripods Mitchell, The CT-3441S comes with the center column. It's the standard configuration. There is an optional short center column, but it's not really a "column" it's more of a plug that's installed in place of the center column to get closer to the ground for macro work. As I said in my earlier post, the Markins M10 WON'T fit within the reverse folded legs of the Feisol CT-3442 - unless the center column is installed. With the center column installed, the Markins M10 fits nicely within the reverse folded legs of the CT-3442 - and the whole system (CT-3442, center column and M10 ballhead) fits easily within the bag that comes with the tripod. Kerry Thalmann Really Big Cameras Aug 05, 2008 at 02:17 AM

MorrieC Offline Image Upload: Off Feisol vs Induro Tripods Everyone has provided great info and I am convinced that I need to take a serious look at the Feisol tripods. I'm very familiar with Markins head for I use an M20 and have also used an M10. Markins makes a great ball head and I'm sure the Q3 is equally as good. THe CT3441S seems like a great travel pod with the Q3 head. I like the idea of using just a tad larger tripod and head so the CT3442 with a Markins M10 is extremely interesting. My only concern is what is the diameter at the base plate on the CT3442?. The photos of tthe CT3442 remind me of a Gitzo 1328 where the base plate is quite large in diameter. If this is the case the CT3441S will be a better choice. Kerry do you know what the diameter difference is between the CT3341S and CT3442 at the base plates? Thanks everyone for your comments. Morrie Aug 05, 2008 at 04:19 AM

ReallyBigCam Online Image Upload: Off Feisol vs Induro Tripods Morrie, I measured around the widest part of the following three tripods, Feisol CT-3441S, Feisol CT-3442 and Gitzo 1325 (for reference) using a cloth sewing tape. So, consider these measurements to be the perimeter of the triangle formed by the three legs of these tripods when they are folded up for transport. The CT-3441S measured just over 12" around the foam leg wraps. The distance around the metal crown (spider, plus legs) is about 11.25". The outside diameter of the bag it fits inside of (without the Q3 installed) is just over 4.25" (the inside diameter is probably about 4"). The total weight of the Feisol CT-3441S with the stock center column and the Markins Q3 installed is 3 lb. 4.25 oz. The folded length is 16.9" The CT-3442 measured just under 15" (about 14.875") around the foam leg wraps and just under 14.5" around the metal crown. The outside diameter of the carrying bag that come with the CT-3442 is about 5.25" (probably pretty close to an even 5" inside diameter). The weight of the Feisol CT-3442 with the optional CT-3442CCKit center column kit and the Markins M10 installed is 3 lb. 15.25 oz. The folded length is 18.9". So, the CT-3441S/Q3 combo is about 11 oz. lighter, folds up 2" shorter and about 1" less in diameter than the CT-3442 with the center column and M10 ballhead. For reference, the distance around the crown (there are no foam leg wraps on my Gitzo) of the Gitzo 1325 is 16". Hope that helps. I'll try to get some photos of the CT-3441S with the Q3 and the CT-3442 with the M10 up in the next day, or so. Kerry Thalmann Really Big Cameras Aug 05, 2008 at 05:22 AM

ReallyBigCam Online Image Upload: Off Feisol vs Induro Tripods As promised, here's some photos of the Feisol tripods and the Markins heads: Photo 1: Top - Feisol CT-3441S with Markins Q3 Bottom - Feisol CT-3442 with Optional Center Column and Markins M10 This photo shows the relative folded size of the Feisol CT-3441S with the Markins Q3 and the Feisol CT-3442 with the optional center column and the Markins M10. As you can see in the photo, with the Q3 installed there is some spreading of the legs on the Feisol CT-3441S that keeps this combo from fitting in the supplied carrying bag. The legs on CT-3442 with the center column and M10 installed fold up tight enough for this combo to fit in the supplied carrying case. This photo shows a close-up of the Markins M10 mounted on the optional center column folded up within the legs of the CT-3442. Photo 2: Detail - Feisol CT-3442 with Optional Center Column and Markins M10 Photo 3: Detail - Feisol CT-3442 with Optional Center Column and Markins Q3 This photo shows a close-up of the smaller Markins Q3 mounted on the optional center column folded up within the legs of the CT-3442. Kerry Thalmann Really Big Cameras Aug 06, 2008 at 07:51 AM

Jonathan H Offline Buy and Sell: On Feisol vs Induro Tripods I've been extremely happy with my Induro tripods - C313 (big boy!) and the CX213 (articulating column). The CX213 sees very heavy weekly use, often in the backcountry. It's lashed to the outside of my pack and gets traipsed through the woods, bumping into trees and rocks in the rain. Not one problem or issue this summer. The C313 I can't really comment on. It arrived in the mail, I took one look at it and realized it was way too heavy duty for me (my longest is a 70-200) and it sits in the original packaging in my closet - anybody want to buy it? Aug 06, 2008 at 03:19 PM

MorrieC Offline Image Upload: Off Feisol vs Induro Tripods Kerry Great info and photos. Boy you are making hard to decide I keep vascilating between these two tripods. Again thanks for the great info this has been great help. Morrie Aug 07, 2008 at 02:49 AM

searchin Offline Image Upload: Off Feisol vs Induro Tripods Kerry, Those photos are really helpful, thanks for the effort. I'm on the verge of buying a tripod for my M10, i just wanted one clarification as to how does one install the center column on the CT 3442. Do you have to unscrew the spider and mount the same?? Thanks, Sachin. Aug 08, 2008 at 02:31 AM

ReallyBigCam Online Image Upload: Off Feisol vs Induro Tripods searchin wrote: Kerry, Those photos are really helpful, thanks for the effort. I'm on the verge of buying a tripod for my M10, i just wanted one clarification as to how does one install the center column on the CT 3442. Do you have to unscrew the spider and mount the same?? Thanks, Sachin. Sachin, You're welcome. Glad I could help. Swapping between the flat mounting plate and center column is fast and simple. The flat mounting plate is held in place within a recessed cavity in the spider by three small set screws. To remove the flat plate and install the center column in its place, you simply loosen (but do not remove) these set screws (with the supplied allen wrench), pop out the flat plate, install the center column in its place and re-tighten the set screws. It took me longer to type that than to actually do it. The first time you do it, it will probably take you less than 2 minutes. After that, about a minute. My daughter just timed me with a stop watch and I swapped from flat plate, to center column, and back to flat plate in less than a minute (but, I've had lots of practice). Here's a photo of the top section of a CT-3442 with the center column installed. You can see one of the small set screws right below the word Feisol. And, here's a diagram that shows the unfinished spider with the various mount options (center column mount, flat plate, leveling base mount): You can't really tell from the photos, but the groove in the flat plate (and the center column mount and leveling base mount) have tapered sides - which gives it a wedge shaped profile. Combined with the tapered tips of the set screws, this accomplishes two things. When the set screws are tightened inward, the tapered tip of the set screws, combined with the wedge shaped mating surface of the flat plate (or the center column mount, if that's what you're using) forces the top plate down snug and tight against the spider. This makes for a very tight, secure connection between the plate (or center column mount) and the spider. And, since every action has an equal and opposite reaction, the wedge shaped surface of the flat plate is also pushing upward with equal force on the tapered ends of the set screws. This added pressure makes it much less likely that these set screws will come loose due to vibration. This is similar, in principal, to using lock washers to prevent nuts from coming loose due to vibrations. And, since you don't need to remove the set screws to swap between the plate and column, the chances of losing one of these set screws are minimized. It's a simple, but elegant design that works quite well. Kerry Thalmann Really Big Cameras Aug 08, 2008 at 05:49 AM

	FM Forums | General Gear-talk | Join Image Upload end