Bizarre turn to this thread. I haven't seen anything about this being caused by a separation of the plate -- it's because it's a compression fitting, and the plate can slide out of the fitting is loose. The situation seems particularly exacerbated by very heavy loads, compounded by the excess torque of a gimbal.

I own a 3541LS and have never had a problem, though I took this thread as a reminder to check that bolt. I do think Gitzo should revisit this to come up with a redesigned lock to make it more secure, since Gitzo prides itself on offering a premium product for demanding users (and the 3rd party fix seems pretty clunky and overbuilt), but this seems mostly like a user maintenance issue.

The fact that it's not an equipment failure means it's user error. Period.

If you don't like the Gitzo product because of this, then vote with your wallet. If you don't mind using the product as it's intended and doing a routine maintenance check every so often - and you want the best tripod available, buy/keep the Gitzo.

There's really not much more to it... sorry.

toddlambert wrote:
The fact that it's not an equipment failure means it's user error. Period.

Again, a matter of semantics. We'll have to agree to disagree.

toddlambert wrote:If you don't like the Gitzo product because of this, then vote with your wallet.

Again, I'm fortunate in that I can make my own solution to the flaw (which will still be cheaper than selling my 1325 and then purchasing a better design). In the end you're absolutely right about the consumer voting with their wallet. I'll not buy another Gitzo product, and I'll advise other prospective buyers to stay away from Gitzo.

bitmaker, do you have any evidence or citations of the "plate separation" problem you've described?

toddlambert wrote:
The fact that it's not an equipment failure means it's user error. Period.

If you don't like the Gitzo product because of this, then vote with your wallet. If you don't mind using the product as it's intended and doing a routine maintenance check every so often - and you want the best tripod available, buy/keep the Gitzo.

There's really not much more to it... sorry.



+1 yes it takes about 5 seconds to check the plate. And it's enough for most people to do that once or twice in a year. All my Systematic tripods I did tighten when I bought them. After that I have never needed to do it again, even after a few years of use with gimbal heads and super-tele lenses on the plates.

louis fusco wrote:
locktight ?

I think you mean this:

http://www.loctiteproducts.com/

Smiert Spionam wrote:
bitmaker, do you have any evidence or citations of the "plate separation" problem you've described?

The evidence would be the people who've had their gear hit the ground? Because Piece A (holding the camera gear) separated from Piece B (that stayed attached to the legs). What other evidence is needed that the design is flawed? The fact that the base plate is made of two pieces insures that there will always be the chance the pieces could separate from each other.

Additionally, the current two piece design wouldn't be as bad if it utilized some form of redundancy to the force of the clamp ring (although, I'd still like to see a single piece base plate...just my personal preference). But with only one method for securing the two pieces together (the clamping force of the ring) once that force is compromised away goes all that camera gear.

bitmaker wrote:
Smiert Spionam wrote:
bitmaker, do you have any evidence or citations of the "plate separation" problem you've described?

The evidence would be the people who've had their gear hit the ground? Because Piece A (holding the camera gear) separated from Piece B (that stayed attached to the legs). What other evidence is needed that the design is flawed? The fact that the base plate is made of two pieces insures that there will always be the chance the pieces could separate from each other.

Additionally, the current two piece design wouldn't be as bad if it utilized some form of redundancy to the force of the clamp ring (although, I'd still like to see a single piece base plate...just my personal preference). But with only one method for securing the two pieces together (the clamping force of the ring) once that force is compromised away goes all that camera gear.


By "two piece" do you mean that the removable plate and the spider are the two pieces? The way you're using the term, it implies that the plate itself is separating in two, leaving a portion of the plate locked in place -- something I've never heard of occurring. What's happening is that it's coming out of its fitting, as its designed to do.

I don't think it's fair to fault a feature (removable, interchangeable plates to accommodate video bowls, columns, etc.) that a user didn't tighten down.
I do think that a better design would have some extra safety tab in case it's not tightened.

I'm curious how many of the individuals who had the top plate of their systematic come off ever tightened the clamping base? Also, I wonder what went through their minds when they got their systematic accessories bag accompaning the tripod. Three wrenches are included in the bag. I would assume that it crossed their minds that these wrenches were included for some purpose other than increasing the shipping weight of the legs. Just a thought.

Jim

Naurescapes.net now has available a bottom plate machined from 6061 aluminum that you connect with a bolt to the base plate of Gitzo systematic tripods. This product appears to be of high quality and should provide a higher level of security for users of Gitzo systematic tripods who do not use a leveling base or center column. Of course, this assumes that both the bolt connecting the base plate and bottom plate is properly tightened; and it would be a prudent secondary measure to check all of the bolts and screws on those tripods, including the bolt through the collar that secures the base plate.

PORSCHE917 wrote:
Naurescapes.net now has available a bottom plate machined from 6061 aluminum that you connect with a bolt to the base plate of Gitzo systematic tripods.

Yes, that's why this thread resurfaced.

EBH

sjms wrote:
bitmaker wrote:
Lars Johnsson wrote:
So what's poor in the design then

The casting(s) that form the Gitzo base plate is two pieces. The correct design is one casting to form the base plate.

louis fusco wrote:
locktight ?

...will work for securing the clamp screw and nut. But it won't do anything to secure the two cast pieces to each other (and that's where the failures are occurring).

then you do not have the interchangability


Who uses that (interchangeability)?

It seems that there are two different issues being discusssed. There is nothing wrong with my top plate; it was simply not tightened properly. Others may have a different problem. Now if the Gitzo had any sense, they would either ship the tripod with bolts properly tightened or very loose, or design a better plate that does not fall out so easily if it is slightly loose. Unfortunately there is little competition, so they are probably not losing enough customers to care. Lesson here is that even an expensive item can suffer slipshod assembly and mediocre design. In future I will assume everything Gitzo is unreliable, and look into other brands if there are any.

EBH

Paul B wrote:
EB-1 wrote:
How much does it weigh?

EBH

Don't know. I'd suggest emailing them at the address they provide on the product page. FWIW, the NSN thread that started all this also has some "homemade" fixes with pics.

I submitted an e-mail query to Naturescapes the day the thread started, but there was no response. I even asked a basic question about another $300 product on the site. Apparently they are not interested in my money. Is it a home/garage business?

EBH

The two piece design is a design flaw and a feature. How can it be both? If you thought you were getting a single piece top plate, It's a flaw because the 2 piece design can (and apparently does) fail resulting catastrophic loss. It's a feature if you bought it because you want to be able to remove it and add accessories ect. The real problem isn't necessarily the product, its Gitzo's silence about it. For instance, if Gitzo included the 2 piece design in the list of features and included a reminder that you need to check that bolt periodically, then the consumer would know exactly what he or she was getting and if they wanted a single piece design, could simply shop elsewhere.

That said, a design like where a failure could result in catastrophic loss should absolutely without question have a built in redundancy in the event it fails. For instance, my Really Right Stuff BH55 ballhead has a redundancy feature to protect against a partial opening of the lever clamp. If the clamp open part of the way. the plate it secures will be loose and slide around, but a small bolt in the plate will prevent it from coming all the way out. This gives me a chance to fix it right away before my gear goes crashing to the ground.

We pay top dollar for Gitzo and this is an issue it should address. Now where did I put that welding torch?

Wow...that looks like an overkill solution from naturescapes.
Bitmaker: what did you end up doing for a safety? The only thing I could think of was lashing the tripod head to the legs with some rock climbing rope...

EB-1 wrote:
Paul B wrote:
EB-1 wrote:
How much does it weigh?

EBH

Don't know. I'd suggest emailing them at the address they provide on the product page. FWIW, the NSN thread that started all this also has some "homemade" fixes with pics.

I submitted an e-mail query to Naturescapes the day the thread started, but there was no response. I even asked a basic question about another $300 product on the site. Apparently they are not interested in my money. Is it a home/garage business?

EBH


Well they're not Amazon.com. But I've always had very fast service from them. However, when brand new products first hit the street things can get pretty busy, unpredictable and supply chains are not always operating initially at peak performance (MarkIII anybody?) I'm no expert on metallurgy but from my days of worrying about the weight of various bicycle parts, I'd guess that the weight of a piece of aluminum that size is pretty insignificant compared to the tripod/camera/lense combo.

Contact info from the website:

MAIN OFFICE:
NatureScapes.Net, LLC
21009 Gunpowder Road
Manchester, MD 21102
toll free: 888-667-0559
410-239-8025

Recalcitrant wrote:
For instance, if Gitzo included the 2 piece design in the list of features and included a reminder that you need to check that bolt periodically, then the consumer would know exactly what he or she was getting and if they wanted a single piece design, could simply shop elsewhere.


What do you mean if they included the 2 piece design as a list of features? It's the systematic series of tripods! Just take a look at the Gitzo catalog. What does it do if not emphesize the interchangeability of the center mount from a single plate to column, geared column, video bowl, etc. I'd say it was made pretty clear, and I had no doubt as to what I'd be getting when I ordered it.

My 3500 series had a bowl so I changed it out to a plate, and tighten it with a dab of locktite, but I'm still interesting in a back up solution like the naturescape item.

Although I monitor the plate adjustment it still leaves you open for possible failure with the present design. A failsafe system seems like a reasonable investment with 10K+ balanced on your tripod.

I like carrying my tripod, lens, and body over my shoulder and it will be nice not to worry about whether I got the plate clamp tight enough.

Jim

GeneO wrote:
sjms wrote:
bitmaker wrote:
Lars Johnsson wrote:
So what's poor in the design then

The casting(s) that form the Gitzo base plate is two pieces. The correct design is one casting to form the base plate.

louis fusco wrote:
locktight ?

...will work for securing the clamp screw and nut. But it won't do anything to secure the two cast pieces to each other (and that's where the failures are occurring).

then you do not have the interchangability


Who uses that (interchangeability)?


if you use a halfbowl with a MP/video camera or a leveling assy from gitzo thats who. the idea behind it is interopability. my feisol does it too just by a different method using 3 machine screws.

jhom wrote:
I'm curious how many of the individuals who had the top plate of their systematic come off ever tightened the clamping base? Also, I wonder what went through their minds when they got their systematic accessories bag accompaning the tripod. Three wrenches are included in the bag. I would assume that it crossed their minds that these wrenches were included for some purpose other than increasing the shipping weight of the legs. Just a thought.

Jim

bravo. a thinking individual. not referring to the proper support equipment as "sillt wrenches"

PORSCHE917 wrote:
Naurescapes.net now has available a bottom plate machined from 6061 aluminum that you connect with a bolt to the base plate of Gitzo systematic tripods. This product appears to be of high quality and should provide a higher level of security for users of Gitzo systematic tripods who do not use a leveling base or center column. Of course, this assumes that both the bolt connecting the base plate and bottom plate is properly tightened; and it would be a prudent secondary measure to check all of the bolts and screws on those tripods, including the bolt through the collar that secures the base plate.

you mean checking your equipment out before using it would be the intelligent thing to do? because that would have, most likeley, prevented 95% of the issue here.

Recalcitrant wrote:
The two piece design is a design flaw and a feature. How can it be both? If you thought you were getting a single piece top plate, It's a flaw because the 2 piece design can (and apparently does) fail resulting catastrophic loss. It's a feature if you bought it because you want to be able to remove it and add accessories ect. The real problem isn't necessarily the product, its Gitzo's silence about it. For instance, if Gitzo included the 2 piece design in the list of features and included a reminder that you need to check that bolt periodically, then the consumer would know exactly what he or she was getting and if they wanted a single piece design, could simply shop elsewhere.

That said, a design like where a failure could result in catastrophic loss should absolutely without question have a built in redundancy in the event it fails. For instance, my Really Right Stuff BH55 ballhead has a redundancy feature to protect against a partial opening of the lever clamp. If the clamp open part of the way. the plate it secures will be loose and slide around, but a small bolt in the plate will prevent it from coming all the way out. This gives me a chance to fix it right away before my gear goes crashing to the ground.

We pay top dollar for Gitzo and this is an issue it should address. Now where did I put that welding torch?

no actually your right you shouldn't go out and by a top $ item that you do not understand its form and function.

I was just going to order a 3541LS and found out about all this?

Should I consider other tripods?

would this be enough of a possible problem for you to consider buying other tripod?

You should always consider alternatives. At this point the problem is known and others have borne the brunt. Really crank down that POS and you should be fine, at least for the lighter gear. I won't be using my 3 series again this year, so I'll let others buy the NSN plate before going that route. I'd use that safety plate for longer lenses/Wimberley.

EBH