p.2 #1 · Realistic Expectations of a Travel Tripod
nma wrote:
No doubt a RRS tripod is superior in some ways, but it is a trade off. You mentioned that it is shorter than the Feisol, so that in itself make the tripod more stable. Just the same, it is shorter and less useful for that reason. Also, does it make sense to discriminate travel tripod by how it handles a 100-400 zoom? Is the 100-400 a travel lens? The OP mentioned a Fuji mirrorless camera as his interest for assessing what he might expect from a travel tripod.
when i look at a product i look at it from how i can use it with most or all of my related equipment.
i use my TFC/TQC14 with my Sony RX100m5 all the way up to my D850 w/70-200 2.8 w/o blinking.
what one person travels with can be different from another.
p.2 #2 · Realistic Expectations of a Travel Tripod
Just an idea. No way better than the TQC14 and actually does not play in the same space.
I recently selected the Gitzo Traveler GT0545T 1.9 pounds with stub center column which comes with the tripod. I do not care for center columns. Tripod also comes with an awesome small carry strap that easily is used to hang your bag or something for added support if needed. You can look up the specs and photos (sorry I have not taken any). I was looking for extremely small and light tripod to hike, travel by plane, carry everywhere type of thing, almost like the weight of a lens.
I have a larger tripod for the car and as someone said, less than a mile, I take the larger one and love it.
p.2 #3 · Realistic Expectations of a Travel Tripod
When you say "travel tripod" it is important to be more specific. What is the largest body and longest/heaviest lens that you plan to use? What head do you plan to use (I would say BH-40 is larger than a travel head for example). What is the minimum extended height without center column extended that you would consider acceptable? What is the maximum folded length that you would accept for your luggage options?
For example, the RRS TQC-14 will fit in hard sided, carry-on domestic (US) spinner suitcases but not international sizes. Flexible roller bags are more forgiving but are you OK with being forced to check the bag with your tripod in it?
I find that I need more than one travel tripod. My largest is a Feisol 3441 (I think) which I take when I use a checked bag and can take more gear. Then I have a RRS TQC-14 that is great for domestic travel. For international travel, I try to take the RRS-TQC 14 when I can (because it is clearly the best IMO), but sometimes I have to take a 5-section Sirui for more minimalist packing. I use Sony A7rII gear.
For travel tripod heads, I think there is no better than Acratech GP-SS in terms of light weight, low bulk, high capacity, and durability.
p.2 #4 · Realistic Expectations of a Travel Tripod
moosehead222 wrote:
Just an idea. No way better than the TQC14 and actually does not play in the same space.
I recently selected the Gitzo Traveler GT0545T 1.9 pounds with stub center column which comes with the tripod. I do not care for center columns. Tripod also comes with an awesome small carry strap that easily is used to hang your bag or something for added support if needed. You can look up the specs and photos (sorry I have not taken any). I was looking for extremely small and light tripod to hike, travel by plane, carry everywhere type of thing, almost like the weight of a lens.
I have a larger tripod for the car and as someone said, less than a mile, I take the larger one and love it. ...Show more →
and that's why RRS has the TFC conversion (the TQC has all the other options and still goes lower on the equivalent flat surface w/o leg contact other than the mushroom foot). simply eliminates the entire CP mechanism but has a setup for weight addition that in the image i modified. this is my specific travel tripod and it fits in my carry on roller.
p.2 #5 · Realistic Expectations of a Travel Tripod
Nice, I like it.
My goal for my entire system was ultra light. Under 7 pounds with tripod, head, Sony body, and three lenses.
sjms wrote:
and that's why RRS has the TFC conversion. simply eliminates the entire CP mechanism but has a setup for weight addition that in the image i modified. this is my specific travel tripod and it fits in my carry on roller.
p.2 #7 · Realistic Expectations of a Travel Tripod
Abuttolph wrote:
Question is - what is a realistic expectation? I know it is difficult to quantify, but I would like to hear about the experience that people have with their travel tripods and stability/vibration.
For most travel tripods I think a realistic expectation is they're OK with small(ish) equipment in good light, but as soon as you start using long exposures or use the tripod in water or windy conditions they become somewhat marginal.
My first travel tripod was a Gitzo 1541T and I replaced that with a Benro C2680T which I used for almost 7 years. I also traveled with a Gitzo 3541LS which allowed me to take long exposures. Last year I replaced the Benro with a RRS TVC-24 after finally being able to examine RRS tripods for myself. The TVC-24 weighs just 0.4lbs more than the Benro. I used the Benro with a 6" short center column but the RRS has no center column - much better. The RRS is basically the equivalent of a series-3 Gitzo but it folds to the same size as the Benro. For me the TVC-24 is a good travel tripod and all-round tripod. My travel cameras are film rangefinders and Sony mirrorless.
sjms wrote:
in the end the real world difference between a good tripod and an excellent tripod are the details. one must decide if paying for those details is worth it in ones overall use.
Let me give just one example of a "detail": In another recent thread sjms questioned my use of washers on the RRS feet - you can see them in the first pic below. I explained why (spikes concentrate a load in the central portion of the cap on the end of the bottom section) and he responded with something like "RRS have engineered the cap to spread the load - hence the flare". I never even noticed the flare on the leg caps - but sure enough it's there (2nd pic below) so no need for the washers if the foot has a full coverage flange. This was a detail I didn't know existed, you wonder how many more are hidden.
p.2 #11 · Realistic Expectations of a Travel Tripod
My favorite tripod for travel by plane is a Feisol CT-3472 that collapses down to 21.7 inches and fits easily into the overhead bin. It supports 66 lbs. and goes to legs height of 58.9 inches. Build quality is better than Gitzo and as good as that of RRS, two other companies tripods that I own and use.
The Feisol weighs 3.9 lbs. which is more than the 2.5 lbs. that the OP specifies but I would much rather cut my total gear weight in other ways. With the Kirk BH-1 ballhead the total tripod weight is 6 lbs. and the only way to greatly reduce that amount of weight and have a stable tripod is to go to something much shorter and with a 8 lb. load capacity.
I leave as much of my gear in the vehicle or my hotel room and can reduce the weight in my backpack to less than 20 lbs. and with the tripod and ballhead I have a 26 lb. load and I can handle that. If I could not then I would sell my full frame cameras and lenses and get a MFT camera and lenses as lens weight comprises most of the load.
p.2 #13 · Realistic Expectations of a Travel Tripod
jharter wrote:
When you say "travel tripod" it is important to be more specific. What is the largest body and longest/heaviest lens that you plan to use? What head do you plan to use (I would say BH-40 is larger than a travel head for example). What is the minimum extended height without center column extended that you would consider acceptable? What is the maximum folded length that you would accept for your luggage options?
For example, the RRS TQC-14 will fit in hard sided, carry-on domestic (US) spinner suitcases but not international sizes. Flexible roller bags are more forgiving but are you OK with being forced to check the bag with your tripod in it?
I find that I need more than one travel tripod. My largest is a Feisol 3441 (I think) which I take when I use a checked bag and can take more gear. Then I have a RRS TQC-14 that is great for domestic travel. For international travel, I try to take the RRS-TQC 14 when I can (because it is clearly the best IMO), but sometimes I have to take a 5-section Sirui for more minimalist packing. I use Sony A7rII gear.
For travel tripod heads, I think there is no better than Acratech GP-SS in terms of light weight, low bulk, high capacity, and durability....Show more →
These are good points you make about being more specific. Basically, lightweight and stable are my first criteria. I would love a tripod around 2.5 pounds that is stable. I am 5' 4", so having a shorter tripod is not that big of a deal for me, although probably not lower than say 47 inch max height on the plate where the ball head sits. As far as size, folded around 17 inches would be fine, but if it can fit into check-on luggage that is ok too, but let's say putting 23 inches or so folded as an upper limit. As I mentioned, I am thinking about a mirrorless kit, and not with a bigger lens. My largest Fuji lens is the 50-140mm. A BH-40 is fine for me and I already own it. The BH-30 with compact clamp, which I would really like, is only about 3 ounces less than the BH-40, so not a big weight savings - just a smaller package mostly. I will check into the Acratrach GP-SS - thanks.
I do have the RRS TVC-24, which I use for travel. It is great for my Nikon gear and for when I am using a car to get around. My inquiry on the travel tripod for this thread is geared more toward a mirrorless setup without a particularly large lens and also something that I can hike with that won't be too burdensome (too much weight and my upper back kills me).
Ultimately, I would like to get a RRS series 1 tripod, but that will have to wait. Seems that the Feisol, Benro, and Sirui are also popular for travel tripods and those are good contenders for me at this point.
p.2 #14 · Realistic Expectations of a Travel Tripod
A Sirui 1205-X tripod would mark the bottom of you criteria. It would be among the lightest, most compact/packable, lowest usable extended length, and least stable. Weighs just 1.7 lbs. RRS 1 series would be the most solid, most expensive, probably the best option.
p.2 #15 · Realistic Expectations of a Travel Tripod
peter_n wrote:
For most travel tripods I think a realistic expectation is they're OK with small(ish) equipment in good light, but as soon as you start using long exposures or use the tripod in water or windy conditions they become somewhat marginal.
I would have to dispute this. This is why I posted a 99s second exposure up above with my light travel tripod, the Sirui 1204-X and the tiny Sirui G10X ballhead.
I love long exposures and have not found them to be any issue at all with the Sirui if set up and handled properly. Obviously in water and in high winds (light winds no issue) extra care is required (heavy stone hanging from centre column hook if the tripod is in strong running water or a windshield - which could even be your body - in strong winds). It's not all about the tripod, your technique and precautions play a vital role too.
p.2 #16 · Realistic Expectations of a Travel Tripod
Abuttolph wrote: Question is - what is a realistic expectation? I know it is difficult to quantify, but I would like to hear about the experience that people have with their travel tripods and stability/vibration....
Most of the posts sing the praises of the RRS 24l. I agree. It is, no doubt, the best all around tripod and finely engineered, too. Considering its cost, it should be.
However, I challenge the notion that the RRS 24l is the best travel tripod. First, its folded length is about 23 inches, making it awkward to port in a suitcase; second, it weighs 3.7 lb. The idea that one would carry that tripod on a plane, with 100-400 mm and 70-200 f2.8 lenses boggles the mind. Yes you could do it but it makes little sense. The RRS 24l is not a travel tripod. It also would not be the tripod I carry on a trek or hiking trip. Selecting the best travel tripod involves trade offs that express your own needs. Frogfish makes the case for the the Sirui 1204-X and the tiny Sirui G10X ballhead. I have advocated for the Feisol 3442. In every case analysis will show that there is no travel tripod that will be best on every specification. But this thread has answered the basic question raised by the OP: What should he expect of a travel tripod? I think we see that something approaching 90% of the situations one encounters in landscape photography can be handled by a well-chosen travel tripod.
p.2 #17 · Realistic Expectations of a Travel Tripod
With the Fuji X kit, can you shoot with an electronic first curtain? Ever since I moved from Nikon DSLRs to Sony A7 cameras shooting in EFCS, I've found my tripod stability requirements to drop dramatically. Now I only have to contend with the environment, as there is no need to dampen the effects of a mirror or shutter. I used a Feisol 3441T for awhile, and now mostly use a small Gitzo 1555T. The only shortcoming of the Gitzo is the relatively short max height even with the small center column extended. I pair it with an RRS BH-25 for the lightest and most compact rig, or the Acratech GP-S if I want to do panos or use bigger lenses. The BH-25 locks down plenty tight even with a front heavy lens, but the GP-S is easier to make fine framing adjustments, and the lever clamp is sublime.
I don't have access to the images now at work, but on my recent trip to Taiwan I never had an issue with tripod stability in calm conditions, and that was even when shooting a long exposure with the ZF 35/1.4 on an adapter hanging off the A7ii, using the camera L-bracket. A supremely unbalanced combo, but no problem for the support rig I had.
p.2 #18 · Realistic Expectations of a Travel Tripod
I've used my Feisol 3442 for years as my travel and landscape tripod and I've got tons of images tack sharp with long exposures. This notion that you have to spend big bucks to get a solid tripod is marketing hook, bait and sinker at it's best.
The 3442 closes to 19"...so it actually fits into a regular sized suitcase. It weighs hardly nothing so it's easy to carry. It extends to a reasonable height. It has a hook so you can hang weight on it if you need to. And it does not cost more than your camera.
I'm sure the RRS tripod is great, but it's too big and weighs to much for me to carry around all day when other options are available.
It's your money and everyone can choose to spend it how they like...but be aware there are options out there that work for less than 1/2 the price.
p.2 #20 · Realistic Expectations of a Travel Tripod
The carbon-fiber Benro Travel Angel was my favorite until my son fell in love with it and I left it for his use. I then got a MeFOTO C2350 carbon-fiber travel tripod which is actually a little bit better as it has the removable leg which attaches to the center column and becomes a mono-pod, cool. Both tripods have legs which fold over themselves which makes for a really compact package. Due to my 6'4" height I went with the slightly larger version.
Between my 3 series Gitzo and the MeFOTO I'd say they both have their uses, the Gitzo for a rock solid platform and the MeFOTO for easy portability, especially useful when traveling light through airports, hiking or when not trying to attract too much attention. Both when properly used and under ideal circumstances are capable of helping me produce some very sharp captures.
