patriot wrote:
Thanks for the info! Just tightened the hex bolt on the base plate of a new Gitzo. It would take some heavy twisting to loosen the plate now.
I've got a Markings base plate coming so this should eliminate the potential for future problems.
no it will not. this item you ordered sits right on top of the plate that is at issue. so it is still vulnerable
Lars Johnsson wrote:
What do you mean when saying the top-plate is two pieces? It looks like one piece on my Gitzo tripods ?
Then you are lucky enough to have a Gitzo with a one piece base plate. That's what I thought I was buying but instead got a base plate made up of two cast and then machined components that are clamped together at final assembly.
Lars Johnsson wrote:
And who say one piece is the correct design
I bet the folks who have seen their expensive camera gear fall to the ground wish their Gitzo tripod had had a single piece base plate. And of course those of us who bought a Gitzo (based much upon their reputation) without a center column specifically because we wanted the simplest and most solid base plate possible... that would be a single piece design.
Lars Johnsson wrote:
We have used this design for many years without anybody complaining before. And suddenly it's wrong and you can't use it after that many years
People have suffered the loss of their gear, then openly complained about it, yet you claim it isn't a problem? Get a dose of reality... some Gitzo customers have suffered losses. And Gitzo's response has been silence while their customers are required to either pony up more money for a third party fix or repair the problem themselves.
I'm fortunate in that I have the ability and the means to create my own solution to what amounts to a piss-poor piece of engineering. But for what I paid for my Gitzo I certainly didn't think I'd have to rebuild the base plate in order to insure that I don't suffer a catastrophic loss of my expensive property.
sjms wrote:
no it will not. this item you ordered sits right on top of the plate that is at issue. so it is still vulnerable
I wonder then if I'm thinking of the right part. On my tripod (2942), the Markings base will replace the center column and existing base plate. From the installation info I read on Markin's site, it screws down using the same threads the center column collar uses. Do I have that right?
bitmaker wrote:
Then you are lucky enough to have a Gitzo with a one piece base plate. That's what I thought I was buying but instead got a base plate made up of two cast and then machined components that are clamped together at final assembly.
I bet the folks who have seen their expensive camera gear fall to the ground wish their Gitzo tripod had had a single piece base plate. And of course those of us who bought a Gitzo (based much upon their reputation) without a center column specifically because we wanted the simplest and most solid base plate possible... that would be a single piece design.
People have suffered the loss of their gear, then openly complained about it, yet you claim it isn't a problem? Get a dose of reality... some Gitzo customers have suffered losses. And Gitzo's response has been silence while their customers are required to either pony up more money for a third party fix or repair the problem themselves.
I'm fortunate in that I have the ability and the means to create my own solution to what amounts to a piss-poor piece of engineering. But for what I paid for my Gitzo I certainly didn't think I'd have to rebuild the base plate in order to insure that I don't suffer a catastrophic loss of my expensive property.
Funny because you wrote only a couple of weeks ago here that you had spent $ 1500 on your very good support system (Gitzo tripod) And you did that because you where tired of the other sub-standard brands Today you have changed your opinion and are saying that your Gitzo is a piss-poor piece of engineering........
And of course some people using Gitzo tripods have suffered loss of their gear, when the lenses are falling to the ground. When thousends of people are using them in every country it will be like that, even if they are good. But it's funny that those tripods and top-plates have been used for so many years without any complains here. And suddenly after being the best for many years, the same plates are piss-poor and can't be used any longer
Lars Johnsson wrote:
Funny because you wrote only a couple of weeks ago here that you had spent $ 1500 on your very good support system (Gitzo tripod) And you did that because you where tired of the other sub-standard brands Today you have changed your opinion and are saying that your Gitzo is a piss-poor piece of engineering........
Yep, people would be better off buying a cheap knock-off like Benro. Couldn't be any worse than Gitzo's design (although I doubt the substrate/matrix design of the knock-offs is as good as what is in the Gitzo CF legs). Because I just disassembled the base plate of my 1325 and saw how bad it truly was. I count myself fortunate in that I wasn't one of the Gitzo customers who had to learn about a bad product by seeing their camera and lens crash to the ground.
Lars Johnsson wrote:
And of course some people using Gitzo tripods have suffered loss of their gear, when the lenses are falling to the ground. When thousends of people are using them in every country it will be like that, even if they are good.
That's the best rationale and excuse you can contrive?? That's like telling Ford Pinto owners their car will blow up when struck from behind simply because the Pinto is a car. Bad design is just that... bad! Doesn't matter how many people are victimized by it.
Totally agree. My only complaint with my 3531s is that the plate was not tight when I got it - right out of the box, it was loose.
I tightened it, and have not had to tighten it again. I fail to see what the issue is here? Your gear could fall from an RRS clamp too... but no one is calling for them to re-design their clamps and plates?
I feel for those who've lose their equipment, but I truly don't think it's an equipment failure here.
toddlambert wrote:
...but I truly don't think it's an equipment failure here.
I believe that's a matter of semantics, Todd. The equipment failure only occurs when the base plate separates from the clamp ring. The bad design is what allows the equipment failure to happen. If it wasn't a bad design there couldn't be an equipment failure (that a number of Gitzo owners have no doubt suffered).
I've had my 1325 for 2+ years and was not aware of the compromised design of the base plate. No more carrying my high dollar gear on the tripod over my shoulder until I've corrected the flaw. The fact that the base plate is a two piece design will always leave open the possibility that the two parts could separate.
Totally agree. My only complaint with my 3531s is that the plate was not tight when I got it - right out of the box, it was loose.
I tightened it, and have not had to tighten it again. I fail to see what the issue is here? Your gear could fall from an RRS clamp too... but no one is calling for them to re-design their clamps and plates?
I feel for those who've lose their equipment, but I truly don't think it's an equipment failure here.
+1
Agree, it's not an equipment faiture. If you just tighten it once it can't happen, and the plate can't fall out.
Lenses and cameras gave been falling from every tripod, plate and ballhead brands also
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.
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.
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.
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:
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. ...Show more →
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.
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.
Today you have changed your opinion and are saying that your Gitzo is a piss-poor piece of engineering........