| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/29/2005 08:22:43 PM · #1 |
I am needing an inexpensive tripod for doing night shots, landscapes, and macros (primarily macros). somewhere in the $100-150 USD range
I've flipped through the B&H catalog and found the giottos mt-9170 looks like it would be good but I'm wondering if there something better for the same price. I have a el-cheepo tripod and need something a LOT more stable.
BTW weight isn't an issue unless it's over 10 pounds (er 4.4 kilo?) |
|
|
|
07/06/2005 03:51:42 PM · #2 |
Look at:
//www.sciplus.com/singleItem.cfm?terms=10080&cartLogFrom=Search
It's only $25, with shipping, and it seems pretty sturdy. I just got one for my new 300D, but it the camera hasn't arrived you, so I haven't been able to test it. The site is American Science & Surplus - I've done buisness with them for years and they're great! |
|
|
|
07/06/2005 03:52:26 PM · #3 |
|
|
|
07/06/2005 03:55:13 PM · #4 |
Slik makes a couple very nice models at under or around $100.00. I use one.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2005 04:08:31 PM · #5 |
Theory is the tripos and head should weight at least 1.5 times what goes on top - your camera in this case. A 300D is about 1.5#, and a lens can be a pound (or a lot more for L glass telephotos with IS).
4 or 5 pound should be the minimum weight for a tripod.
that said, my 'cheap' tripod is an ambico unit i got at big lots for $10. With my older p&s cameras it was fine. My rebel is too heavy, but it works for now.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2005 04:19:18 PM · #6 |
| We have a Manfrotto 055 and a 190, both with ball heads, and find that they are VERY stable. The 190 is a bit shorter, but also lighter. If you are 6ft then I would suggest the 055, as it does get right up there. Plus, the center post can be removed and inserted sideways so you end up with a boom ontop of your tripod, and you can also insert it upside down, so you can have your camera suspended under your tripod legs. I love using the 055 as I know I have all the flexability I need to get the camera in just the right position to take the picture. Only drawback is is it pushing 8lb, so if I am going out and know I will be doing lots of walking around, I take the 190. Dont really know how much either one cost, as they were both a gift. |
|
|
|
07/06/2005 05:23:11 PM · #7 |
I just bought this Slik a month ago and it's great.
I was really into the Manfrotto, Bogen names but the less expesive ones couldn't really handle the weight of my 70-300mm Zoom. I was kind of advised against them by the salesman at B&H compared to the one they recomended to me. The Slik is like a rock and it feels like it will take a beating for a while.
$150 might do you better than what I wanted to spend on the Manfrotto/Bogen models, so I can't speak at that price range.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2005 05:26:39 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
I just bought this Slik a month ago and it's great.
I was really into the Manfrotto, Bogen names but the less expesive ones couldn't really handle the weight of my 70-300mm Zoom. I was kind of advised against them by the salesman at B&H compared to the one they recomended to me. The Slik is like a rock and it feels like it will take a beating for a while.
$150 might do you better than what I wanted to spend on the Manfrotto/Bogen models, so I can't speak at that price range. |
Yup. That's the same one I've got. Fine tripod, really. You have to pay a LOT more to get significantly better performance. And I was a pro for 25 years, I know tripods...
Robt.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/12/2025 01:26:47 PM EDT.
