Upgrade advice

[armand]

Hi, I'm starting on this forum by asking some upgrade advice. I like photography for quite a while, and I'm slowly improving my theory and practice.
For now I have a Nikon D50 with the 18-55 kit lens, and I bought it almost 3 years ago. While I see it can do better I don't plan to change the camera until a fully learn to use all it's functions (2-3 more years), at which point I will go for a D300, maybe D700 (or D3).
Lens is ok, but I do want something better, first thing would be VR (even as I have quite a steady hand, I can get passable picture while handholding at 1/30, sometimes even slower).
The tripod definitely needs upgrading, as it's a very flimsy (although light) Sunpak Traveler.

I did my research, and decided that I need a tripod that can be taken as carry on (as I might from time to time), and probably I won't notice such a big difference between 3 and 4 sections. I will need the tripod mainly for landscapes, plus some night photography and macro. Here are the choices I managed to get to:

Model__Price
Length without column __ Length with column__minimum length__Folded length
Supported weight__Own weight__mount type

Manfrotto 190CXPRO4 __ 290$
48" - 57.5" - 3.2" - 19.7"
11 lbs - 2.95 lbs - 3/8"

Benro C-158n6 __ 240$
49.6" - 58.5" - 12.8" - 19.3"
11 lbs - 3 lbs - 1/4"&3/8"

Manfrotto 055MF4 Magfiber Pro __ 260$
51.4" - 65" - 4.3" - 21.3"
15.5 lbs - 4.4 lbs - 3/8"

For the heads, I have a lot of options (I looked on B&H). Ideally should be a ballhead with separate panning control, up to 1-1.5 lbs, be able to deal with small to medium camera/lens mounts. The legs+head should be around 500$ (can go up to 600$ if really better). Also should have a 3/8" mount (as the above tripod legs have this one, and 1/8" would need an adapter and more weight).


Now I go to the lens. Seems the kit 18-55 gets reasonable reviews, so I would like to know if my choices would significantly better.
So far I am between the Nikon 18-200 VR and Nikon 16-85 VR. Natural temptation would be 18-200, but I keep reading about significant distortion. I can live with some as I care more about the content, but not if it's obvious, as I don't plan to use software correction for every picture.
The 16-85 gets better reviews, but if it's not that much better, probably I would take the extra telephoto instead of a shorter focal length, as I am still looking towards a 12-24 (not sure as if I upgrade to a full-frame, all these lenses will be useless).
The 16-85 is around 100$ less than the 18-200VR, which is around 630$.
I guess another choice would be to take a 55-200VR and a 12-24, for similar cost, but I don't want to change that many lenses, particularly as I plan to take the first pictures in Miami, and that sand tends to go everywhere.

[armand]

Here are some of the heads I was lookinf for:

Model __ Price __ Supported weight __ Own weight

Benro KS-0 - 130$, 17.6/ 14oz
Benro KS-1 - 150$, 26.4/ 1.2 lbs
Giottos MH-1001-652 - 100$, 11/ 15.5oz
Giottos MH-1302 Pro II - 130$, 18/12.5oz
Giottos MH-1301 Pro II - 145$, 20/ 1.1lbs
Gitzo GH1780* - 200$, 22lbs/ 9.9oz*  - *=no quick release, needs 3/8" adapter
Acratech Ultimate - 320$, 25lbs, 1 lbs
Induro DM-12 - 206$, 26.5/ 1.1 lbs
Gitzo G-1278 - 225$, 13.2/ 1.3 lbs
Gitzo GH1780QR - 250$, 22/12.3oz
Kirk BH-3 - 255$, 15/ 1.2 lbs

[armand]

I kept searching and I found another option for a tripod. For about 50-100$ more, I found this Feisol model: CT-3442, the tournament series.
The only thing it doesn't have is non locking legs, otherwise it almost looks too good to be true comparing to the other 3 choices:
lighter - 2.3 lbs
stronger - holds up to 22 lbs
taller without column - 54.3"
taller with column - 67.3"
shorter when folded - 18.9"

Does anyone know how it compares to the other 3 tripods I mentioned before?

[giles]

I kept searching and I found another option for a tripod. For about 50-100$ more, I found this Feisol model: CT-3442, the tournament series.
The only thing it doesn't have is non locking legs, otherwise it almost looks too good to be true comparing to the other 3 choices:
lighter - 2.3 lbs
stronger - holds up to 22 lbs
taller without column - 54.3"
taller with column - 67.3"
shorter when folded - 18.9"

Does anyone know how it compares to the other 3 tripods I mentioned before?

I know nothing about any of the tripods you mention, sorry.  I would not plan on carrying any of them on aircraft, however: I suspect they'd be viewed with suspicion by most security staff. :-(  Checked luggage seems the way to go for tripods. :-(   (I know, you can carry umbrellas, walking sticks, crutches, yada yada yada.  I'm just dubious -- perhaps overly so -- about tripods.)

Of the ballheads you mention the only one I know is the Acratech, which I own and like.  I've recently upgraded to a BH-55 (now there's some weight for you!) but I ain't selling the Acratech. :-)

Giles

[spidermike]

I would not plan on carrying any of them on aircraft, however: I suspect they'd be viewed with suspicion by most security staff. :-(

That's what I would have thought.
My wife and I flew out of Calgary on one of the first flights just 4 days after 9/11. Security staff dutifully took the micro pair of nailclippers off us but left us with our aluminium monopods. We felt so unsure about this so we asked the airhostess if she was happy with us having these hollow metal non-Xrayable things with us and she just looked bemused and said it didn't worry her because she'd never seen them before. She also admitted the security checks were in some disarray because noone had a clue what they were doing or what they were looking for (I really don't think anything has changed in all this time...)

[armand]

I checked and they are not on the prohibited list from TSA website, and there are several people on this forum traveling with tripods as carry on. I would think that if they are under 22" it should be no problem, maybe even up to 26". And I plan to buy carbon fiber which should be transparent to XRay.

[DarkPenguin]

I love my Feisol.  Has been very good to me.  They've been very helpful when I've done "bad things" to it.

[francois]

I checked and they are not on the prohibited list from TSA website, and there are several people on this forum traveling with tripods as carry on. I would think that if they are under 22" it should be no problem, maybe even up to 26". And I plan to buy carbon fiber which should be transparent to XRay.

I would just say have plan B ready if you need to check your tripod at the last moment. It happened to a friend of mine and it was just before boarding the plane.

[lightstand]

I have that Manfrotto 055MF4 Magfiber and it's a very nice tripod, not as sturdy as my heavier Bogen's but for SLRs I think it's a great choice. I use it with the 488rc4 head. I am a firm believer in getting a very good tripod as something too weak just doesn't work when you need it. That said tripods seem to run the gamut from too cheap to ridiculously expensive. If you're here in the US I've seen some great deals on older Bogens in the used section of Craigslist

[armand]

Right now I am between the Manfrotto 055MF4 and the Feisol 3442 (if I add the center colum will be around 2.75 lbs vs 4.4 for Manfrotto, and slightly higher, for about 100$ more).
Anybody compared them before?
There are few issues I am concerned about:
- if they are as stable
- how reliable and easy to use is the twist-lock on the Feisol, as I heard is more prone to problems comparing to the snap-on of the Manfrotto?
- how resistant is the carbon fiber from the Feisol comparing to magfiber from Manfrotto, for things like sand or bumping into rocks?

I would really want to save some weight, as it seems I will need a leveling base also, but not if there too many compromises to be made. I don't want to buy another tripod for many years.

PS. the maximum weight I am foreseeing for this tripod would be a D3-like camera with up to a medium-sized lens.
PPS. If I add the leveling base, they will cost about the same

[DarkPenguin]

I don't have the feisol you are interested in and have only limited experience with Manfrotto products.

- how reliable and easy to use is the twist-lock on the Feisol, as I heard is more prone to problems comparing to the snap-on of the Manfrotto?

Seems fine.  The legs do spin (at least on the one I have) so you need to do them in order.  It doesn't take long to get that down.  And once you know how far you have to loosen them you can move pretty quickly.  The Manfrotto leg locks I've played with before are certainly quicker but beware tightening them too much.  I have had one try to take a finger.  Not a negative.  Just be careful.

I would really want to save some weight, as it seems I will need a leveling base also, but not if there too many compromises to be made. I don't want to buy another tripod for many years.

I like the arcratech leveling base.  Feisol didn't have one when I wanted one.  The acratech is quite nice.  Just an FYI.

I don't think you can go wrong with either of these.  One thing I really like about some of the Manfrottos I've looked at is the nice carrying strap.  I need to find a third party one for my feisol.

[Ken Bennett]

I have used both kinds of tripod leg locks -- the Manfrotto snap locks, and the twist locks on my Gitzo. They both work, but I have to say I like the twist locks better. The snap locks loosen over time, and I found my tripod slow sinking as the legs collapsed. It's easy enough to tighten the locks, but only if you have the right tool with you at the time.

[armand]

I finally decided about what to get, and although I already ordered I'm still not sure with my decision  

Tripod legs
I was mainly between the Feisol and and Manfrotto 055MF4, and for the last day I was set on Feisol, but 1 hour before ordering I went with with Manfrotto 190CXPRO4. Chose it over Feisol because I had more information on it, had horizontal column (on Feisol I couldn't see a picture with the center column in intermediate position, not matter where I looked), and had everything on it. On Feisol you had to add things, and while I was ok with it, the lack of information about the extra stuff didn't help (like dimensions/weight for center column or the leveling base). It's about the same weight, and up to 100$ cheaper than Feisol 3442.
(if you look too much you get over other tripods also, like a Manfrotto 055...4, carbon fiber only - was 3.7lbs vs 4.4lbs for magfiber, not enough to justify the price difference; there was an interesting Induro or even a Gitzo 1541 I thing, for about 530$ - a touch lighter and with better on paper characteristics)

Ballhead
Finally went with a Kirk BH-3. A touch heavier than I wanted, but seems to be well built and should last a while. Still not sure if Markins Q3 would have been better for about 50$ more (was definitely lighter)

Lens
I chose Nikon 16-85VR. While the 18-200VR seems to be a very nice bargain, I shot until now with a 18-55 so I can live without the extra reach. The sharpness and less distortion were the factors. While distortion might not be that visible in real life photos (it was still worse than my cheap lens kit) the sharpness will. I'll just need a wide-angle and a zoom later on.

[armand]

Long time after I started this topic I came back to share few thoughts about my selections.

I'll start with the tripod head. Probably Kirk was ok with a larger camera, but with my D50 (at that time, D90 now) it was way to stiff and difficult to adjust. So I send it back and got a Markins Q3 with which I am much more happy. I have few issues about how strong you can fix the panoramic base (partially because I think I forced it too much). It's lightweight, easy to adjust and very stable with a D90/ 16-85VR, can probably take more than 3-4 times the weight. Used it also in Miami area with dust and sand around, and so far so good.

The tripod is also quite good. Didn't take it as a carry-on and with the new developments in luggage restrictions I won't even try. Stable, but I would expect more occasionally. I suspect it's because my camera/lens combination is just too light, I'll need to attach a hook for a bag and see if it improves. The legs do rotate a little, more than I was expecting. Not an issue so far though. The lock mechanism for the legs is quite good, I am able to extend them quite fast and make fast adjustments. Doesn't loosen on it's own, and I must admit a didn't even clean once in more than a year.
The horizontal column is nice, but it's not that stable, you really have to pay attention to stabilize it. Also it makes the entire tripod a little wobbly comparing to a similar tripod without the horizontal column.


The 16-85VR it's nice, my main lens. I do experiment with a couple of primes but I return to this one, and it's my only zoom. Still not sure if it's better than a 18-200VR as I don't have one to compare the image quality, but except for the occasional wildlife I don't need more than 85. Probably I'll get a 70-300VR as a cheaper lens if I want extra reach.