Tripod Controversy - does sturdy = sharp?

So I am a bit confused and I am looking for some insight from those that “actually” know from real world experiences.

I understand the difference in Tripods with thicker/stiffer legs will reduce movement and provide a more stable platform - but is that what I really need?

I keep reading/hearing “Look for the biggest, baddest tripod that you can afford - and then get the next size up!”. But is that really a one size fits all answer?

For m, I say - i don’t think so…

When it comes to tripod shooting - I mostly shoot two different genres:

1. Product Photography
   1. Indoors in a controlled Enviroement
   2. D810 - Teathered
   3. 24-70mm
   4. 60mm Micro
   5. 55mm Ball Head
2. Wildlife Photography
   1. Outdoors
   2. D500
   3. 200-500mm
   4. Carbon/Fluid Gimbal

I have the Gitzo GT2932 Basalt 3-Section Tripod and 99% of the time it’s does not have the center column attached. I have started shooting more long lenses and have considered upgrading my tripod to something a bit more sturdy and with 4 sections so that it’s a bit smaller - but do I really need to?

The 4 sections would be nice, but the most important is steady = sharper (all things equal). Am I really going to gain much in my Product Photography with the smaller/lighter setups? What bout with the 200-500mm, all long lens techniques state that you put your left hand on top of the lens and leave the Gimbal all loose so that you have fluid movement - what’s the benefit here?


I would like to hear form folks in both these areas about their experiences form going to a small/lighter tripod to a heavier/more sturdy.

I use a number of different tripods depending on what I'm doing.

I use my large heavy tripod: Outside, in the water, heavy lens, long exposures, windy conditions, not climbing a mountain and weight/size matters.

Medium sized: What I am usually hauling around, but keeping in mind what size lens I might be shooting. Large lens then I go to the large tripod.

Small: Tighter areas, controlled conditions, not using a large lens.

However, I always carry some Walmart plastic bags in my camera case in the event I need to add weight to stabilize or weigh down a tripod. I can throw rocks, sand, a leprechaun, etc. into the bag as needed.

The biggest mistake I see is when people are standing next to their tripod and they are shifting their weight around. I was on a night shoot with my tripod sitting on solid rock to completely eliminate and movement of the camera by my body weight. Behind me was another photographer that identified himself as a "pro" yet he was shooting from a wood deck where his wife was walking all around the camera while he was shooting long exposures and he was doing the same. As you can imagine, their weight and movement vibrations were messing up his images.

That's my two cents.

Moab Man said:

I use a number of different tripods depending on what I'm doing.

Click to expand...

This is pretty much my approach as well. I think you need to match the tool to the job at hand.

For myself sometimes all I need my tripod to do, really, is act like a third hand and hold the camera with decent stability. Exposure/shutter speed will be high enough that absolute, rock-solid stability may not be crucial to successful shots. In those instances my light as a feather travel-tripod will probably work just fine. When I start doing 30-second exposures for night photography, though, those light as feather travel tripods with their spindly little legs just aren't up to the task, which means dragging out the bigger, heavier tripod.

Different expectation/needs = different tripods to handle them.

If I could only have one tripod, it would be the biggest, heaviest one I own.

...

Horoscope Fish said:

If I could only have one tripod, it would be the biggest, heaviest one I own.

...

Click to expand...

Agreed!

The other important question is how much does one really need to spend to get a decent tripod for long exposures. Obviously a $25 tripod won't cut it, but do you really need to spend over $1000 for a decent tripod? Other then for a travel/hiking tripod, where weight is important, is carbon fiber really worth the extra money?

Bikerbrent said:

The other important question is how much does one really need to spend to get a decent tripod for long exposures. Obviously a $25 tripod won't cut it, but do you really need to spend over $1000 for a decent tripod? Other then for a travel/hiking tripod, where weight is important, is carbon fiber really worth the extra money?

Click to expand...

As with most things I think there is a point at which most people would agree you have reached maximum ROI (Return On Investment). Beyond this point (typically) you will start paying dearly for modest improvements in either performance, feature-set or both. But then too there are those who shoot professionally and things like tripods are, most likely, tax deductible so why NOT spend a couple grand and to hell with the Price/Performance Matrix altogether? They need absolute top-of-the-line equipment and that's ALL that matters. For most of us, though, I think it's safe to say price matters. It's my personal opinion one does not need to spend into the fourth digit to get a very, VERY good tripod and head setup. That being said, I *do* think you need spend a few hundred, or somewhere in that neighborhood generally speaking to get into equipment

I always chuckle when I see someone ask, "Is it worth it?", regardless of what thing they're talking about. As if the question has some definitive answer.

Bikerbrent said:

The other important question is how much does one really need to spend to get a decent tripod for long exposures. Obviously a $25 tripod won't cut it, but do you really need to spend over $1000 for a decent tripod? Other then for a travel/hiking tripod, where weight is important, is carbon fiber really worth the extra money?

Click to expand...

I rarely use a tripod, but when I do believe it or not I use an Amazon model. The thing is stable as you can imagine, and cost less than $100 new.

The trade off? It weighs just slightly less than a metric ton. When it comes to tripods you can get sturdy and well built without spending an arm and a leg. But only if you don't mind them being heavy. If you want sturdy, well built and lightweight, oh ya, that gets expensive.

Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk

It's better to have too much tripod and not need it than to have too much camera and not enough tripod.
I went with a big, heavy sturdy Benro tripod. Holds three time more weight than my heaviest camera/lens combo.
Stability isn't an issue.