Gitzo .. 3 or 4 sections ?

[monkeyleader]

Howdy,

I'm considering a Gitzo tripod and had a question regarding the 3 or 4 leg sections ... Having finally worked out the coding in the Gitzo range (it seems to be the best kept secret in the world) I'm considering the GT5542LS or the GT5532LS (the main difference being the 42 (4 section) and the 32 (section). From a specification point of view the main differences are that the 4 section is 150g lighter (which on face value makes no sense to me), extends 3cm longer (as well as .8 cm closer to the ground), closes up 7.8cm smaller.

Will be paired with (current maximum consideration) a 400mm f/2.8 (IS Generation 1) and a Canon 1DX - at times a Canon 2x III Extender as well. Will also be used in less demanding scenarios with a ball head and landscape type lens. I know the tripod is WAAAYY over specced in regards to the maximum load but the price difference for something which I aim to last a lifelife may actually save me in the long run (i.e. winning the lottery and going all in for a lens upgrade) ...

What I'm really interested in those who have handled the 3 and 4 section Gitzos (not necessarily this model) in the field .. do you notice much difference in either .. any notable trade offs (especially in regards to stability in 3 v 4 sections) time to extend etc etc ... Myself at 5f 10in eye level would most likely take the tripod to its full extension - although not sure how often I'd use that (certainly don't today)

Thanks in advance.

Nigel

4 Section
Primary materialCarbon Fibre
ColourBlack
Weight (g)2800
Max load (g)40000
Min height (cm)10.0
Max height (cm)153.5
Closed length (cm)61.0
Leg sections4
Horizontal centre columnNo
RangeSystematic

3 Section
Primary materialCarbon Fibre
ColourBlack
Weight (g)2950
Max load (g)40000
Min height (cm)10.8
Max height (cm)150.0
Closed length (cm)68.8
Leg sections3
Horizontal centre columnNo
RangeSystematic

 

[Canon Bob]

.....the 4 section is 150g lighter (which on face value makes no sense to me),

The first section tubes (attached to the spider) are the same diameter in each case and then each extension piece is of a smaller diameter. If you achieve the same overall length with 4 sections then there is less of the previous larger diameter tubes in favour of the final smaller, and lighter, tube section.

My personal take is that stability is compromised when using the last section (the thinnest) and a 3 section version avoids this. I have a 4 section but it's the XLS version so I rarely need the last part extended to achieve the same height as a 3 section.

Bob

 

[tijuana taxi]

My personal take is that stability is compromised when using the last section (the thinnest) and a 3 section version avoids this

I agree with Bob if we are talking about the smaller series 1 and 2, but as the leg diameters increase I think the difference is minimal. The leg diameters of a series 5 are substantial on both 3 and 4 section versions so the smaller closed length of the latter could be relevant.

You may find the series 3 would be adequate for your needs, many birders use this model with similar setups to yours. Lighter, shorter closed length and fully extended at 6ft tall I need to be on tiptoes to see the top LCD of a 5D using my 4 section version

Nothing to do with me, but there is a 3542LS on the classifieds that might be of interest

 

[Gaz J]

I've got the 5532LS. Im 6'2" and with a gimbal head on i dont have it fully extended. As far as stability goes it is very good. I would rather have the slight increase in length and weight over the 4 section version and not have to open and close 4 clamps. I use with 500 f4 and 1DX. After looking at both I went for the 3 leg version and have no regrets.

 

[HoppyUK]

With many tripods most of the leg flex is in the joints (and with smaller models, also in the thinner end section). The trick of sliding a couple of inches of leg back up often makes a dramatic difference, and three-sections are more rigid than four.

However, I have a whole bunch of good quality tripods here now (for a magazine review) and perhaps the biggest difference with the Gitzo is how rigid the leg locks are, and sliding a bit back up makes virtually no difference. I've noticed this before. So with a big Gitzo, I think you can probably ignore the number of sections from a performance point of view.

Another thought - with big four-section tripod if you're not too tall, in normal use you can get away without extending the last section at all. So you get the benefits of both types and only use the fourth section when you need the height.

 

[Impspeed]

I have a 4-section 3 Series (3542 - for sale) which I rarely/never extend past 4-5" of the lower leg section. I use it with a D3/D4s and Nikon 400mm 2.8 (much heavier than the new Canon) without any issue.

 

[maninsuitcase]

I went with a 3 Series 3 section (GT3532LS) for 2 reasons: 1 it was cheaper than a 4 section, 2 less locks to mess about with.

Granted it's a bit long folded up but it's sold as a rock, I certainly see no need for a 5 series. In fact I know 1 person who swapped a 5 series down to a 3 and is using a 600mm on it.

If the max hight difference was more pronounced I'd probably have gone for the 4 section but for an extra inch I wasn't willing to pay for it.

 

[Gaz J]

The 5 series are bulky and sometimes on a long walk in I think it would be nice if it was a bit lighter but the stabillity it offers when set up more than offsets that. I get quite a number of people who comment on how stable it looks and several have asked me if they can pop their camera and lens on it to see what its like.

Over spec, overkill? Perhaps. But I wouldnt swap it for any other tripod.

 

[BMD]

I've got the 5532LS. Im 6'2" and with a gimbal head on i dont have it fully extended. As far as stability goes it is very good. I would rather have the slight increase in length and weight over the 4 section version and not have to open and close 4 clamps. I use with 500 f4 and 1DX. After looking at both I went for the 3 leg version and have no regrets.

Ditto.