Redsnapper..... but which one?

IanC

IanC

Messages
1,326
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
Yes
I need a tripod for use with longer shutter speeds, i have narrowed it down to a redsnapper due to discount and good reviews on here. At the moment im doing landscapes and architecture, but i am looking to start taking pictures of my local football team and possibly powerleague 5-aside which me and my friends play in.

i have a d40 and standard kit lens and i will eventually look to upgrade to a d90 or a d300 and get some longer and quicker lens's depending on how well the football photography goes.

can anyone suggest a suitable tripod and head from the redsnapper range?

Cheers, Ian
 
For the landscape and architecture stuff, I'd be looking at the carbon-fibre one if I was going to carry it any distance, or if that's too many beer tokens, then either of the 3 or 4 section aluminium ones. The 4 section packs smaller and is easier to carry, at the expense of being marginally shorter at full reach and theoretically a bit less stable due to additional joints in the legs. As far as shooting the footy, I'm with Strumstrum - get the monopod and ball head bundle.
 
Thankyou for the replies, the monopod is a good option for grass fields you are right, but would it work on a hard surface, to be honest i would probably just shoot handheld for the powerleague stuff (which is astro turf).i will be shooting through a wire fence also.

cheers :thumbs:
 
I have the 4 section alloy tripod and the £15 head.

Packs nice and small, great value. Perfectly stable IMHO.....
 
Monopod for the football no question :) on a hard surface you just retract the spike (on the redsnapper) of fit the rubber foot (for Gitzo or similar) there's a reason why every photographer at the footy has a monopod. One they work and don't take up much space. two if a player i skidding on his arse towards you especially in this weather its easier to move out the way with a monopod than tripod. The Redsnapper carbon fibre tripod is excellent, though when fully extended its a bit unstable. You can hang weight from the hook underneath though :)


EDIT i should add the comment about being unstable is when ive used it with a 400 f/2.8 and MKIII so its right on the weight limit :bonk:
 
I honestly dont see why you would want a tripod for football if you are capturing the game.

monopod is far far better for keeping up with the pace.

tripod is great for things but moving sports imo.
 
I seem to be doing more and more football and rugy and because of that I have ordered the Redsnapper monopod as my tripod is not suitable for fast moving sports shots
 
IanC said:
Thanks for all your help guys i shall go for the the monopod option for the football

is it worth getting a more expensive head on the tripod for landscapes or shall i just stick with the bundle deal

http://www.aldine.co.uk/redsnapper/tripod-3wayhead-combo.html
Click to expand...

I went for the 284 + 3 way as it is a fantastic deal and I neither need speed or precision so went for the cheapest.. .. I am no expert but I think in general the ball heads are for instant movement but you run the risk of throwing out your correct up down adjustment whilst making your needed left right one...wheras the 3 way heads are a tad slower to get you where you want to go but you can tilt the axis independently..

I am sure I will soon be corrected but that is my interpretation of the 2.:shrug:
 
you don't have the retractable spikes on the feet on that one and it's also heavier than the redsnapper. Plus it only holds 4kg where the redsnapper holds 6kg (the ball head holds 10kg, the 283 legs can hold up to 8kg).

It's all in there in the item description
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top