Tripod for use with a gimbal head....

Bobsyeruncle

Bobsyeruncle

Messages
17,355
Name
Bob
Edit My Images
Yes
recently bought a lensmaster gh2 gimbal head from a fellow TP member. My current tripod is a Manfrotto 190xproB, but it's not really sturdy enough with the gimbal head and my D7000/sigma 150-600C.
Any suggestions on a more sturdy tripod without breaking the bank?
Could
Possibly spend in the region of £200-£300 for legs only. Obviously £200 would be better :)
All thoughts and suggestions/recommendations appreciated. A
 
Last edited:
What don't you find sturdy about it? A friend of mine uses a 300 2.8 and d800 on a gimbal style head (benro sidekick and ball head, previously the beike gimbal) and it seems to find it ok for him and gets sharp images too. If you do want to upgrade to the 055xprob I find it to be good and sturdy enough to use with a gripped d750 and 200-400 f4 so it would be fine with a 150-600. The short centre columns are a great replacement to the longer one, they allow you to get lower.
 
rob-nikon said:
What don't you find sturdy about it? A friend of mine uses a 300 2.8 and d800 on a gimbal style head (benro sidekick and ball head, previously the beike gimbal) and it seems to find it ok for him and gets sharp images too. If you do want to upgrade to the 055xprob I find it to be good and sturdy enough to use with a gripped d750 and 200-400 f4 so it would be fine with a 150-600. The short centre columns are a great replacement to the longer one, they allow you to get lower.
Click to expand...
When all the legs are fully open and the centre column is raised, it seems a wee bit shoogly.
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
When all the legs are fully open and the centre column is raised, it seems a wee bit shoogly.
Click to expand...

The 055xprob is taller than the 190 so no need to raise the centre column. In fact I'm just over 6 foot and already find my tripod a bit to tall with the gimbal attached so I have to lower it a bit.
 
ecoleman said:
The 055xprob is taller than the 190 so no need to raise the centre column. In fact I'm just over 6 foot and already find my tripod a bit to tall with the gimbal attached so I have to lower it a bit.
Click to expand...
Ok, thanks. I'll maybe put a wanted ad in and see what comes up.
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
When all the legs are fully open and the centre column is raised, it seems a wee bit shoogly.
Click to expand...
If you are raising the centre column then it won't be as stable and that's a good reason to get a larger tripod. I never raise the centre column due to reduced stability. I've now shorten the short centre column so I actually can't raise it! I cut it shorter so I can spread the legs flat or at their widest setting without the centre column touching the ground and creating a fourth leg.
 
As with rob I have a kood

c.f tripod that I use with the lensmaster gimbal ,and I have converted that to fixed plate only type ,if my memory serves me rightly the manfrotto plates incorporate small securing screws from underneath ,if in use these could be set to high and inducing wobble
 
rob-nikon said:
If you are raising the centre column then it won't be as stable and that's a good reason to get a larger tripod. I never raise the centre column due to reduced stability. I've now shorten the short centre column so I actually can't raise it! I cut it shorter so I can spread the legs flat or at their widest setting without the centre column touching the ground and creating a fourth leg.
Click to expand...
Not just me then. :)
 
Using the centre column isn't going to be stable with a big lens regardless of the tripod - get something without. Look at the Benro Combination series - something like this fits your budget and should be rock solid. I've got a very similar Benro (now discontinued) and a Benro Gimbal, which happily holds a 1D series body + 500mm lens. The legs can splay out to get you really low to the ground.
 
I've had the Manfotto and over time found it lacking, I then tried the vanguard pro but again found it lacking especially for low level shooting.
I'm now using the Benro Mach 3 and I'm very impressed with its performance, its built like a tank, very rigid and stable and with the supplied short centre column goes very low with ease.
The fit & finish is superb, they've really paid attention to the little details, even the case thats supplied is much better quality than those from Manfrotto.
I only need a small tripod but even my tiny TMA 28 A will carry a 14 kg load, ideal as I use a pro powered tripod head with camera & 300mm f2.8 without any issues at all.
The leg locks are superb, firm and don't slip, the centre column adjuster is the same, it locks up very easily and firmly with no creep at all.

I would recommend them over the Manfrotto or Vanguard tripods, it will do what you want and within your budget.

http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-benro-mach3-tma47axl-aluminium-tripod/p1573990
 
I got a Benro from a member on here, couldn't tell you the model off hand but it's a cracker of a tripod for my lensmaster head and tamron 150-600
 
rob-nikon said:
If you are raising the centre column then it won't be as stable and that's a good reason to get a larger tripod. I never raise the centre column due to reduced stability. I've now shorten the short centre column so I actually can't raise it! I cut it shorter so I can spread the legs flat or at their widest setting without the centre column touching the ground and creating a fourth leg.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that Rob. It's a bit low if I don't raise the centre column a bit.
the black fox said:
As with rob I have a kood

c.f tripod that I use with the lensmaster gimbal ,and I have converted that to fixed plate only type ,if my memory serves me rightly the manfrotto plates incorporate small securing screws from underneath ,if in use these could be set to high and inducing wobble
Click to expand...
Thanks. I'll have a look at that.
Will H said:
Using the centre column isn't going to be stable with a big lens regardless of the tripod - get something without. Look at the Benro Combination series - something like this fits your budget and should be rock solid. I've got a very similar Benro (now discontinued) and a Benro Gimbal, which happily holds a 1D series body + 500mm lens. The legs can splay out to get you really low to the ground.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I'll check them out.
magicaxeman said:
I've had the Manfotto and over time found it lacking, I then tried the vanguard pro but again found it lacking especially for low level shooting.
I'm now using the Benro Mach 3 and I'm very impressed with its performance, its built like a tank, very rigid and stable and with the supplied short centre column goes very low with ease.
The fit & finish is superb, they've really paid attention to the little details, even the case thats supplied is much better quality than those from Manfrotto.
I only need a small tripod but even my tiny TMA 28 A will carry a 14 kg load, ideal as I use a pro powered tripod head with camera & 300mm f2.8 without any issues at all.
The leg locks are superb, firm and don't slip, the centre column adjuster is the same, it locks up very easily and firmly with no creep at all.

I would recommend them over the Manfrotto or Vanguard tripods, it will do what you want and within your budget.

http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-benro-mach3-tma47axl-aluminium-tripod/p1573990
Click to expand...
Thanks. Probably swaying towards a benro. Wish there was somewhere decent to check them out.
tom24 said:
I got a Benro from a member on here, couldn't tell you the model off hand but it's a cracker of a tripod for my lensmaster head and tamron 150-600
Click to expand...
Thanks Tom. Looking like a benro will be the ones to look at. Does it have a centre column?
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
Ok guys, thanks for the help. I've narrowed it down to 2 benro models. One has a short centre column, the Mach 3, and the other has no centre column, the combination.
Not sure which would be the best? Not bothered about carbon.
http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-benro-mach3-tma47al-aluminium-tripod/p1573991

http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-benro-combination-com47axl-aluminium-tripod/p1574070
Click to expand...
Personally if I was now buying a tripod I would go for one without a centre column as for me a centre column gets in the way and it's also sturdier too. The only difference between those is closed length, one is 69cm and the other is 79cm. A 4 section would reduce the closed length but at a little loss of stability. With a gimbal head attached you will be nearing 90-100cm closed. Also I know you said that you are not bothered about carbon but with those tripods and a gimbal head you are talking 4kg, as you camera and lens is probably nearly 3kg are you happy to be carrying about 7kg? I've managed to get my tripod and head down to 2.5kg (manfrotto cx055 & large unit all), as its relatively light I take it with me more often rather than leaving it behind. If you go with a carbon tripod it's unlikely you will regret it in the future whereas it's possible you may have that feeling that you should have. Looking at the benro range the carbon tripods do save weight and closed length but at the expense of overall height (150cm instead of 180cm). It really depends what you what from a tripod. Have you compared it against your current tripod as that's probably the best way. It's possible the carbon ones won't give you a height increase so I would check that before purchasing as I'm not sure exactly what the max height of you'd current tripod is.

My choices would be:

Carbon

http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-benro-combination-com37cl-carbon-fibre-tripod/p1574082

Aluminium

http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-benro-combination-com47axl-aluminium-tripod/p1574070

The problem with tripods is there has to be a compromise somewhere, whether that's cost, weight, closed height, max height, centre column or not, number of sections, maximum stability or portability.
 
rob-nikon said:
Personally if I was now buying a tripod I would go for one without a centre column as for me a centre column gets in the way and it's also sturdier too. The only difference between those is closed length, one is 69cm and the other is 79cm. A 4 section would reduce the closed length but at a little loss of stability. With a gimbal head attached you will be nearing 90-100cm closed. Also I know you said that you are not bothered about carbon but with those tripods and a gimbal head you are talking 4kg, as you camera and lens is probably nearly 3kg are you happy to be carrying about 7kg? I've managed to get my tripod and head down to 2.5kg (manfrotto cx055 & large unit all), as its relatively light I take it with me more often rather than leaving it behind. If you go with a carbon tripod it's unlikely you will regret it in the future whereas it's possible you may have that feeling that you should have. Looking at the benro range the carbon tripods do save weight and closed length but at the expense of overall height (150cm instead of 180cm). It really depends what you what from a tripod. Have you compared it against your current tripod as that's probably the best way. It's possible the carbon ones won't give you a height increase so I would check that before purchasing as I'm not sure exactly what the max height of you'd current tripod is.

My choices would be:

Carbon

http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-benro-combination-com37cl-carbon-fibre-tripod/p1574082

Aluminium

http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-benro-combination-com47axl-aluminium-tripod/p1574070

The problem with tripods is there has to be a compromise somewhere, whether that's cost, weight, closed height, max height, centre column or not, number of sections, maximum stability or portability.
Click to expand...
My existing tripod is 1.8kg and the ideal height is 1.4M which requires the centre column to be raised, hence the stability issue.
My camera, lens and gimbal is 4.2kg.
The carbon tripod 37cl is ideal for height and weight etc at a cost of £229
The alu one 47axl is 3kg, 1.8M which is higher than I need, so won't need extended as much, therefore may be more stable? And is £149 so saves £79 but weighs an extra kilo.
Mmm, not sure what to do....
 
No centre column in mine, it's a carbon fibre with twist locks
 
Last edited:
Model is C3770TN
 
rob-nikon said:
Personally if I was now buying a tripod I would go for one without a centre column as for me a centre column gets in the way and it's also sturdier too. The only difference between those is closed length, one is 69cm and the other is 79cm. A 4 section would reduce the closed length but at a little loss of stability. With a gimbal head attached you will be nearing 90-100cm closed. Also I know you said that you are not bothered about carbon but with those tripods and a gimbal head you are talking 4kg, as you camera and lens is probably nearly 3kg are you happy to be carrying about 7kg? I've managed to get my tripod and head down to 2.5kg (manfrotto cx055 & large unit all), as its relatively light I take it with me more often rather than leaving it behind. If you go with a carbon tripod it's unlikely you will regret it in the future whereas it's possible you may have that feeling that you should have. Looking at the benro range the carbon tripods do save weight and closed length but at the expense of overall height (150cm instead of 180cm). It really depends what you what from a tripod. Have you compared it against your current tripod as that's probably the best way. It's possible the carbon ones won't give you a height increase so I would check that before purchasing as I'm not sure exactly what the max height of you'd current tripod is.

My choices would be:

Carbon

http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-benro-combination-com37cl-carbon-fibre-tripod/p1574082

Aluminium

http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-benro-combination-com47axl-aluminium-tripod/p1574070

The problem with tripods is there has to be a compromise somewhere, whether that's cost, weight, closed height, max height, centre column or not, number of sections, maximum stability or portability.
Click to expand...


The main thing that concerns me with the carbon one is the height, there is only 9 cm headroom for you to play with if on uneven ground and you have to splay 1 or 2 of the legs to get it level meaning it could come up short of your ideal 1.4 m height.

I realise probably better than most how much of a problem weight can be, but its also an advantage when it comes to stability, the Mach 3 has tripod strap lugs for carrying as well as a built in hook on the centre column for suspending more weight,

I also have lens master gimbal head, but my set up is a little crazy in that mine is fitted upside down to a opticron centre column which is fixed in a hide clamp, the whole lot is suspended from the hanging pole on the bariatric bed I live in 24/7, but it works, mind you should have heard Robs surprise when he was asked if the lensmaster was up to it. he went and tested one for me, hanging it from the workshop roof with a full load to make sure it worked and it still works perfectly over 2 years on.
 
magicaxeman said:
The main thing that concerns me with the carbon one is the height, there is only 9 cm headroom for you to play with if on uneven ground and you have to splay 1 or 2 of the legs to get it level meaning it could come up short of your ideal 1.4 m height.

I realise probably better than most how much of a problem weight can be, but its also an advantage when it comes to stability, the Mach 3 has tripod strap lugs for carrying as well as a built in hook on the centre column for suspending more weight,

I also have lens master gimbal head, but my set up is a little crazy in that mine is fitted upside down to a opticron centre column which is fixed in a hide clamp, the whole lot is suspended from the hanging pole on the bariatric bed I live in 24/7, but it works, mind you should have heard Robs surprise when he was asked if the lensmaster was up to it. he went and tested one for me, hanging it from the workshop roof with a full load to make sure it worked and it still works perfectly over 2 years on.
Click to expand...
That is very true it doesn't have much room to play with if on uneven ground.

Bobsyeruncle said:
My existing tripod is 1.8kg and the ideal height is 1.4M which requires the centre column to be raised, hence the stability issue.
My camera, lens and gimbal is 4.2kg.
The carbon tripod 37cl is ideal for height and weight etc at a cost of £229
The alu one 47axl is 3kg, 1.8M which is higher than I need, so won't need extended as much, therefore may be more stable? And is £149 so saves £79 but weighs an extra kilo.
Mmm, not sure what to do....
Click to expand...
This is the problem with tripods, you can't have it all... well you can but it would be a gitzo at £600-700! If you work out what you definitely need/want and what isn't so important the choice is probably made for you. The main thing for you sounds to be max height so maybe a the aluminium benro is the one for you. At least you would know the CF would be borderline and at times likely to be too short.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top