Which Redsnapper tripod?

bomberman

bomberman

Messages
1,149
Edit My Images
No
Hi

I am really torn between the 283 and the 284 tripods and just can't make my mind up about which to get. I know the 284 is more compact and goes lower than the 283 with around 10cm less max height but as i'm new to photography i don't know what my needs are so well yet.

The ability to get down lower on the 284 is more appealing to me than the extra height of the 283 because i'm only 5"8 and the 284 with the head and camera ontop will be too tall for me to see through the viewfinder! (i've got stickies on my wall to prove it). Does anybody ever use their tripod above head height?

also, is the minimum height of the 284 more useful in your opinion? or is it irrelevant due to the reversibility of the centre mount of both models?

Probably the main reason i'm holding off buying the 284 at the moment is the number of leg sections - 4. Does anyone find unfolding 4 leg sections every time a PITA?

Just to help you answer i'm into landscape photography and so far the £10 tripod i bought off ebay has been used on steep windy hillsides and in rocky streams. macro is something i'd like to try but not as important.
 
I am surprised you didn't get an answer, but I guess everyone is either on hols, or enjoying taking shots in the sun!
I believe that there is a chap on here, Joe? who works for redsnapper. I am sure he will answer if he sees the thread.
I believe what he has said before though on the differences, was that the 284 was not quite as stable as the 283 in theory, because of the extra leg-piece, however he had not seen any issues with stability (hence the in theory). I don't think that having 4 legs is going to make much difference in extending time etc. For landscapes, they hardly tend to run away.
I have a cheapo £10 tripod too, and must really upgrade at some point.
Often I don't extend more than 1 leg each side, not because it is a pain, but because I don't need that extra height.
I had a colleague who was 6' something. He was happy to see the height that my current tripod goes to, as he finds them difficult to get high enough. I can't say that I have ever extended my tripod to a point where I am shooting above my head. I would think that should I ever need to take shots above peoples heads (haven't so far), then I would probably use my monopod.
 
Hey thanks, at least someone's replying!

really can't make my mind up on this. the 283 seems the simpler and more elegant design but the 284 just seems a bit smarter and more compact.

Grrrrrrrr.
 
What would be really useful is a pic of the tripod with the centre-column inverted to see what the setup looks like at minimum height. Then i could decide on the basis of whether i liked the look of it or not. if not i'd probably go for the 284.

Tim
 
HI,

I can only comment on the 283 as this is the one i have, i bought it at the beginning of this year and its great. very sturdy even when fully extended, its great as it can get so close to the ground, when i bought mine i got a smaller centre column included in the bag so it can get even closer to the ground.

I also got mine with the ball head, which is also great, as with the tripod it is very well built.

Joe on this forum is who i dealt with at Redsnapper, so he will be able to help you decide.

Chris.
 
I spoke to joe via email and he explained the physical differences. I'm just undecided as to which is more useful: Height or low-downiness :)

At the moment i'm thinking the ability to go lower (284). But i'm unsure about the 4 leg sections - it seems like a lot of work just to get the thing fully extended.

Therein lies my dilemma. Ideally i'd like to order today! Might email him again.
 
But the 283 will go down as low as the 284 surely, and if that's not low enough you could always put the head on the bottom?



(Sorry about the yellow pages - only thing I had handy to show the height).
 
For me, rather than the maximum and minimum heights that they will do, the real deciding factor would be the folded length of the tripod. They'll both go down to ground level if you reverse the centre tube, there's only 4" in the max height anyway. The difference between 490mm and 620mm can make a big change in the "carry" of the tripod. I've got a Lowepro camera bag with the tripod carrier bit on the back, and the 283 is just a wee bit long - it feels like it's flapping about a bit and makes the pack a little unweildy. In the supplied bag it's fine, of course, but that's an extra thing to carry around - not ideal if your trekking up and down mountains. Then again, if you are yomping around like that, then the CF version would probably be better (though I'd like to see a 4 section version of that one - for the aforementioned carrying advantages!)
 
TheBigYin - that is a big advantage for me too, i don't want to be carrying anything too bulky

robrevens - the 284 goes 80mm lower than the 283 - and thatnks for the pic!

How does reversing the centre column work? do you hang the camera upside down?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top