To tripod or not to tripod

venchka · 10-31-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crasis

Go big or go home!

Haha! But hey, you just said the magic words there. MF goes on the tripod long before the Leica or Canon equipment.

So then, why worry about putting your Leica on a tripod? If you REALLY need to, it's because your MF miraculously broke and you're standing there with your pants down, figuratively. At that point, it doesn't matter where the tripod socket is located. You just have to get the shot

We strayed quite far from my original topic. I felt it was time for a new thread on the tripod or don't question.

First of all, my idea of when to use a tripod is very early, very late or anytime my film of choice and f-stop/shutter speed selection suggests a rock stable platform for the film. No matter which film and which body I may have at hand.

As a matter of choice, my whacking great Pentax 6x7 needs a tripod to wring every last bit of detail from the slides or negatives. The mirror slap is quite pronounced. The tripod quells any mirror bounce. I knew all of this going in. It's a price I'll gladly pay for the big slides & negatives.

Panorama production was mentioned as a reason for using a tripod. Darn essential I say. I am keen to try producing some tiled images using mutiple rows and columns of images. I can't think of a better lens/body combination for this than the 50mm DR Summicron on the M5. I plan to start small, say 2 rows of 3 photos. Having said that, I'm also thinking that 2 rows of 3 photos from the Pentax 6x7 would be wonderful as well.

Telephoto lenses and tripods. No brainer.

I reckon tripods began life as a required piece of kit when cameras moved outdoors. There is no reason to think that they are any less useful and required today.

Grinning. All of this tripod talk is giving me GAS!

Ash · 10-31-2006

Tripods were necessary from the days when Large Format was the ONLY format, and emulsions were dead-slow. I'm sure there are photo's of elderly people who passed away during exposures.

I only use mine for slow speeds or when I'm taking portraits and want to be running around and know the camera is staying put. For that reason my RF's never end up on a tripod. Occasionally I'll carry a monopod... or maybe a banana

Crasis · 10-31-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by venchka

I reckon tripods began life as a required piece of kit when cameras moved outdoors. There is no reason to think that they are any less useful and required today.

Grinning. All of this tripod talk is giving me GAS!

Oh gods, tripod GAS? Good luck with that

Ash · 10-31-2006

It won't last. You get a manfrotto, then you dont NEED anything better, you simply need a camera worth placing on the tripod, and the circle of life is complete.

ffttklackdedeng · 10-31-2006

Agree with Ash - but replace the brand with Gitzo

Tripod GAS is harmless, the only error on the way is to take compromises

Talisker · 10-31-2006

Ha - tripod wars! I'm happy with my Manfrotto 190 and my little Velbon ultralux, which is an exellent little travel tripod if you replace the head. The camera worth placing on the Manfrotto is a Gaoersi 617, my new toy. The Bronica 645 often goes on the Velbon, although I have to use an angle bracket for landscape format.

Magnus · 10-31-2006

in my opinion tripods are an absolute necessity, I shoot mainly at slow speed and wnat to get the fixed items fixed and the mobile.. mobile, this is a certain style where one needs a tripod. I like ghosting it certainly adds to the total atmossphere, but then again it's a personal style of shooting

MadMan2k · 10-31-2006

I use a tripod when I can't handhold, and no tripod when I can, pretty much..

It makes life a lot simpler shooting close-ups with a telephoto, because you won't be moving forward and back with the camera to bring it out of focus.

Also, when I shoot landscapes with a tripod, I just seem to get better results. I don't know if that's because the image is sharper because of lack of camera shake, or because I think about the shot more - probably a combination of both. Most of my landscapes are shot at slower than 1/200th of a second, so handholding could theoretically lose at least a little sharpness.

JeffGreene · 11-01-2006

I do a lot of early morning low light landscape projects with my Mamiya 6, and find a tripod essential. I've been using the same old aluminum Gitzo Explorer (much heavier than the carbon fiber, basalt, latest whizbang-element-of-the-moment tripod) for many years and find it extremely stable for medium format, my RD1 and my Leica).

I've questioned the utility of some of the newer, carbon/basalt/whatever fiber, very expensive "traveler" tripods which seem to provide virtually no resistance to torque and would seem to provide questionable stability for the price paid.

A couple of friends who also hike mentioned some new "Trekpod" that supposedly is cost-effective, has both monopod and tripod virtues, and also serves as a hiking staff. Anyone know anything about them?

scottgee1 · 11-01-2006

Depending on your shooting style, you may want to consider a Uni-Loc/Benbo.

I have the former and the more I use it, the more I like it. As I stated in the previous thread, I use a tripod only when I can't. I consider it essential to get the results I want.

ScottGee1

venchka · 11-01-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeffGreene

...A couple of friends who also hike mentioned some new "Trekpod" that supposedly is cost-effective, has both monopod and tripod virtues, and also serves as a hiking staff. Anyone know anything about them?

TrekPod

It looks interesting. I wouldn't trust it with anything big or heavy.