| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/15/2006 07:32:52 PM · #26 |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 08:04:14 PM · #27 |
These were all taken using a Wal-Mart $40 tripod. I hung my MicroTrekker backpack on the hook in the center column to add stability and the tripod worked very well. I still use it a lot, and it's held up like a champ. I have had no stability problems in wind, I've had no issues with the mounting plate slipping or being wobbly in the least, and it has two levels on it, which I think is great because I'm not the best judge of level horizons. If you want to shell out $800 on a tripod, feel free...but I'd rather use that extra $760 on a lens or something. If I burn in hell for all eternity for supporting Wal-Mart's "shady" practices, so be it. ;)
  
I have a framed 8x12 of the last one on my office wall and I think it looks beautiful. :)
|
|
|
|
06/15/2006 09:00:28 PM · #28 |
I just replaced a $40 wolf camera tripod with a manfrotto in the $150 - $200 range. I am very pleased with my purchase. I think both have their place, and I will continue to use both.
The inexpensive tripod is lighter, and does well enough for relatively fast shots (< 10 seconds) - macros, low light, etc. It is easier to take hiking and the like.
Where the sturdier tripod comes in handy is for long exposures, and in windy conditions. My take II entry was a long night exposure. In the original, taken with the inexpensive tripod, building signs were fuzzy due to camera shake. In the retake, they were very sharp.
If you don't want to spend the dollars for a top-of-the-line tripod, you can still get a lot of benefit from a low-end one. You just need to go into it knowing its limitations. |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 09:37:18 PM · #29 |
Like any gear, the cheap stuff will work well in a lot of situations, but when the going gets tough you may not be able to rely on it to produce the results you want. Generally you want a tripod to help you when the lighting is low and you can't hold the camera still, so its no good if your tripod shakes during long exposures.
I thought I had a decent tripod, it's a cheapish middle range tripod, but during the recent night challenge 100% of my shots from the first night were thrown straight in the trash because of tripod movement. So I discovered that I couldn't fully extend the legs and expect crisp images, but it works great if i dont extend the legs. Now that I know that I can take good crisp photos with 30 second exposures.
|
|
|
|
06/15/2006 10:14:44 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by karmabreeze:
Originally posted by wavelength:
Originally posted by karmabreeze:
That Wal-Mart is to be avoided whenever humanly possible. Target doesn't engage in most of the same shady practices that Wal-Mart employs and isn't so inherently evil. |
Target does some other things that I disapprove of, but that's sorta OT here. I think the walmart comment was just a generalization for "discount big box store" |
Mostly, but of the big boxes, Wal-Mart is hands down the absolute worst. Anyway, yeah, this isn't the place for a big socio-political argument, but if I have a choice between Wal-Mart and Target, I think it's a more responsible choice as a consumer to choose Target. |
Kmart really tweaks me. |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 10:29:41 PM · #31 |
Greats shots Lauriel
I had a whole paragraph here for the Wal-Mart bashers and high-dollar tripod advocates, but I thought I might start another thread on it later, so I deleted it.
|
|
|
|
06/15/2006 10:46:10 PM · #32 |
Practical usage. I was trying to get a low to the ground macro shot a couple of days ago, using the D70s and Sigma 105mm macro lens. Not a particularly unwieldy or heavy combination. Grabbed my $30 cheapo tripod, because it was handy. 40 blurry shots later, i went and got out the Manfrotto combo tripod, and nailed the shot with a couple of tries.
Edit to add: The cheapo is great for holding off camera flash or the P&S, but not for anything heavier or for detail work. And the Manfrotto belonged to my dad, it's at least 17 years old and looks almost new. I doubt the cheapie will be around in 2 years, much less 17. :)
Message edited by author 2006-06-15 22:51:09. |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 10:48:05 PM · #33 |
| I got a $30 tripod too. We dont have Walmart here so it's just another generic tripod - but it works fine, except for the weight. |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 11:01:10 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by shamrock:
Practical usage. I was trying to get a low to the ground macro shot a couple of days ago, using the D70s and Sigma 105mm macro lens. Not a particularly unwieldy or heavy combination. Grabbed my $30 cheapo tripod, because it was handy. 40 blurry shots later, i went and got out the Manfrotto combo tripod, and nailed the shot with a couple of tries.
Edit to add: The cheapo is great for holding off camera flash or the P&S, but not for anything heavier or for detail work. And the Manfrotto belonged to my dad, it's at least 17 years old and looks almost new. I doubt the cheapie will be around in 2 years, much less 17. :) |
Canon 100mm F/2.8 macro on a an XT with a $30 tripod and a 20mph wind on the beach.
I don't don't buy everybody's blurry shots getting blamed on tripods. Everybody's looking for a scape-goat. But hey, if it makes ya feel better.
|
|
|
|
06/15/2006 11:23:46 PM · #35 |
| I have a walmart tripod and it works fine for me. I don't use it very much though |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 11:27:05 PM · #36 |
Hi,
I have four tripods and two monopods. Each has its place (except the broken one).
Tripod 1 is a light-weight name-brand tripod that I bought at a local camera store. I liked it because it was light to care, easy to set up, and operated smoothly. But the head broke while I was using it, sending my camera tumbling towards the floor. Fortunately I caught the camera before it hit the floor so no damage was done. This tripod is no longer in service!
Tripod 2: I replaced tripod 1 with a no-name unit. It does not work as smoothly but it seems to me to be less likely to break. It is light and easy to use--I take it with me when I'm not sure whether I'll need a tripod.
Tripod 3 is my serious tripod. It is a carbon-fiber unit with a good ball head. It is a lot more stable than the light tripod but it is heavier to carry and slower to set up and adjust. I use it more than the others because I can count on it.
Tripod 4 is an antique. I got it "free" with a 4x5 view camera I bought a few years ago on ebay. I think it was designed for an 8x10 or larger view camera. The head is cast iron and the thing weighs about a ton. But it really is more stable than the carbon fiber tripod. I may use it if I enter the 30 second challenge.
If you are considering getting your first tripod, you need to think about how you are going to use it. If you need light and easy, any of the inexpensive units will probably serve you well. If you need more stability, a serious tripod will be better in the long run. If you are strapped for cash, I've seen antiques like mine at photo swap meets for $30-$40.
--DanW |
|
|
|
06/16/2006 12:14:47 AM · #37 |
UPDATE!
Alright, I just got in my Sigma DG 70-300mm APO and it doesn't have a tripod mount on the lens, so my camera is wayy top heavy so I really need not get the walmart/depot store brand. I am thinking about this one from ebay, what do you think?
Ebay Link
Message edited by author 2006-06-16 00:15:35. |
|
|
|
06/16/2006 12:54:35 AM · #38 |
Originally posted by TooCool:
I'm always amazed that people will bitch because the oil companies are gouging people but Walmart is evil because it gives people a way to get things cheap... C'mon, which is it... |
Funny isn't it? I'd rather have a world of $8.00 per gallon gas and no wal*mart than $1.25 per gallon and a wal*mart on every corner (and I drive over 40,000 miles a year).
Topic: That one looks like a decent tripod, but I don't know anything about it. I wonder if anyone else has one of these that can give you some info. Is their anyway on ebay to PM a previous purchaser of that tripod and ask them what they think about it? I was thinking you could look at the sellers feedback and find the last person who left feedback for this exact tripod and PM them. |
|
|
|
06/16/2006 01:00:20 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by jahoward:
Topic: That one looks like a decent tripod, but I don't know anything about it. I wonder if anyone else has one of these that can give you some info. Is their anyway on ebay to PM a previous purchaser of that tripod and ask them what they think about it? I was thinking you could look at the sellers feedback and find the last person who left feedback for this exact tripod and PM them. |
Man, I just bought two of 'em (gf wants one too). I know I am taking a risk, but I am sure I can make them work. |
|
|
|
06/16/2006 01:03:09 AM · #40 |
If I had all the money back I have spent on inexpensive tripods, I could probalby buy two of what I have now.
I have never had an inexpensive tripod where 'sag' wasn't a problem. Even with lighter weight cameras, it came into play.
I have had clamps break, heads break, legs break, not-so-smooth panning, not-so-smooth tilting... no ability to mount the center colum horizontally, not able to set up the tripod low enough...
I thought i would be happy with what I bought as I bought it. I told myself that I didn't need anythign more than I could get for $40 at walmart... I even told myself that more than once. I just wish I had that money back now :)
|
|
|
|
06/16/2006 09:58:59 AM · #41 |
Go into a camera store and try out the expensive tripods, and compare them to the cheapies. Consider that a good tripod should last you for a lifetime, compared to camera bodies which change every few years or lenses that change every decade or so.
|
|
|
|
06/16/2006 10:38:56 AM · #42 |
**off topic**
Hmm..I guess I've missed out on what wal-mart did that was so bad.
**back on topic**
Please return to your reguarly scheduled channel.... :)
Message edited by author 2006-06-16 10:39:08. |
|
|
|
06/16/2006 10:51:38 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by colyla:
**off topic**
Hmm..I guess I've missed out on what wal-mart did that was so bad.
**back on topic**
Please return to your reguarly scheduled channel.... :) |
Still off topic and I'm still not getting into a big debate, but if you want to see for yourself what they do, just google "walmart bad" and read any of the zillion articles that come up.
Message edited by author 2006-06-16 10:51:48.
|
|
|
|
06/16/2006 11:01:56 AM · #44 |
I bought an expensive tri-pod once @ a yardsale of course. LOL. It broke.
This is my best advice. There is stabalizer bars that hold the legs equal, they slide up and down as the legs go out and in, on those stablizer bars there are pins holding them together, make sure those pins are well built, with good material (not plastic), I think its the first thing that breaks on most tri-pods. Other than that, I am with the first comment that says, "any is better than none". GL. |
|
|
|
06/16/2006 11:22:22 AM · #45 |
For the walmart dispute, here's what google has to say:
google fight |
|
|
|
06/16/2006 12:03:55 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
go on ebay and find teh seller Amvona. get one of their tripods. I got a tall, heavy-duty one with a pistol grip head, quick release, carry bag and 2 sets of feet - $68 incl shipping. Very comparable to a bogen 2021 and a 322 head - like this.
buy one like this - at-828 |
What Chris said: I've got one of these, you can bid on it for a couple of days, and chances are you'll end up paying under $60 for it. I've got one, it is heavy, (no carbon-fiber) but because it is heavy, I can put 20D with a battery grip and 70-200f2.8 on it in portrait and it won't budge!
-Serge |
|
|
|
06/16/2006 01:28:04 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by shamrock:
Edit to add: The cheapo is great for holding off camera flash or the P&S, but not for anything heavier or for detail work. |
i've had two cheapies... one around $20 and the other around $60... both are now dedicated to holding up a flash, so i don't really regret buying them, but now that i have a real tripod, i understand why so many people tell you to hold out and save up the money...
|
|
|
|
06/16/2006 03:06:30 PM · #48 |
Those cheap tripods are useless. I should know - I have them. Depends on what you need it for I guess . Mine takes a good while to setup because everything is creaky and I have to adjust the height and if I set it at a particular angle it droops a little so I have to overcompensate, etc. Its a pain - but its cheap.
Here's an article about walmart data collection that I was forwarded today
//www.unknownnews.org/0606040528WalMart.html |
|
|
|
06/16/2006 05:03:25 PM · #49 |
| i have a pocket tripod that is about 1ft long collapsed. it is awesome. its plastic.. my other full size collects lots of dust |
|
|
|
06/16/2006 09:55:51 PM · #50 |
| I still stand by my comment... A cheap beer is better than no beer at all! I mean tripod! :-P |
|
