• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Tripod Musings

S

Scott B. Hughes

New member
I'm in need of a replacement tripod. Over the years I've owned a Bogen 3040?, then a Gitzo 3-series, and back to Bogens (3051) since 1999.

I really like the 3051 with an ArcaSwiss B1 head, it is getting heavier by the day and I simply want to downsize.

We need something that is stout, lighter, quick to set up/break down and with a minimum platform (no center columns thank you) height of 56-60". Cost is not the number one priority, unlike the other attributes mentioned.

The Gitzo 3530LSV is appealing, but is marketed as a 'video-tripod'. I am unsure of that matters or the significance of that label.

The tripod would be used with primarily 1-Series Canons, lenses ranging up to the 500/4, although that is not too common.

Thoughts? -Scott
 
N

Nill Toulme

New member
The traditional gold standard in this category is the Gitzo 1325. But Gitzo's just changed all their model numbers and I don't know which of the new ones correlates to that model (but it appears it might be the 3530S).

In the ballhead category, the current "usual suspect" is the RRS BH-55. It will also support a Wimberley Sidekick holding your 500 very nicely.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
 
M

Marian Howell

New member
the 3530LSV certainly seems to fit ther description of your needs. maximum height is 58.3, something to keep in mind if you are tall. reports of happy users with 1dk2 and canon 500 and 600IS with wimberly heads can be found on the naturescapes.net forum, mostly people replacing 1325's, although some had 1548's. there appears to be both a bowl and a flat platform, both of which can be removed, and a 1521 leveling head can be put there. the new leg locks seem popular!
 
S

Scott B. Hughes

New member
Nil, Marian thanks for your input.

I'm still unclear, but after an afternoon of surfing (web) I am leaning towards the 3540XLS.

Ball heads are yet another consideration, although I love my B1 and am not sure if it will be replaced or moved to the new legs.

Is the RRS head an improvement over the B1?
 
N

Nill Toulme

New member
Note that the 3540 has four leg segments vs. the 3530's three. That may or may not be what you want.

Most seem to consider the BH-55 an improvement over the B1. Google "BH-55 review" for more details.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
 
S

Scott B. Hughes

New member
The fourth set of legs is not desired, but that set gets it up from ~58" to 79", a rainge I rarely would use.

I didn't find if there was a model w/o the fourth set of legs that was at the 58" level. More research!
 
N

Nill Toulme

New member
I think Marian's right about the 3530LSV. Parsing Gitzo's models and descriptions is difficult to say the least, but notwithstanding the "video" designation for this one, it appears to me that it's basically the same as the 3530S, i.e., a barebones no-center column set of legs, that that its max height is about 58" vs. 50". That would make it very similar to the 1325 and adequate for most users. I'm 6'2" and use the 1325 comfortably.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
 
R

Ray West

New member
Hi,

Just out of curiosity, I've been trying to find out what the differances are 'twixt the similar models. I have no idea. I would guess they are the same, can't see a photo anywhere, but the LSV may include the 'video bowl' which I don't think is required. The Gitso site is particularly bad, in trying to find an item, annoying sort of menu pop out things, search doesn't work too good either. If it were me, I would want more info before actually paying for fixtures not needed. Where are the photos of the 3530 series, what are the differances, do some include a centre column, etc, etc?

btw Nil - your Naturescape links to B&H...

Best wishes,

Ray
 
N

Nill Toulme

New member
Whoops, sorry, here's the correct NatureScapes link.

I think the 3530 LSV affords a very critical 8" in additional max height over the 3530S, but it's very difficult to parse Gitzo's specs on the new line.

Note the NatureScapes description includes this clue:

"Carbon fiber Systematics are now also available in a wider selection of heights: standard height for reduced weight and increased transportability, eye level height for comfort and precise control, over head height for extra flexibility in the studio or at weddings, concerts and sport events."

Hmmm... I bet the S in the 3530S means standard height, LS means eye level, and the XLS in the 3540 means overhead/extra long. And the V in the LSV means it includes the video bowl. So what we really want is a 3530LS, but it doesn't seem to exist.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
 
R

ron_hiner

New member
gitzo 3540 model numbers

Here is what I think I know... from notes I wrote down a few days ago by trying to decipher a bunch of almost identical descriptions:

Rapid Center column (adjustable height models)
3540 -- pack length =21.7" max ht 65.4" wt= 4.4lbs
3540L - pack length = 26.3" max ht 71.3" wt = 4.7lbs

No center column (height adjustable only by adjusting leg length)
3540LS pack length 21.7" max ht = 57.5" wt=3.8 lbs
3540XLS pack length 27.6" max ht= 78" wt= 4.3lbs

If I recall correctly, the third digit of the model number is the number of sections in the leg -- the above 4 models all have 4 leg sections.

I want a minimum pack length, minimum weight, and the perfect height would bring the viewfinder right to my eye level without any fiddling -- particulary fiddling with three different legs.

Ron
 
N

Nill Toulme

New member
OK so the S means no center column. Further evidence that what we really want is the perhaps non-existent 3530LS. ;-)

So for now I guess we buy the 3530LSV and throw the video bowl in the closet. What the heck is a video bowl anyway? Do you put popcorn in it?

Ron I think there's a tradeoff in pack length vs. number of segments. Other things equal, four segments = shorter pack length than three segments.

Note also that some are of the view that the new weight ratings with the new tubings mean that the true successor to the 13xx series is not the new 3xxx series but rather the 2xxx series, i.e., that what you might want for up to a 500 f/4 is something like the 2530 or 2540 series. You might want to look into that, to save both weight and cost.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
 
R

Ray West

New member
Hi Ron,

i think you are right - the 40 is four sections, the 30 series are three.

It seems that your summary shows there are two basic 4 section units, without centre columns, one extending to 57.5 inches, the other to 78 inches. As listed, you can add a centre column to the shorter unit, if less than or equal to the collapsed leg length, it weighs an extra 0.6 ibs, giving an additional height of about 8 inches ( 3540). Adding a longer column, of about 26.3 inches, I guess, for the 3540L, you get an extra 14 inches (0.9 lbs extra.) I am not certain the L is a 26.3 centre column, if not it must not be easily removeable, and must stick up an extra 4.6 inches when collapsed. (I could do some maths on this, along the lines of solving linear equations with unknowns, but I get the idea.) So, the 'S' means no centre column, the L means long, the 'X' means extra.

Based on that, the 3530 LSV is without the centre column, but with the video attachment. I think the 3530, and discard the centre column, or shorten it, may be an option for Scott.

Sorry Nil, you say similar re. letters - didn't read it til now, I do not understand why Gitso try and obfuscate the basic information. The Link to Naturescape, says the video bowl is included, and also a flat plate, so it seems you get a freebee for your cornflakes, too, and is probably Scott's best option.

Seems I've got back to where you all were anyway ;-)

Best wishes,

Ray
 
N

Nill Toulme

New member
This chart at NatureScapes is helpful to puzzle all this out.

Sounds like more than a few people are going to be upgrading their 1325's. That suggests that there could be some nice deals on used 1325's coming down the pipe soon.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
 
S

Scott B. Hughes

New member
Ray West said:
...... Based on that, the 3530 LSV is without the centre column, but with the video attachment. I think the 3530, and discard the centre column, or shorten it, may be an option for Scott.

Sorry Nil, you say similar re. letters - didn't read it til now, I do not understand why Gitso try and obfuscate the basic information. The Link to Naturescape, says the video bowl is included, and also a flat plate, so it seems you get a freebee for your cornflakes, too, and is probably Scott's best option.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the large quotation.... I've been pondering this for days.

The 3530LSV appears to be the answer for me. Max height is good, three sections is good, weight is a major bonus (~10 lbs difference from the Bogen 3051).... my last concern is leveling.

I'm coming from a tripod that allows the platform to be leveled as all three leg lengths to be adjusted simotaneously and quickly.

Adjusting each leg is far too tedious from memories of 25 years ago.... what is the concensus? Deal with leveling with the ball head?

Any thoughts of Gitzo's 'leveling base'? -Scott
 
N

Nill Toulme

New member
The 1321 leveling base is what you want for that purpose. I have no personal experience with it but have the impression FWIW that it's as well regarded as the rest of Gitzo's tripod equipment. It seems to be especially popular with the pano crowd.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
 
M

Marian Howell

New member
the 1321 lives on my 1325. it's very quick and easy to use. occasionally i grab it when grabbing the pod, and accidently twist it loose, that is my only negative. i use it for both panos and for the wimberly head and find it very convenient and useful. in situations where the pod is not being set on level ground it is a life-saver.
 
N

Nill Toulme

New member
Oh yes, I find frequent need for the 1325, used it yesterday for a church shoot. An RRS BH-55 lives on top of it. I also have a G2227 Explorer — the one with the goofy but extraordinarily useful articulated center column and any-angle legs — with a BH-40. They both have their own Sidekicks; they don't like to share. ;-)

And RRS L-plates on both of the Mark II's.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
 
M

Marian Howell

New member
for Nill:
it's hard to believe, since it looks so ponderous, but the 1321 spec sheet lists it at one-half pound (.5)! the 1325 itself is a bit bulky, so i don't notice the weight of the 1321 at all.
now the full wimberly, that's heavy LOL
 
B

Bart_van_der_Wolf

pro member
Nill Toulme said:
Oh yes, I find frequent need for the 1325, used it yesterday for a church shoot. An RRS BH-55 lives on top of it.
Click to expand...

Scott B. Hughes said:
Sorry Nill, I meant to ask if you are doing just fine withou the 1321. -Scott
Click to expand...

Nill Toulme said:
Oh... yes, but I don't do panos (yet).
Click to expand...

Nill, with the RRS BH-55, 'all you need' for Panos is the RSS Ultimate Pro 3D Pano kit. It'll set you back a fair amount of cash and VAT (I know, because I recently purchased it), but wow it's very well crafted stuff, a true delight to work with!

The BH-55 will take care of your general leveling requirements, and the rest of that setup will allow to get you to get images that offer a solid foundation for stunning composite images (yes, I'm a long time multiple-image high-res convert).

By the way Nill, how do you like the BH-55? Did you previously have a ball-head to compare it with? If it's anything like the other RSS stuff, I'll probably spoil myself with one, and never look back again.

Bart
 
N

Nill Toulme

New member
Yes I like the BH-55 very well indeed. I'm also very impressed with the BH-40, although I just got it and haven't used it very much at all yet. My only previous ballhead was a Kirk BH-3.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top