Cheap Tripod

[Speedway]

Do you think this is worth buying.
Keith.

[macmich]

they look pretty nasty

[etherial]

Maybe just to hold up a speedlight, no way I would put any decent camera gear on it for risk of falling.

[Mat]

well it has a P&S mounted on it for the sales pics so.... hmmm not.

[Wingnut]

i just paid $24 for a cheapo for taking "product" shots in a light tent. After using it once, I am ready to throw it in the bin. Can't hold the camera steady and droops. Save you money and buy something better

[mikew09]

Keith, you may be much like me and spare cash for you favourite hobby is a constant toil of saving. Took ,12 monts to save for my first L series. So my tripod was a cheapy, looked much like tht one and I cursed and hated it from the first use. Recently bargained down a Vanguard 263 AT tripod with a SBH-100 ball head $180. Sounds a lot but I have to say - am happy as a pig in you know what.
From experience, step away from cheap tripods - they test your sanity and risk damage to your expensive camera gear.

Cheers,

Mike

[MarkChap]

Nope

Seriously, don't scrimp on a tripod, you will only be very disappointed and will still have to buy yourself a decent one
Therefore making the right one more expensive by the price of the cheap one you should not have bought first

[BUGSnBIRDS]

If you are looking to save on brand new...take a look at European Camera Specialist website...Sydney I think. No connection with them whatsoever but they do have a good second hand selection and you might pick up something of better value with a fair second hand price price. I'm really learning the value of a tripod and I sure as heck wouldn't skimp on it.

[Colinc1]

For a point & shoot yes, anything else forget it, and i wouldn't want to use it on a very windy day

[mal from cessnock]

Maybe useful for holding a strobe or another light accessory but not substantial enough for your camera. Face it, photographic kit comes at a price - but lasts forever.

[Kaktus]

@ Mal from Cessnock and Colinc1

Do you think it would be suitable for a Bridge Camera like the Panasonic FZ-100 ?

[arthurking83]

.....

Do you think it would be suitable for a Bridge Camera like the Panasonic FZ-100 ?

I don't think you'll have too many issues with a setup like that, with the one major caveat that: if you shoot in breezy conditions, the vibrations caused by the lightweight unstable tripod may affect image quality. In good conditions you should be ok.
The problem with DSLRs is that they have mirrors inside them that slap up and down with each exposure, and even tho you may have a mirror up mode to eliminate this problem, it's not an ideal solution(sturdier tripod is a better solution).
Compacts and Bridge cameras don't have the vibration causing mirror slap issue to worry about.
Note that the longer the focal length, the more magnified the image AND subsequently the same goes for any vibration in the entire system. So.. say on a wide-ish landscape scene, at 27mm, even tho the vibrations are there, are much less noticeable in the resultant image. Do that at 465mm, and those same vibrations will be magnified about 20x(same ratio as the focal length ratio) and you get blurrier image.
I don't know about the optical stabilization systems in bridge and compacts and how they work, but I suspect that it should be turned off when on a tripod just as with a DSLR.

I think you should always go for the most expensive tripod you CAN afford. That is, if you think you can justify spending $150 on a tripod, then do that, and not simply spend $29 on a tripod that will eventually get broken/replaced/or forgotten in a few months time.

[mal from cessnock]

My two cents worth - absolutely not, NO NO NO.

I read a review and saw this one on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IztTeCUYwxY
This is a high end point and shoot and deserves a low end, well made tripod. Check out Manfrotto and be prepared to pay $200 incl head.
This little guy is capable of shooting 60fps at it's lowest res and 11fps at its highest.
As far as I can ascertain, it's a fine camera. There's so much coming out now with incredible technical sophistication. Just maybe if you were to pair it with a cheap plastic tripod you'd never achieve the result Panasonic intended.

As stated, my two cents worth.
Cheers, Mal

[Scotty72]

I think it is an excellent tripod for use as a substitute javelin.

Seriously though: with the exception of holding a flash, I wouldn't go near it.

Too many people (including me when I first started) totally under-rate the importance of a rock-solid tripod. If you want it for landscapes, cityscapes etc. (esp in low light), then I think this is far more important (and far cheaper) than paying thousands for a pro-grade lens.

Scotty

[Duane Pipe]

Gday Speedy I went tho the trouble of making a window mounted rig for my car for storm chasing, so at that price I would have brought it just for the head to save on time, but using it for mounting a big zooma and expensive camera on well im not to sure about that.

[Kaktus]

@ Mal and arthurking83

Thank you both for your very informative replies. Looks like I better start saving up (again).

[mal from cessnock]

Don't worry too much Kaktus - after you've got the basics (at great expense) you'll be ok to create some awesome images.

Your best images are ready for you to admire in 2011

Cheers, Mal from Cessnock

[arthurking83]

@ Mal and arthurking83

..... Looks like I better start saving up (again).

It may be easier than you may think too.
Remember you have a bridge camera, pretty small and lightweight when compared to a DSLR, and massively small and lightweight when compared to a DSLR with a large telephoto lens.

Your gear should really be appropriately proportional.
I think It's a silly notion to suggest that you need a strong and sturdy tripod, if your camera weighs in at only 400g(or thereabouts.. just for arguments sake)!!

In general the DSLR body alone may be in the order of 500g, add as many more grams for a normal lens, and when adding a super sized telephoto lens, you don't add grams, but tons and Megatons!(well.. ok, anywhere from 2-3 kgs.

no way on earth that the tripod in the ad posted by the OP would hold a semi pro DSLR with a 300mm f/2.8 attached to it. The aluminimium legs will buckle under the weight of the lens alone!
BUT!! for a 500g Panasonic FZ-100, I see no reason why the cheapest tripod won't do the job of holding up the camera in a sturdy manner.
A wet empty toilet roll tube will do that for ya, so there is no reason for this tripod not too do so either.
Don't get me wrong here, I'm always the first to espouse the virtues of getting a solid stable tripod(and head!!).. and I have enough tripods and heads of various flavours to know the difference between a sturdy tripod and a popular tripod brand assumed to be a sturdy tripod.

if you can afford the $150 price of a 'sturdy tripod' of good value, then ATM the range of Benro legs and heads is probably a good short term purchase option and can do good service on a medium sized DSLR+lens set up.

Benro A-057EX($85) + BH-0($50) +(postage) = total approx $150-160
This combo is an all metal setup, no plastics to snap on 'ya when you need it most.
The only problem with such a cheap lightweight tripod setup is the limitation that you won't really be able to use a longer focal length lens on it. It'll start to become front heavy out of balance and will eventually fall over when you leave it unassisted for a few minutes.

So!! plan for the long term: If you have any plans to acquire a DSLR and any longer/heavier lenses to boot, get your tripod once and forget about it(for that you may need in the order of $500-700)
If you have no immediate plans(say 1 year or less) to get yourself a bigger heavier camera, then think of any cheapo tripod as something better than nothing.

Too many times we see images from newbies taken at 1/5s and handheld, where clearly even a $20 tripod would have helped get at least a stable, clear and sharp image.
If I had the need, I'd also have a cheapo lightweight tripod, but for exclusive use with my ultra wide angle 10-20mm lens. My problem is that one minute it's 10mm, and in an instant, I may be up to 300mm and f/2.8(easy) but more importantly 500mm and f/8.... nigh on impossible even on many of these so called sturdy tripods to get a super sharp image with every shot. The fainest breeze will always induce image killing vibrations in the 500mm and less than 1/100s.
I have seen vibration induced image degradation at 10mm, but this is rare, so I'd have no problem in using something cheap and nasty and still getting a few decent quality images. The problem is about the flexibility required when it is required.

It may be a case of horses for courses in the horse racing world, but in the photographic world it'stripods for cameras(doesn't sound as poetic, but it makes a lot more sense).
A small camera on a large, heavy, over engineered tripod setup is probably as silly as a large camera and lens on a small crapola tripod as per that advertisment(except in the case where the large tripod is purchased for future growth in mind)

Anyhow, it's a matter of:
1) specifying a budget(priority!!) a decent tripod can cost you as little as $150 and well beyond the $8K range(that I know of in real world photography applications)
2) specific requirements(what are your primary reasons for use... macro, landscapes, studio portaits ... full frontal oncoming lava flow photography? ...etc) how sturdy/reliable does it need to be?
3) longevity(in terms of how much can you afford to lose over a set period of time, before replacement/update time?) You buy today for $1000, and when it;s time to sell it, you may only get $100. In this case I keep 'em.
4) usefulness, user friendliness. The tripod's inherent ability to annoy it's owner is consideration too. if you get tired of carrying a heavy aluminium, and subsequently stop carrying it, then it's wasted money. Carbon Fibre is very light weight strong and can also be used as hiking stick/walking stick. I have a harder time using my aluminium tripod as a walking stick compared to when using my CF tripod. the weight, and hence inertia of the alumimium is annoying(I have a bad knee!).

[pacogun]

I remember using this similar tripod shooting at windy beach. The wind blew the tripod & my P&S camera away, end up with sand in camera. Killed the camera!

[exwintech]

Keith - I don't think you can have a "good" tripod at a "low" price.

On most camera forums "good" means $400.00+ carbon-fibre legs and a $600.00+ multi-functions head. And on my limited budget, $1,000.00 isn't a "low" price - but it "would" be a fairly "good" tripod.

With a Fuji HS10 - with 4 x AA Eneloops about 20% heavier than the Lithium battery FZ100 - I needed a tripod that was both portable on public transport (backpack) and wouldn't wreck the wallet - while being firm enough for an HS10 in a breeze.

I called the place - Digital Camera Warehouse in Canterbury, Sydney - where I buy my camera gear, and they suggested several to look at on their site, and asked me to go in and try some out.

Which I did, and from the ones they set up to show me - chose the Slik F740. While it's indeed basic, it's quite well-made, and of course has 12-months warranty. The legs are 4-section, flip-lock, and are braced. The head is quite smooth 3-way plus 90-degree, and it has a bubble level. The quick-release shoe is standard size.

It's rated for 1.46-kilos, so adequate for the 700g HS10, and will likely do a turn for the coming Pentax K-R - though only with the shorter/lighter lenses I'll have at first.

It weighs just over a kilo, max height 1480mm (I don't use the 235mm extension), and folds to 590mm. It can also be used on a table or bench, legs not extended, with bracer in place. I've used it that way for the HS10's Text/Documents mode.

The HS10 at its max 30x / 720mm is very motion/vibes sensitive - on that tripod, I use Manual, with MF, and the Timer, and this works quite well even in a moderate breeze.

Price when I bought the F740 was $50.00 - it's now listed on the DCW site at $55.00.

While it perhaps isn't "3 generations duration" quality - I've had mine for over 6 months, given it quite a workout, and so far, no rattles or other problems. For the purposes, and at the price, I'd buy it again - and when I do get a "better" one for DSLR - I'll be looking higher up the Slik range.

Dave.