Evening

by w.hrybok

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Take the 2-minute tour ×
Photography Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional, enthusiast and amateur photographers. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I understand this is probably one of the phrases people hate most 'good but reasonably priced' because I realised that most often you get what you pay for. Nonetheless I am looking for my first tripod for a Canon 600D.

I am planning on doing some nature shots, but I don't think I'll be using a tripod all that much. So I'm looking for something that can handle the body and a lens such as the 70-300mm lenses from Canon.

Ideally I'm looking for something light and easy to carry/set-up and hopefully around £30.

Edit

Having considered spending more now, I've narrowed it down to hopefully some better ones now: Manfrotto Compact Series tripod

Slik Sprint Pro II

I believe these to be better tripods and while I understand they aren't the best, hopefully they will serve their purpose well

share|improve this question
    
There are a lot of other questions on super lightweight, super extensible, super cheap tripods: have you read them and what didn't you find answered for? –  Francesco Aug 30 '12 at 21:25
2  
possible duplicate of What are my best options for a tripod for up to $100? –  mattdm Aug 30 '12 at 21:25
3  
also: are you really sure that you want to let such a cheap tripod hold your expensive camera and lens? –  Francesco Aug 30 '12 at 21:26
2  
Beyond the duplicate that mattdm points out above, see photo.stackexchange.com/questions/2505/… and photo.stackexchange.com/questions/778/… –  dpollitt Aug 30 '12 at 21:28
2  
I always recommend reading bythom.com/support.htm. Note: I'm not saying you need to spend $1k, I'm saying you need to understand what choices you're making. –  Dan Wolfgang Aug 30 '12 at 23:04

4 Answers 4

up vote 2 down vote accepted

A good carbon fiber would seem to be the choice. Brand is another matter with some friends choosing Slik legs with Really Right Stuff Ballheads. Myself I have an Adorama carbon fiber with a ballhead (at the moment I can't recall the #'s but it can handle my D-700 with vertical grip or my D3S with no movement).

A monopod is also a good and wise investment.

Keep also in mind that HDR, were you to try it, should always be shot with a sturdy tripod to be sure that all images are in alignment.

One more thing: try to get a remote trigger so all settles down when it fires. Doesn't have to be a fancy name brand or aftermarket: but they really do help avoid shake, even with the strongest tripod, which can become an issue.

Now for some personal comments on the choice of the lens, since you mention the 70-300 in your question: my current lens of choice, believe it or not, is the Nikon 28-300mm VR for it gives all, except for the 17-35mm, the focal lengths needed except macro and that is reserved for the 105mm.

share|improve this answer
    
The question was for a "reasonably priced tripod" around $50. Even the most basic(cheap) Adorama carbon fiber legs are $150. –  dpollitt Aug 31 '12 at 2:49

I've got a tripod very similar to this one from Dolica. It's not without its faults. The ballhead doesn't move quite as nicely as I'd like, and I can count on just a bit of movement as I lock it in place. Once it's set, though, I'm happy with the results. Just as no lens is without its faults, no tripod is without vibration, and good technique helps improve your results, too. Keep the center column down if you can, extend the legs only as far as you need to, hang some weight on the center, use mirror lock-up and a remote shutter release -- all the normal stuff applies.

There's no doubt at all that higher-end tripods would perform even better, but I've lugged this one up and down any number of trails, set it up in streams, plopped it into snowbanks, stuck it in the mud, used it as a walking stick -- you name it. No worries. For less than $50, it's miles ahead of the tripods you'd find at Wal-Mart for $30 or $40.

I typically use this with a Canon 40D and a 15-85mm lens. I've used it with my 70-300 lens without incident, as well. This was my 50mm lens, set up on a bunch of jagged rocks for 30 seconds.

O'Shaughnessy Flowage

share|improve this answer
    
That tripod is certainly very close to an exact copy of the Manfrotto 055XPROB, which runs $150 just for the legs. I wonder if anyone has done a comparison of the two. If you look at the amazon reviews I bet you could find some comparisons. –  dpollitt Aug 31 '12 at 1:37
    
I'd expect at $150, you'd be able to see some areas where the Manfrotto is a little better. I'm not disputing at all the idea that you get what you pay for, but I also believe this is a steal at $50. I think I paid $40 for mine on sale. –  D. Lambert Aug 31 '12 at 1:51

For $50 US, or your £30, you won't be getting much of a brand. So just buy something you like in the local camera store and use it. Consider it the "learners tax" in that once you learn how to use a tripod, you won't be happy with one under $100 or so. Once you get to $150, they start to be reasonably solid.

As the Strobist says: http://strobist.blogspot.com/2010/03/most-powerful-light-in-your-bag.html

"A tripod is not worth a hill of beans if it won't hold your camera rock steady. Seriously, what's the point? If you cannot leave your shutter open for 30 seconds and get a sharp frame, the tripod is not doing the one job it was designed to do."

share|improve this answer
1  
ok well you've succeeded in convincing me not to go cheap... I think I'll try to find one thats used and going for about $100. Would you think something like this might be a good choice? bhphotovideo.com/c/product/614698-REG/… –  Toby Seers Aug 30 '12 at 21:33
    
That looks awfully light for that 300mm lens, let alone your next one. Its got an old-style tilt-pan head, most folks these days prefer a ball head. When you read the reviews on B+H, even folks who like it say they legs are flimsy. I went with this one, about $160. bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/… but its mostly a personal choice. –  Pat Farrell Aug 30 '12 at 23:51

When I started out as a landscape photographer I just went to local store and bought one of the cheapest tripods for my height. That was some $50 Chinese Fox TD150 tripod or something. Pros - easy to use, easy to carry, not afraid to break it down.

I used it for almost a year, repaired it a few times, but generally I was happy with it - it helped me to understand what do I need for good landscape, so recently I've bought a Manfrotto tripod with a ball head.

Don't be afraid to buy something cheap for a first time. Learning curve is endless in photography, so you can always find something better suiting your needs if you will be still into it a year later. At least you will better understand what that needs are.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.