Before the rush

Before the rush
by evan-pak

Submit your Photo
Hall of Fame

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Photography Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional, enthusiast and amateur photographers. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I'm looking to buy a tripod + head (for my Canon 40D), but am not sure if I want to spend more than $100 on it.

So can you suggest options for best tripods for $100 or less? Or, is it important to spend more than that on a tripod?

Extra props for options which might be available in India.

share|improve this question
What lenses do you want it to support as well as the camera? What do you intend to use it for? Will you need to carry it? – Edd Oct 5 '10 at 11:04
Welcome to photo.SE! – Reid Oct 5 '10 at 12:17
###Just a thought Tripods are simple things, so buying from eBay or similar may be a good option, allowing you to get more tripod for your money? – AJ Finch Oct 5 '10 at 13:27
Is it acceptable for me to request that we add monopods to the optional answers? I want a good answer to this question also, but I am also willing to consider monopods. If necessary, I am willing to open a new question on this. – BBischof Oct 6 '10 at 2:58
possible duplicate of What should I pay attention to when choosing a tripod? – mattdm Mar 23 '11 at 23:37
up vote 11 down vote accepted

Only you can say whether a $100 is enough - certainly there tripods that will take a 40D for less than this amount, but you are usually compromising build quality, reliability, usability etc. so it comes down to where you priorities lie. Maybe you only need the 'pod for really low light, and you'd rather save for lenses.

I will say this however, there's nothing like a good tripod. The confidence that when you step away from the camera it's not going to fall over and smash into pieces is not easy to put a price on. Tripods don't become obsolete, a good one will last for many years.

share|improve this answer
I'm accepting this as the answer because this is sensible knowledge. You're right, until I try a bit (perhaps by borrowing from friends) I'll never know which tripod is sufficient – AJ. Oct 9 '10 at 6:25

I have a Slik Sprint Pro that is fine. I use it for a Nikon D90 with lightweight lenses. It's $95 at B&H right now; no idea about availability or cost in India.

That said, it is very easy to buy less tripod than you need, and inexpensive tripods tend to be truly awful. Many people go through several tripods before realizing they really do need nice, high-end support. Thom Hogan's Tripods 101 article is a good exposition on this.

That said, I am perfectly happy with the Slik. It meets my modest needs. I am looking around for other options, but that's only because I'm trying to find something lighter.

share|improve this answer
Exactly what I don't wish to do. Not buy /less/ tripod and then end up ruing it. Checking out Thom Hogan's article. Hopefully it'll help – AJ. Oct 6 '10 at 15:48
@Anant, You won't ruin it if it's less than you need; tripods at the $100 price point aren't that bad. The (potential) problem is that it won't be stiff enough and you'll still have more vibration blur than is acceptable. – Reid Oct 6 '10 at 22:40
I'm sure he meant ruing as in rue the day. – Mark Ransom Oct 9 '10 at 14:56

You could look for something like the gorillapod from joby-- the $80 version can handle large video cameras, so should be able to accommodate your 40D. It's not a standard tripod, in the sense of height and the like, but it will wrap around nearby poles and can be placed on walls, etc.

Have a read of Thom's tripod guide; essentially, for new gear, you're looking at more money than you have budgeted. I took his low-end recommendation, with a heavier tripod and a 322rc2 ball head, and it's worked fine for me, but at more than you're willing to spend at ~$300.

share|improve this answer

I bought a Velbon Sherpa 600R a while ago and am very pleased with it for my uses. It stabilises my 1Kg camera+lens very well. At 2Kg it's light enough that I don't find it uncomfortable to carry for short trips but heavy enough to be stable. It's very adjustable and holds solid once locked down.

With tripods you will definitely get more the more you are willing to spend up to around $1000 but for me this is the right compromise between cost and quality at this time. Currently showing at around $100/£100.

share|improve this answer

I use Benro A-250EX with BH00 ball head. I paid 99€ for this one, and it was the lightest among those I can trust my camera to (and not give away a fortune).

It's very well built. With the head unmounted, it fits even in my laptop bag, but it is high enough to take portraits sometimes. The tripod weights approx. 1 kg (2.2 lb). It can endure as much as 2.5 kg of load, which is enough for most consumer DSLRs and lenses unless you are using super-telephoto zooms.

share|improve this answer

I have used a Slik 300DX tripod ($109) for many years and am very pleased with it. I don't have super-heavy lenses, but you only have to crouch a little if you want to use it with the center tube down for more support. The 3 things I like about this tripod are that its reasonably priced, not too heavy, and the legs will splay out and allow (with a short center column) the camera to be positioned right off the ground.

The only reason I would switch to a different tripod would be to get one that was a little taller with the center column down.

share|improve this answer

I've been using a Sunpak 7500TM for years, and I found it for $65 at best buy. For the price, it's very stabile, and semi-portable. It's small enough to take as carry-on in the U.S. and the center support can be removed as a monopod.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


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.