Chris T's post reminded me . . .
It seems to me that bags, tripods and heads are harder to get right than
cameras and lenses.
I may be built backwards. I carried a tripod half way around the world, took a few thousand photos, and never took it
out of my suitcase. Yet I use them at home all the time, for tests, still lifes, in the yard, and so on.
For years, I've been mostly using a Hakuba 640 CF tripod. I liked the weight, size, adjustable length center column,
stiffness, lack of resonances - and hated the twist leg locks. Four section legs means nine locks to twist and untwist -
sigh.
So I decided to treat myself to a new tripod. After too much time spent on research, I decided that what I probably
really wanted was the Hakuba's fancier sibling, a Velbon Carmagne 630. Same sort of CF legs, but only three section, mag
spider, instead of aluminum, flip legs locks and foam padding around the top sections.
But, of course, they were long discontinued, pricey used and very thin on the ground. So, I visited my local, with a
couple of models in mind and came home with a Manfrotto 290 xtra. Very similar specs to the Velbon and not unreasonably
priced.
I was pretty content using it, if not wild about it, Even with only three sections, it has a little flex I can feel that
the Hakuba didn't. Not a practical problem, but - I dunno . . . It certainly IS easier to adjust than the Hakuba.
But, of course, I had set up a 'Bay search for a Carmagne 630, didn't cancel it, and one shows up. I don't really need
it, and it's too much money, but I watch to see what happens. No bids; relisted for $99, with big, excellent head I
don't need. After confirming that the head comes with a QR plate, I set up a snipe at the minimum bid, and win.
That's silly, but I'm kind of excited to compare them. I do - and - anyone
need a Manfrotto 290 xtra???
The V has somewhat thicker leg sections, especially at the bottom, and doesn't flex at all in my handling. The leg locks
take MUCH less pressure to release and set than the M, but are quite secure. Those are the big things, it feels sturdier
and adjusts more easily. Oh, and is somehow a teensy bit lighter.
The V legs are a little bit shorter and it's center column a little bit taller, so they are the same max.height. The V
center column is larger/sturdier than the M, so the extension doesn't bother me. And the V column is two piece, so it
can go lower, if needed. Leg angle settings are equivalent. The foam on the legs of the V is in perfect shape, not beat
up, and it can't hurt to have even more vibration absorption.
Here's a neat idea every one should use. The bottom two V leg sections are marked with a numerical scale, at 5 cm/2 in.
intervals - genius!
The only real advantage the M has is their excellent system of screws up from the bottom of the top place to really
secure the heads. It's actually a very good tripod, but not the winner - for me.
Way Too Many Legged Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|