Hello all,
I'm looking for a tripod that is light, condensed, but still sturdy/strong since I want one that I can take along for long hikes and backpacking trips (don't plan to shoot in super extreme windy weather or anything like that). I plan to use this as my walk around tripod around the city as well. The camera I am using is the D7100 (675g/1.5lbs) and usually use the 12-24mm f/4 (461g/1lb), 70-300mm f/4-5.6 VR (744g/1.64lbs). I currently have the Vanguard Alta Pro 263 AT Tripod and the Vanguard SBH-250 Ballhead; this tripod is extremely sturdy and flexible and I haven't had any complaints other than its length when it's retracted (quite heavy, but not terrible).
So after looking at different tripods, I stumbled upon the Mefoto Roadtrip and the Mefoto Globetrotter and found these to be extremely appealing. My question is whether I should invest in the Mefoto Roadtrip, Mefoto Globetrotter, or to just stick with my sturdy Vanguard 263+Vanguard 250 Ballhead.
Here are the specs of each...
Mefoto Roadtrip (Aluminum) $189
Max Height: 61.6"
Folded Length: 15.4"
Weight: 3.6 lbs
Max Load: 17.6 lbs
Mefoto Globetrotter (Aluminum) $209
Max Height: 64.2"
Folded Length: 16.1"
Weight: 4.6 lbs
Max Load: 26.4 lbs
Vanguard 263AT+Vanguard 250 Ballhead (Aluminum)
Max Height: ~69"
Folded Length: 56.1"
Weight: 5.8 lbs (Legs: 4.4 lbs, Head: 1.4 lbs)
Leg Max Load: 15.4 lbs
Head Max Load: 44 lbs
Again, I am currently using the D7100, 12-24, 70-300 VR, but I do plan to upgrade my gear in the future (but do not plan to upgrade for the next 2-3 years). Maybe switch to full frame (D600/D800) or get higher end glasses (Nikon 14-24mm or 24-70mm)
So my questions:
1) What is the difference between maximum load and and tripod's "sturdiness," is there a correlation? How would you measure a tripod's sturdiness? Because even if I decided to shoot with the Nikon D4 with a 70-200 f/2.8 that's about 6.4 lbs, but the RT tripod supports 17.6 lbs, so why would anyone want to pay more for the GT (other than it having a higher max height)?
2) Does more tripod weight = more sturdiness, if so sticking to my Vanguard+Ballhead would probably be a better choice for "driving to a location" shots, right?
3) From your guys' photography experience, do you think the RT or GT would fit me better? Based on specs and reviews, the RT seems to suffice my needs. I'm just worried that if I plan to upgrade into the D600/D800 and/or heavier lenses, the GT would be a better long term investment BUT the RT's 3.6 lbs seems so appealing!
4) Overall if you were in my shoes, would do you think would be best. Again, I do city photography, portraits, outdoors photography (day hikes, camping, stars), nothing too extreme.
Thank you! Some help on my decision would be awesome!!
I'm looking for a tripod that is light, condensed, but still sturdy/strong since I want one that I can take along for long hikes and backpacking trips (don't plan to shoot in super extreme windy weather or anything like that). I plan to use this as my walk around tripod around the city as well. The camera I am using is the D7100 (675g/1.5lbs) and usually use the 12-24mm f/4 (461g/1lb), 70-300mm f/4-5.6 VR (744g/1.64lbs). I currently have the Vanguard Alta Pro 263 AT Tripod and the Vanguard SBH-250 Ballhead; this tripod is extremely sturdy and flexible and I haven't had any complaints other than its length when it's retracted (quite heavy, but not terrible).
So after looking at different tripods, I stumbled upon the Mefoto Roadtrip and the Mefoto Globetrotter and found these to be extremely appealing. My question is whether I should invest in the Mefoto Roadtrip, Mefoto Globetrotter, or to just stick with my sturdy Vanguard 263+Vanguard 250 Ballhead.
Here are the specs of each...
Mefoto Roadtrip (Aluminum) $189
Max Height: 61.6"
Folded Length: 15.4"
Weight: 3.6 lbs
Max Load: 17.6 lbs
Mefoto Globetrotter (Aluminum) $209
Max Height: 64.2"
Folded Length: 16.1"
Weight: 4.6 lbs
Max Load: 26.4 lbs
Vanguard 263AT+Vanguard 250 Ballhead (Aluminum)
Max Height: ~69"
Folded Length: 56.1"
Weight: 5.8 lbs (Legs: 4.4 lbs, Head: 1.4 lbs)
Leg Max Load: 15.4 lbs
Head Max Load: 44 lbs
Again, I am currently using the D7100, 12-24, 70-300 VR, but I do plan to upgrade my gear in the future (but do not plan to upgrade for the next 2-3 years). Maybe switch to full frame (D600/D800) or get higher end glasses (Nikon 14-24mm or 24-70mm)
So my questions:
1) What is the difference between maximum load and and tripod's "sturdiness," is there a correlation? How would you measure a tripod's sturdiness? Because even if I decided to shoot with the Nikon D4 with a 70-200 f/2.8 that's about 6.4 lbs, but the RT tripod supports 17.6 lbs, so why would anyone want to pay more for the GT (other than it having a higher max height)?
2) Does more tripod weight = more sturdiness, if so sticking to my Vanguard+Ballhead would probably be a better choice for "driving to a location" shots, right?
3) From your guys' photography experience, do you think the RT or GT would fit me better? Based on specs and reviews, the RT seems to suffice my needs. I'm just worried that if I plan to upgrade into the D600/D800 and/or heavier lenses, the GT would be a better long term investment BUT the RT's 3.6 lbs seems so appealing!
4) Overall if you were in my shoes, would do you think would be best. Again, I do city photography, portraits, outdoors photography (day hikes, camping, stars), nothing too extreme.
Thank you! Some help on my decision would be awesome!!