Camera shake on tripod?

RL168

TPF Noob!
Joined
Feb 18, 2007
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Folks,

I have a quick question and hope you guys can help. I have a Nikon SLR camera, right now I am using it on a cheap Kodak tripod I picked up from circuit City years ago. I noticed when I am pressing the shutter-release button, I can see the camera shaking slightly from the viewfinder. I am guessing that is because of the built quality of the tripod that is causing the shake? What do you guys think?

Thank!
 
Yup, that's why.

You get what yuo pay for.
 
If a good quality tripod isn't in your immediate budget, try using the 10 second delay when it is feasable. This will eliminate the shake caused by your finger, but not such things as wind vibration.
 
You did not mention your specific camera. If film, traditional tripod use includes a shutter release cable.

Additionally, if the tripod has an 'elevator' center section, hanging a substantial weight [10# or so] from the central post will improve stability.
 
I think you need to read the following article. Very informative and may well help you from following some well trod footsteps.

http://www.bythom.com/support.htm

Thanks, I added that to my bookmarks. I'm currently on step four (second, sturdier pod), and was looking into step five (different heads), so this will save me the remaining misteps.:lol:
 
if it is not very windy, every tripod [EDIT: read below, not really every] will do if you use a cable release or remote. you might also need mirror lockup if shooting with long lenses and a weak tripod.

without a cable release or remote, even the most sturdy tripod will fail you.
 
without a cable release or remote, even the most sturdy tripod will fail you.
:thumbup:

To me, the main purpose of a tripod is to hold the camera so that I'm not touching it when the shutter is fired. A remote/cable release is a great tool to have for tripod shooting. Otherwise, use the self timer. As mentioned, Mirror Lock Up (MLU) is a feature that some cameras have, which will further reduce movement when the shutter is fired.
 
Most tripods are also more stable if the center column is not extended.

But yeh... use timer, use MLU (if possible), use cable/wired release, use heavier sturdier tripods.

I also would tie a bag between the legs of the tripod and weigh it down with rocks.
 
if it is not very windy, every tripod will do if you use a cable release or remote. you might also need mirror lockup if shooting with long lenses and a weak tripod.

without a cable release or remote, even the most sturdy tripod will fail you.

Alex_B,

I don't know what equipment you use, but I would have real reservations with putting a 5D with a 70-200mm f2.8 on a $12.00 cheap aluminum tripod. http://www.pricegrabber.com/search_getprod.php/masterid=3641489/skd=1/search=discount tripods Nothing like watching $4000 hit the ground. While I was not suggesting to the orgional poster that they go with a $900 tripod, if it is going to be a used piece of equipment, any buyer would be wise to spend the money to purchase a tripod and head that is at least rated high enough to support his camera body and heaviest lens. Nothing worse than reading that post that is a tale of woe with a fallen camera and lens on a cheap tripod.

I will however second, or probably at this point third or forth the remote shutter release and mirror lockup. They will help.
 
Agreed.. but $900 tripod? Some of the sturdiest Bogen/Manfrottos (legs and heads) are not even close to that price.

For what [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Thom Hogan does, if he can justify $900.00 for what he does I will not object. If I was putting a $7000-$8000 lens on a camera I suppose I would do the same. For me my Manfrotto 3021B Pro and 322RC2 head are more than sufficent with what I use now. [/FONT]
 
Alex_B,

I don't know what equipment you use, but I would have real reservations with putting a 5D with a 70-200mm f2.8 on a $12.00 cheap aluminum tripod.

OK, my equipment is in about the league you mention, and that is probably why the 12 USD tripod did not come to my mind at all, mean, as in "they exist".

And of course I did not mean to support the idea of using a tripod that physically cannot support the weight of the camera lens combination!

My idea of a "cheap" tripod was not 12 USD. I was more (in my mind) comparing 100-ish with 900ish USDs. But you are right that I should have used more careful wording to avoid misunderstandings which then lead to a disaster of the type you describe! :confused:


My point was more, that as long as a tripod physically can support your camera lens combination, under ideal conditions it will perform well. Of course there will also always be conditions where you want a more sturdy/heavy tripod or one which damps away vibrations better.
 
For what [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Thom Hogan does, if he can justify $900.00 for what he does I will not object. If I was putting a $7000-$8000 lens on a camera I suppose I would do the same. For me my Manfrotto 3021B Pro and 322RC2 head are more than sufficent with what I use now. [/FONT]

So a Leica M8 with a Noctilux is about $10k but weighs less than half the weight of a 5D with 70-200mm lens. Is it still necessary to carry a tripod almost as heavy as the camera/lens itself? Is a $900 tripod expensive enough to support it?

I think what Alex and I are sayin is purchase a tripod that are spec'd to support the weight and provide a stabile base.... cost has nothing to do with it....

I would have absolutely no problem putting my $5000 camera on my father's old wooden tripod he purchased for less than a $100 bucks.

I would have a major problem putting a $5000 camera on a carbon fibre lightweight tripod (Unweighted) on a very windy day that costs $900.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top