Landscape photography: the point of using a tripod?

[anubis404]

You've went from landscape photography to "run of the mill daylight shots."

No, I didn't. I meant run of the mill daylight LANDSCAPE shots.

Why do you bother taking a DSLR anyway? It sounds like you are willing to settle for tilt, blur, and broad daylight shots. You could save some weight by taking a little tiny, frisky point and shoot. More room for candy and medical equipment.

A) A DSLR isn't nearly as heavy as a tripod.

B) The difference between a point and shoot and a DSLR with a good lens is tremendous. This can't be said for a tripod.

C) I will NOT settle for blur.

D) Who said I was bringing candy? Sure wasn't me. Nice strawman.

 

[anubis404]

I love it when someone asks for opinions and then argues each.

I only argue when people start criticizing me for my decisions.

Undecided? Bring a bean bag to set your camera on, or just one of those little 6" long mini pods and see if you actually want/need to use a larger tripod in the future.

Sounds like the answer is no.

One of the first (notice I said one of) good ideas yet.

Then don't carry a tripod.

Next thread.

Jon

I've literally had people to tell me to stop b*tching about the weight of a tripod without knowing how strong I am, where I live, where I'm hiking, or what tripod I'm using. I don't take kindly to a-holes who are rude to me because I make different decisions. When put in this position, I will defend myself. Maybe if you read at least a couple of replies you'd know that. It won't give you the satisfaction of quoting me out of context, but hey, at least you can be honest.

 

[JerryPH]

You've went from landscape photography to "run of the mill daylight shots."

Why do you bother taking a DSLR anyway? It sounds like you are willing to settle for tilt, blur, and broad daylight shots. You could save some weight by taking a little tiny, frisky point and shoot. More room for candy and medical equipment.

My thoughts exactly. Excuses are easy are always easy to find, compromises are even easier to make. If all you want from your photography are "run of the mill daylight shots", you definitely don't need a tripod.

 

[anubis404]

My thoughts exactly. Excuses are easy are always easy to find, compromises are even easier to make. If all you want from your photography are "run of the mill daylight shots", you definitely don't need a tripod.

Definition of run of the mill daylight shots is not panoramic, HDR, or lowlight. You make it sound like everyone's images that don't fit into these three categories somehow aren't worthy. Reading the above post might help a little too.

 

[table1349]

Definition of run of the mill daylight shots is not panoramic, HDR, or lowlight. You make it sound like everyone's images that don't fit into these three categories somehow aren't worthy. Reading the above post might help a little too.

But this is worth reading.
Professional landscape photography strategies for more dramatic photos

One of the excerpts from this tutorial.

For the best results, I always use a tripod OK, so this hot tip IS about equipment! And it’s not really one of those "Hey! I never thought of THAT!" sort of tips either, but you've been working too hard trying all these techniques to be disappointed with your efforts.

I feel I have to include it to help give you the best chance to make sure the other secrets will work, so you'll be consistently shooting better creative landscape photography.

If you got up extra early to get the perfect light, spent a fair bit of time thinking about how to capture the shot, how to compose it, defining the relationships – I'd feel terrible if you wasted the moment by taking a chance using only your "steady" hand. And if it was really early that you woke up, you probably had enough coffee to make the earth shake! Tripod, please!

Use a GOOD tripod. Of all the photography in the world, landscapes lend themselves pretty well to careful composition and the sensible use of a tripod, because you can more-or-less plan your shot.

My favorite is an old, beat up Manfotto. I've had it for at least a thousand years! But it’s lightweight, and sturdy. I also have a tiny pocket-sized one that I carry with me everywhere – to perfectly capture those unexpected opportunities! (My digital point-and-shoot camera is with me all the time too).

Whether you only have a car roof, a table, or a steady boulder, for support, you can use this tiny wonder to guarantee sharp, clear and awesome creative landscape photography.

 

[KvnO]

I've literally had people to tell me to stop b*tching about the weight of a tripod without knowing how strong I am, where I live, where I'm hiking, or what tripod I'm using.

They may not have known those things, but you did imply that the weight of a tri-pod could prevent you from reaching your goals during a hike/climb. To someone who's unfamiliar with what you do, perhaps that does sound a bit extreme.

I don't think anyone's insulting you or calling you weak, but to some a tri-pod is necessary gear and they'll defend it as such. Just like the way you've defended yourself here.

Obviously, there's a difference in philosophies here. If you're happy with your images without a tri-pod (as you seem to be), why bother with one? No matter what they say, no one here can make you carry anything you don't want to.

 

[TheSon]

My carbon fiber tripod weighs less than my SLR. It's a little over 2lbs. If you're that worried about weight just buy a light weight tripod.

You can get a light, cheap crappy one for under $10 on ebay... It's better than nothing. I bring my tripod EVERYWHERE (even snowboarding sometimes).

 

[elemental]

My glass is fast enough to handle doing hand-held landscapes. If a blade of grass or two is a little blurry, I'm not going to shoot myself.

If your shooting style and priorities don't necessitate a tripod, don't bring one. Every hiker/backpacker has priorities. However, I don't think shooting wide open with fast glass is a very good way to do landscapes. Many great landscape photographs were taken with the lens stopped down a little farther than f/1.4. Sharpness and depth of field are important considerations for this style.

Oh, and I know nothing about "serious" hiking either. I'm definitely not planning a week long trip to the Gila National Forest with an 11,000 foot ridge or two involved and a sixty-five degree temperature spread.

I don't carry my DSLR at all on my "serious" backpacking trips. I carry a tiny Ricoh manual 35mm SLR because it's smaller, less fragile/expensive to replace, and because good film can still capture incredible images if you know how to use a camera. It's also lighter, but that doesn't concern me as much as the others. Oh, and the batteries last forever. That, a few rolls of Pro 160C (and maybe some of the Velvia stashed in my freezer), and a pocket tripod probably take up less space than your camera body and lens alone. I'm not into HDR (it seems to run sort of counter to the ethic of leave no trace backpacking) and I trust my ability to correctly expose an image without having to review it or check the histogram, so I have everything I need.

The best part is that the whole setup (including the film, which might be the most expensive part) cost less than $50.

 

[Jklersy]

I only argue when people start criticizing me for my decisions.

One of the first (notice I said one of) good ideas yet.



I've literally had people to tell me to stop b*tching about the weight of a tripod without knowing how strong I am, where I live, where I'm hiking, or what tripod I'm using. I don't take kindly to a-holes who are rude to me because I make different decisions. When put in this position, I will defend myself. Maybe if you read at least a couple of replies you'd know that. It won't give you the satisfaction of quoting me out of context, but hey, at least you can be honest.

Im a backpacker. My pack generally weighs around 30lbs. I take my tripod, which weighs about 6 lbs with me for my landscape shots. thats an additional 20% to my pack, just for one item. I only wiegh 150lbs and I hike about 15 miles per day on my backpacking trips. that includes stopping to set up and take shots. So I do say stop your complaining and dont ask questions that you dont want the answers to!

 

[Iron Flatline]

I canNOT tell you how much I've enjoyed this thread. Fabulous.

I think I would describe this as Community-Based Entertainment. I swear this is the reason I stay around amateur forums.

 

[Turnerea]

My pack is alright, but my tripod really is heavy. The light but sturdy ones are quite expensive, not to mention my backpack can't hold a tripod. That means I have to carry it in my hand.

Not to throw flame on this fire, but you could get some straps from REI ($10 maybe) to strap just about anything to the outside of a backpack. I find it handy to have both hands free when scaling more difficult and steep terrain.

 

[iflynething]

I think you should pay closer attention to the ads on thephotoforum

Just HAPPENED to look up and saw this and thought it was ironic we're talking about the weight of tripods.....

~Michael~

Oh any my two cents: Dont' caree the backpack since you can't handle 36 pounds. With all the gear. Maybe you should hike less or workout more? I just can't believe you would hike 15 miles on whatever you call a hike, and then say you can't do almost 40 pounds of gear. OH NO!!

Interesting thread....

 

[Jon_Are]

Holy crap.

Dude, you already "know" you don't need a tripod. So do not bring one.

I'll say it again: Do Not Bring One.

And don't take stuff so personally; nobody is questioning your manhood.

We promise we won't call you a Nancy Boy if you leave the pod at home instead of attaching it to your (probably pink) backpack.

Jon

 

[abraxas]

I still think you need a tripod.

Have you considered adopting or renting a pygmy goat to carry it?

 

[Vautrin]

Can I just ask why everyone thinks you need to use a tripod for hdr? Photomatix lines up images automatically that I take just running past things...