Manfrotto MKC3-P02 Vs MK394-PQ

Manfrotto MKC3-P02 Vs MK394-PQ

  • Manfrotto MKC3-P02

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Manfrotto MK394-PQ

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters


TPF Noob!
Sep 17, 2012
Reaction score
Which Tripod is better?
The MK394-PQ is $40 more.

I will use it for a Nikon D7100 + 16-85 VR

I do macro, landscape and wildlife work... Which tripod will suit me more?



[h=1]You might look at Induro Alloy 8M Tripod AT-014 56-Inch Max Height 8.8lb Load Capacity (amazon)
Price: $102.00 & FREE Shipping
Fewer leg sections means a more stable tripod. The larger the diameter of the leg sections the more stable the tripod, and the more weight it can handle.

The leg sections on the MK394-PQ have fairly small diameters (26, 22, 18, 14 mm) which limits stability and weight capacity. Having only 14 mm in the lowest leg section is kind of scary.
The specs of the cheaper one don't even specify the leg diameters.
I look for a top leg section that has a diameter of at least 32 mm.

It doesn't look like the center column can be reversed to get the camera close to the ground, and it apparently has no weight hook which is used when it's windy or addition stability is needed.

Many people scrimp on buying a tripod only to discover inexpensive, when applied to tripods, generally means not as stable or as versatile as the buyer hoped.
So a few dollars are added to the tripod budget and tripod #2 is bought. The same story often applies and so more money is added to the budget and tripod #3 is bought.
Tripod #3 usually works, but the total cost of buying 3 tripods adds up to what a really good tripod would cost.

Ideally a tripod's legs and head should have a weight capacity 3 times more than the heaviest cameea/lens combo you anticipate ever mounting in the tripod. The extra capacity allows for hanging weight from the weight hook.
I support the less leg and thicker leg sections too for stability.
And a good brand & model tripod will go much further for total satisfaction.

Most reactions

New Topics