When I was a kid and just starting out in photography I had a 1940s all-metal tripod with telescoping legs. it was really a crappy machine, but I was able to use it with some care and practice for a lot of tripod shots. In the ensuing years I have become more and more critical of tripods that are not really steady, and I am particularly critical of tripod heads that might suffer from what's called creep. When you lock the head it should stay at exactly the right place, and if you have to aim the camera slightly higher or lower to compensate for the movement that happens when you lock the head down, then you are just setting yourself up for a frustrating experience.
Fairly well-known Nikon author Thom Hogan has had a really good article on his website about the right way to select and buy a tripod only one time, by buying right the first time as opposed to a process of Serial upgrading from good to better to best.
I agree on the droop.
That is also a problem when people use a camera with a long lens, then screw the CAMERA to the tripod. The center of gravity is way in front of the tripod, making it difficult for the tripod to hold up the camera. You have to JAM the elevation lock TIGHT to try to hold it up.
What I have an issue with Tom's article is that it seems like he is advocating ONE tripod.
That is a "jack of all trades, master of none" situation.
Or "master of few, and poor at others."
Like we have multiple lenses for different purposes, I have multiple tripods (and heads) for different purposes.
I had to get a gimbal head, because both 3-way pan and ball heads, were dismal failures when trying to track a fast moving subject.
For me, a ball head is a PiA to use for precision alignment, A 3-way pan head is better, and even better is a gear head.
Again, no ONE single solution. A jack of all trades, is a master of none.