tripod question

yeti

TPF Noob!
Joined
Jan 8, 2008
Messages
115
Reaction score
0
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Hi all,

I recently got a tripod (Manfrotto 728B), which says is rated up to 3.5kg. I would like to use an SLR camera on it, with a not-so-heavy lens (combined weight of camera+lens is under 2kg).

It all looks good, the camera appears to be well-supported, the tripod head appears strong enough to lock it in place any way I put it. After I bought the tripod, I noticed that it says it is for point-and-shoot cameras only. No SLRs.

I can't think of a 3.5kg point-and-shoot camera (unless it is lead-lined) and the one type of camera that approaches these specs is not on the supported list. I am scratching my head now.

Am I missing something? Is this tripod safe to use with an SLR camera, provided that I stay within the weight limit?

Thanks!
 
That really makes no sense. Why would they say point and shoot only?
Hmm...

Well, if you can lock it in any position...then I say it's good. Maybe it's just a weird mistype.
 
Probably a marketing decision .. maybe they want to sell a heavier duty tripod to SLR owners.
 
Hi all,

I recently got a tripod (Manfrotto 728B), which says is rated up to 3.5kg. I would like to use an SLR camera on it, with a not-so-heavy lens (combined weight of camera+lens is under 2kg).

It all looks good, the camera appears to be well-supported, the tripod head appears strong enough to lock it in place any way I put it. After I bought the tripod, I noticed that it says it is for point-and-shoot cameras only. No SLRs.

I can't think of a 3.5kg point-and-shoot camera (unless it is lead-lined) and the one type of camera that approaches these specs is not on the supported list. I am scratching my head now.

Am I missing something? Is this tripod safe to use with an SLR camera, provided that I stay within the weight limit?

Thanks!

One of the reasons it is probably listed as a P&S small video camera tripod is its size and height. It is only 4'5" tall with the legs extended. It's maximum height it is 5'6" with the center arm extended to the max.

Extending the center arm with a DSLR is something to be avoided if at all possible. It is an unstable platform for something like a dslr and can defeat the purpose of a tripod in the first place.

A smaller P&S or small video camera will be more stable on the extended center arm as the center point of balance for the camera will probably be inside the demensions of the body. With a DSLR you stick on that longer/heavier lens on the front and the center point shifts outside the confineds of the body making it front heavy. That is one reason that larger lense have tripod collars for them, to relieve the stress of the heavy front weight and provide a more centered ballance on a tripod or monopod. Even a shorter lens without a collar will tend to make the camera front heavy, just not as much.

I think it will be a stable platform if you don't raise the center column and don't mind having the camera four and a half feet of the ground.
 
One of the reasons it is probably listed as a P&S small video camera tripod is its size and height. It is only 4'5" tall with the legs extended. It's maximum height it is 5'6" with the center arm extended to the max.

Extending the center arm with a DSLR is something to be avoided if at all possible. It is an unstable platform for something like a dslr and can defeat the purpose of a tripod in the first place.

A smaller P&S or small video camera will be more stable on the extended center arm as the center point of balance for the camera will probably be inside the demensions of the body. With a DSLR you stick on that longer/heavier lens on the front and the center point shifts outside the confineds of the body making it front heavy. That is one reason that larger lense have tripod collars for them, to relieve the stress of the heavy front weight and provide a more centered ballance on a tripod or monopod. Even a shorter lens without a collar will tend to make the camera front heavy, just not as much.

I think it will be a stable platform if you don't raise the center column and don't mind having the camera four and a half feet of the ground.


I dont really understand whats wrong with the center Column? I have a cheap tripod that i use for now... and I've had no problems out of it.
 
Raising the center column raises the center of gravity of the tripod and the camera as a whole, making them more prone to topple over. That, however, is an issue with ALL tripods, not just mine, and I did try to extend it all the way with my camera on top: it still seemed pretty stable.

I was actually more worried about that the head letting go of the quick-release plate AND my camera. I got this particular tripod because it is all metal and its head is solid steel. I was surprised to see it says "point-and-shoot only" despite being so heavily built. I don't want to think what some of the lighter (plastic) models I saw are rated for.
 
Marketing only. My first tripod was a 725b that listed point and shoots only. I used it with an SLR for over a year till I outgrew it.
 
Marketing only. My first tripod was a 725b that listed point and shoots only. I used it with an SLR for over a year till I outgrew it.

I rest my case. Anyone in the market for a tripod should check out this article before buying.

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

The average shooter doesn't have to spend the money that Thom spends. But for a little well spent money and an eye to the future a good tripod can be purchased that you may well never outgrow. $150.00 spent 30 years ago has yielded me a studio tripod with head that to this day can't be beat and continues to preform flawlessly. For less than $300 a good tripod and head can be purchased that will last a lifetime.
 
Raising the center column raises the center of gravity of the tripod and the camera as a whole, making them more prone to topple over. That, however, is an issue with ALL tripods, not just mine, and I did try to extend it all the way with my camera on top: it still seemed pretty stable.

I was actually more worried about that the head letting go of the quick-release plate AND my camera. I got this particular tripod because it is all metal and its head is solid steel. I was surprised to see it says "point-and-shoot only" despite being so heavily built. I don't want to think what some of the lighter (plastic) models I saw are rated for.


I wouldn't worry about the head letting go of the camera and the QR plate. It is the same QR (RC2) that they use on their better quality heads. The RC2 QR is a good system that has been used for a long time. If you lock it in properly it should never let go.

Raising the center column not only raises the center of gravity, it also make the camera prone to vibration by being at the top of a single arm. You have just put a heavy weight on top of a single support column. If the column is completely retracted into the legs then the camera is supported by three individual support columns working together. The weight of the camera can not pull on any of the support columns with out being countered by the other two legs.
 
That question made my brain hurt. I have no idea.
 
gryphonslair99,

Thanks for your help and all the information! :)
 
I rest my case. Anyone in the market for a tripod should check out this article before buying.

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

The average shooter doesn't have to spend the money that Thom spends. But for a little well spent money and an eye to the future a good tripod can be purchased that you may well never outgrow. $150.00 spent 30 years ago has yielded me a studio tripod with head that to this day can't be beat and continues to preform flawlessly. For less than $300 a good tripod and head can be purchased that will last a lifetime.
Is it better to have no tripod over a cheap tripod? Spending money that you have for a tripod and getting a cheaper one and using the other half of the money to put gas in the car to go to work would be a better alternative than buying an expensive tripod and going to work on a credit card, wouldn't it?

Every hobby is like this. "I can afford $50." Then others come back, "No, you are wasting your money! Get the one for $300." If someone states they can afford only $50, how can they expect to magically have $300 to spend just because someone says they are wasting their money?

I rest my case.
 
I'd have to say I agree with gryphon. I'd save up and wait to get the $300 tripod rather than waste $50 when I know I'm going to get the $300 tripod eventually anyways. I know that I will love photography for a long time, and don't need to waste my time or frustrations with crappy equipment.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top