Sturdy Tripod for next 20 years - Slik Pro 700 DX (2 Viewers)

[crumbucket]

Hello all. I need a new tripod. The old Velbon df-40 just isn't enough tripod for my heavy scope (about 4lb. or 1.8kg), and the crank has broken a gear tooth.

I want my new tripod to last for years, and to be flexible enough for whatever future needs I have (digiscoping?). It will get rained on maybe several times a year. It needs to be sturdy, and I don't really care if it weighs a lot (well, let's draw a line at roughly 8lb. or 3.6kg). I think I prefer a 2-way head, but that seems to be uncommon. I don't want wingnut legs.

Of course I want to spend as little money as possible, like everyone else.

Here are the candidates I've come up with:

- Slik Pro 700 DX combo: big, cheap, heavy, cheap, sturdy, and cheap. $140 for legs and head. Well reviewed for photography, but can't really find reviews for birding? Head seems to be not fluid-type?
- Slik Pro 580 DX combo: smaller in every way than above, but with better head, although still not fluid. $200

- Legs: Slik Pro 700 DX legs, 500 DX legs, Manfrotto 055's, Vortex STX-70's

- Heads: Manfrotto 701, 501

I realize that there are hundreds of other possible options, but am listing these first. I have no brand loyalty.

I think something like a Manfrotto 128rc (3130?) head is not really strong enough from what I've read?

I have NOT enjoyed this search to find a tripod. There are too many manufacturers, too much memorization, too many models, with naming that is too complicated. I would hope that I can wait a decade or two before having to relearn all this stuff again. Also, there is no camera/optics store anywhere near me. I am overwhelmed and would welcome anyone's opinions on any of the above.

 

[SteveClifton]

I think something like a Manfrotto 128rc (3130?) head is not really strong enough from what I've read?

I don't know about the tripod but the 128 head is more than enough for a heavy(ish) birding scope. I've tried the 701 (owned one, even!) but sold it as I didn't like it personally. The 501 would work fine also but might be overkill. The 128 is my favourite all time head, and I've tried lots!

As for the legs, I have a Manfrotto 055 Carbon Fibre which is great, but my next one will most likely be a Gitzo 3-series CF which should be considerably more stable (and expensive). It is pro-quality, and can be adapted for use with or without a centre column. Every review I've read would indicate that a Gitzo will last for years if looked after properly, and will offer very stable support. The Aluminium ones are considerably cheaper if cost is an issue.

Steve

 

[crumbucket]

Steve, thanks for the reply. What I had read about 128's was that they can slip with a heavy scope regardless of how tightly you try to get it if the scope is angled too far forward or backward. This was from a person who also owned a 501 and a 701. I can't find the link to his review now, but it was referenced somewhere in birdforum.net (I know that that is not much help). So I assume that you have not had this problem? How heavy is your scope? And why did you personally not like the 701?

As for CF, I won't be considering those at all. Too expensive, and again, I do not really care if the tripod is heavy. Aluminum for me! (or even aluminium... ) And will now look at the Gitzo 3-series.

 

[SteveClifton]

On my particular unit (actually, I have two) I can tighten it down enough so that it doesn't slip when I carry it around over my shoulder. You do need to tighten it quite hard, but it does work! (with a Swaro 80mm scope-just under 2kg with case fitted and Q/R plate attached).

I also use the head with a camera on occasions with a heavy-ish lens (50-200 F2.8-3.5-weighs about 1.5kg with camera attached) to shoot close-ups of butterflies and dragonflies. At such times the head can be angled down at around 45 degrees and locked so that it doesn't slip.

I rarely find that I need to angle the head to such an extreme degree for use with a scope. When carrying it around it sometimes does slip a little, though usually this is because I didn't lock it down tightly enough.

I like the fact that on the 128 head, both planes of movement use friction plates to achieve the fluid movement, and tightening the plates causes them to be forced together so that more or less friction can be applied to suit your individual preference/purpose.

With the 701, the up/down movement is similar to the 128, but the horizontal movement is locked by a side-mounted bolt that applies friction to the mechanism from the side. IMO this results in the horizontal plane being either loose or tight, with little adjustment between the two extremes. Obviously this comes down to personal preference, and other people love the 701 head.

From personal experience, the 128 is bomb-proof and will last for years with no real loss in performance. My experience with the 701 is that it feels less sturdy, but again, that is a personal thing.

Perhaps the review you read, which compares the 128 to the 501, makes it seem inadequate (which is understandable in comparison with that head!) but I think it is fine and will serve you well for years.

Steve

 

[RJM]

You should look at the Gitzo clones from Benro and Induro if you want "buy once" high quality. And don't dismiss CF due to weight/cost. They are usually just has heavy as AL but have thicker tubes so are less prone to vibrations and stiffer to support heavier loads.

Also if you want something that will stand up better over time in rain you will need to pay for moisture and dust sealing. Those features along with stainless steel fittings do not come cheap.

You also want a tripod that is tall enough to use your scope comfortably for long periods without bending over and without extending the center column more than 6" or so. The taller you need to go the more expensive it gets.

Finally, skip the traditional video head and go with a gimbal mount from Jobu on Benro. A gimbal is far superior to any standard head if you ever want to use your scope for digiscoping.

As for what I use, its and Induro C-314 with Gitzo G2180.

cheers,
Rick

 

[Kevin Conville]

Lets see...

Durable, affordable, capable, weight not a main issue...?

A Manfrotto 055 with a 128RC head sounds like a good way to go. The 128RC is plenty strong and I've used them (I have two) for many years with different types of optics including large spotting scopes.

I like carbon tripods but frankly, you just can't beat a large aluminum Manfrotto for ruggedness and smooth function. And, they're relatively cheap. Replacement parts are readily available also, if ever needed.

 

[crumbucket]

Very helpful replies.

Steve, excellent explanation. I think understand the comparison better now. Would also be interesting to see more comments from those who prefer the 701 or 501. It is interesting that you feel that the 128 is tougher despite the 701's purpose of supporting more weight.

RJM, as you point out, CF is quite superior. Whether one uses CF's attributes to lower the weight, increase the strength, or split the difference (the Manfrotto 055's seem to do exactly that), CF seems to approximately double the price of a set of legs. I would rather my money go toward bettering other attributes of the tripod/head.

Your comments about Benro and Induro are quite helpful. I'll look into those more. Can you recommend specific models of those? And the gimbal head idea.... interesting. I hadn't really considered those. And your setup, wow, what a nice setup. And rain. Hrm. Maybe I'll just have to rethink my desire to let it get wet. If that's going to significantly increase the cost, perhaps just keeping a raincoat over it is what I'll have to do.

Kevin, you are giving me more faith in that tried and true setup.

So does no one use pan/tilt heads? My Velbon was certainly crappy, but I still assumed that some folks would try to get by without spending money on extra heads. Is a quality pan/tilt not worth considering? Also, does no one use ball heads? The RRS BH-25 seems interesting (and the BH-40 more so, but too expensive).

It seems no one has much experience with the Slik stuff mentioned above?

 

[Kevin Conville]

So does no one use pan/tilt heads? My Velbon was certainly crappy, but I still assumed that some folks would try to get by without spending money on extra heads. Is a quality pan/tilt not worth considering? Also, does no one use ball heads?

I've experimented with different heads with spotting scopes. Here's a concise summary based on my experience...

Medium and large spotting scopes: use a two way video fluid head like already discussed.
For a small spotting scope like an ED50: a medium sized ballhead works great.

Typical pan heads are too fiddly with three sets of arms or knobs, four if one includes horizon tilt. Too much to think about, and slow to use.

Large scopes are difficult to control on a ballhead.

Hope this helps.

 

[RJM]

Deciding the height of the tripod, the total load it needs to support, and the most you a prepared to spend for the legs and the mount, will narrow the choices amoung all makers to just a handful and the decision becomes pretty simple. I can't find that info in any of your posts and do not have any experience with Slik (once I had my "numbers" above, a quick glance thru their catalog indicated they made nothing I wanted).

Until you can come up with those numbers, it will be hard to get more than general recommendations. Frankly, I think your goals of cheap and "buy once" quality are somewhat at odds.

Rick

 

[crumbucket]

Kevin, excellent summary. I think I will follow your observations.

Rick, indeed! You are right, and it has narrowed my choices. I am 6', my wife is 5'5", and our big scope is angled. I'm guessing I would like to stay under $300, but would gladly pay $140, and could perhaps be convinced to pay higher than $300 if you convince me that I must. Would be happy to provide any other numbers for you that would be helpful (and keep in mind that I may not know those numbers, which is why I'm here asking for advice!). I will never, never afford $550 for tripod legs. Like you say, obviously, "cheap" and "quality" are very at odds! Still, occasionally in life one finds out that a Honda Civic is a better vehicle in most every aspect than some that cost 3x what the Civic does. I would like you to tell me what tripod a Honda Civic is.

After perusing the 178 or so great reviews of the Slik 700 DX (legs) at B&H, and noticing that Kowa picked those legs for the their own brand, and noticing that they cost $100, I'm maybe settling on those. Although Manfrotto 055xb's can be had for $165. I see that they somehow allow a minimum height of 7cm, which seems rather incredible. And as Kevin said above, they have readily available replacement parts, and a dependable reputation.

And I'm feeling rather more comfortable about the 128rc. If anyone can point out a resource selling 055xb + 128rc combos as a good price, it would be much appreciated. Maybe purchase on Thursday.

Thank you all again for your helpfulness. It is much appreciated.

 

[Kevin Conville]

I'd check the usual reliable sources crum, such as B&H Photo, Eagle Optics, Adorama, and Amazon.

FWIW, I have had 3 Manfrotto aluminum tripods including a 3021 (now 055) and currently have a carbon Manfrotto 055MF4 and a carbon Benro 028. The aluminum Manfrottos have the same quality construction in every respect, just with aluminum tubes which yield a heavier tripod (of course) and a tripod that is much more thermally conductive. The stiffness issue is overblown IMO when you get into the beefier tripods like the 055s. A carbon 'pod is quieter under certain conditions as it doesn't "ring" like aluminum, but for the most part is a non issue.

The aluminum versions of Induro and Benro are quite affordable knock-offs of Gitzo, and are well made. The main virtue of these are leg locking collets instead of locking cams (Manfrotto). This matters most when folded down as it makes the collet type 'pods more streamlined and compact. Not a big deal either way IMO.

I think there is a very good reason why the Manfrotto 055/128 combo is so widely used, it works great, and is the best bang for the buck. Oh, and get a black one..much less glare.

Enjoy whatever you get,
Kevin

 

[crumbucket]

Thanks again, Kevin. Hope you'll entertain one last question (and for anyone else too). If the 501hdv and the 128rc were similarly priced, would you still go with the 128rc for scoping? Digiscoping? I'm trying to not succumb to my cheap nature if the 501 is really what I need...

I keep reading stuff like this: linky and it makes me concerned that while the 128rc is certainly enough for now, that should I do something like start digiscoping, or buy a big set of binocs, that I'll regret it and have to buy another head.

I know my questions are open ended, and I admit that I do not yet know how I will use this tripod in the future. Seems like a 501 gives me the flexibility to do most anything I would think of doing, while smoothly operating about as well as a 128rc?

 

[SteveClifton]

Thanks again, Kevin. Hope you'll entertain one last question (and for anyone else too). If the 501hdv and the 128rc were similarly priced, would you still go with the 128rc for scoping? Digiscoping? I'm trying to not succumb to my cheap nature if the 501 is really what I need...

I keep reading stuff like this: linky and it makes me concerned that while the 128rc is certainly enough for now, that should I do something like start digiscoping, or buy a big set of binocs, that I'll regret it and have to buy another head.

I know my questions are open ended, and I admit that I do not yet know how I will use this tripod in the future. Seems like a 501 gives me the flexibility to do most anything I would think of doing, while smoothly operating about as well as a 128rc?

Purely for the weight saving, I would get the 128 head. I do a lot of digiscoping and find the 128 perfectly adequate. Mine is the LP version rather than the RC (quick release version), which allows me to attach a Manfrotto sliding plate adapter to help balance the set-up. This isn't really necessary with a small & light digital camera, but if you were to consider using a DSLR then it would be useful.

I hate carrying more weight than I need to, but if that isn't an issue then by all means consider the 501.

Steve

 

[postcardcv]

I've used the Manfrotto heads that you're looking at and all work well enough. As a birding head I think that the old classic 128 is almost unbeatable - it's very smooth moving and very easy to use. Plus it's solid so won't break when you drop it or bash it into a wall and is easy to take apart and clean when you've been doing too much seawatching. The only real downside is that it can droop if your set up isn't well balanced.

I like the feel and the function of the 701 (I've only breifly tested the newer version but it seems even better), it's a nice birding head and works well with a digiscoping rig on the back. The sliding plate section does help to balance your set up, it's very easy to move it a bit forward when you add a camera on the back. My concern about the 701 is how robust it is, there just looks like there's more to break than on a 128. I have seen 128 heads that are ~20 years old and still going strong.

Then the 501, this is my real favourite. It's big and heavy, but it's rock solid and will hold a heavy set up with ease. When I was heavily into digiscoping I went for one of these and never looked back. The movement is so smooth (the tension adjustments on pan and tilt are great) and getting the balance right is easy. I've used a 501 with everything from a small 60mm scope upto a camera with a big lens (4+kg of gear) and it never failed me. They seem solid enough to me, mine has seen plenty of abuse and is still going strong. I've only moved away from it now for photography, for birding I still tend to use the 501 (though I do still have a 128 for travelling light).

As for legs... the Manfrotto 055 series are very good, I use a 055 Pro with my 501 as my main birding rig. I've used 055 tripods in one form or another for many years and they've all been very solid, but I do like the pro model most. However (as others have said) if you want real stability and don't mind paying the price then look at a Gitzo. I changed to a Gitzo for photography ~4 years ago and was astounded by just how stable it is, if I could afford to I'd buy another for birding.

 

[Kevin Conville]

I like both Steve's and Postcard's answers. I also read the thread you linked us to. I would only add that if I were to go the 501 route, I'd give up the notion of moderate weight and I would probably be looking at an even beefier and stiffer tripod than the 055**. The Induro 313/314 or the Benro or (better yet) Gitzo version of it come to mind. Maybe even a Berlebach wood tripod. The Manfrottos are fine but won't be as stiff as one of the better, large collet type tripods.

I won't discount what the guy on CN said about 15x70 bins on a 128 head, but I use Fujinon 16x70s on my 3130s (128RC now) and it works OK. Mine lock down easy enough, though I'll confess the balance isn't the best when well off the horizontal, as in night sky viewing.

As in any equipment choice there will be compromises. Is a 501 smoother and beefier than a 128? Of course. It also is much bulkier and weighs and costs twice as much.
Are there stiffer tripods than an aluminum 055? Yep. They are also heavier and more expensive.

For birding, with any normally used spotting scope, the 055/128 is a very good balance. For serious digiscoping or frequent giant bino use, you may want to continue your research. I think you are quickly going to discover why so many of us have more than one tripod

 

[mooreorless]

A Celestron 80ED refractor [not a light scope for sure] on an older Bogen 3236 tripod and Bogen 501 head. The Nikon 60mm Fieldscope looks kind of small on it.

 

[Kevin Conville]

A Celestron 80ED refractor [not a light scope for sure] on an older Bogen 3236 tripod and Bogen 501 head. The Nikon 60mm Fieldscope looks kind of small on it.

Now that looks like a very robust setup indeed. By my accounting, you're somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 lbs, all included. Not my idea of a "field" scope, though probably great from your porch! I didn't include one of the video Manfrotto tripods because of their weight.

 

[mooreorless]

Yea Kevin this is a porch set up for sure. I was just showing the 501 mostly. I have a picture with this on a lighter tripod that I gave my brother-in-law. 3001 tripod, it would be ok with a regular 80 spotting scope, tripod not quite up to the bigger astro scope the head is.

 

[crumbucket]

I am overwhelmed at all the good advice I'm getting. Thank you all.

I'm really torn. I think I want a 501hdv + 055xprob for $310, which seems like a really great deal. I then think that how can I go wrong with 128xx + 055xb for $240, since that combo is loved so much. I then think well, that original Slik 700 DX combo goes for $140, and is certainly sturdy enough, although not ideal for digiscoping since it has the photo head.

Arg. Gonna sleep on it and decide tomorrow. I wonder if Manfrotto will offer rebates again any time soon, since I just missed the last round, which expired Monday.

 

[crumbucket]

Ordered the 501hdv + 055xprob for $311 total from B&H. Seemed like a good deal since the best I could find them individually was $180 and $186. I feel this combo will at least give me a B+ result at anything I'm likely to try. I'll post back in 20 years to let everyone know how it went. Just kidding, will post back in the next few weeks or so with my newbie impressions. Thanks again all.