Posted by Mike Maples on January 9, 2008 at 3:33 PM
I currently use a Gitzo 1325 CF tripod with a full Wimberley head as the platform for my 400mm f/2.8 AF-S, D2X, flash bracket, SB-800 w/better beamer, etc. It works really well but in extreme cases like moon shots with a 1.7x or 2x TC I get some shake...not much, but some. It's enough that I have to be very careful. I'm starting to wonder if perhaps a Gitzo 3530S is in order?
Are the big Gitzo's that much more stable? Will I even notice the difference? Is it worth another $150 over the value of the 1325?
In my experience, bigger isn't necessarily better with CF. They're so light that I don't think the formula applies quite as well as with aluminum or wood. In any case, I tried a friends 3530 side by side with my 1349 on a windy day and didn't find it any more stable until I added a counterweight to the center column. That was best with a line long enough to get the weight down really close to the ground. Then there was the problem of wind swinging the counterweight on longer exposures. I finally ended up driving a tent stake into the ground and using the line (para cord) to synch the tripod down to that. But then again, that was the same system I was using on the 1349, which rendered it just as steady.
Windy conditions aside, have you tried a center weight or stake to steady your setup? The legs on your 1325 should be plenty stout enough, so my concern would be that it's topheavy.
BTW- I didn't think the index on the 800 was high enough for moon shots, even with a beamer....
Posted by Mike Maples on January 9, 2008 at 6:43 PM
Yeah, Hank...I turned the flash off for the moon shots so I wouldn't get any hot spots from the reflected light
Posted by Bill Chambers on January 9, 2008 at 6:51 PM
Mike, if I'm not mistaken, the 1325 legs are basically identical to the GT3530S as far as size goes. I believe the only difference is the 3530 has the anti-rotation feature and the new style gasket/sleeves. As for steadiness, I would doubt there would be any difference. Just my 2 cents of course...
Posted by Mike Maples on January 9, 2008 at 7:03 PM
My "extra stiffness" assumption is based on the load ratings of about 26 pounds for the 1325 and nearly 40 pounds for the 3530. I assume the 6x carbon layering system must make it stiffer but not sure. I'm also being tempted by an older G1548...decisions, decisions...
Posted by Bill Chambers on January 9, 2008 at 7:48 PM
If you plan on using the tripod in water I would definitely recommend the newer GT series over any of the older models. The newer models aren't affected by water, preventing the problems of frozen legs, etc. Also, the anti-rotation feature is really nice too, making it much quicker to set-up.
The answer is YES, at least for the 1548 which is significantly more stable than the 1325.
When I bought our 1548, I wanted a 1325 in the worst way. Our local camera dealer carried both and I had the opportunity to compare them side by side. Placing my hand on the top where the head mounts, I could visibly move the 1325 while the 1548 remained rock solid. I am not certain what is now equivalent to the 1548, but you will find it much more stable.
The 400mm f/2.8 is almost as heavy as the 600mm f/4. You will find the extra heft of the bigger tripod well worth the additional cost. We have never regretted purchasing the 1548. Your experience with the1325 confirms our decision.
Discussion
7 repliesAre the big Gitzo's that much more stable? Will I even notice the difference? Is it worth another $150 over the value of the 1325?
Any advice appreciated.
Windy conditions aside, have you tried a center weight or stake to steady your setup? The legs on your 1325 should be plenty stout enough, so my concern would be that it's topheavy.
BTW- I didn't think the index on the 800 was high enough for moon shots, even with a beamer....
Don't tell my wife, Bill! She HATES the leg rotation and stickiness of Gitzos in adverse conditions. The improvements could prove expensive.
When I bought our 1548, I wanted a 1325 in the worst way. Our local camera dealer carried both and I had the opportunity to compare them side by side. Placing my hand on the top where the head mounts, I could visibly move the 1325 while the 1548 remained rock solid. I am not certain what is now equivalent to the 1548, but you will find it much more stable.
The 400mm f/2.8 is almost as heavy as the 600mm f/4. You will find the extra heft of the bigger tripod well worth the additional cost. We have never regretted purchasing the 1548. Your experience with the1325 confirms our decision.