Posted by Mark Jenkins on July 13, 2008 at 12:35 PM
I am thinking of buying a Gitzo tripod since it is so highly recommended by so many. I have a Nikon D300 and my biggest lens is the Nikon 500mm MF which I think weighs about 6 lbs. for a total of about 8 lbs. for lens and camera. I also have lighter lenses including 17-35mm and others which weigh on average with camera 3-4 lbs. My question is could the GT2541 which is rated for 26 lbs. be sturdy enough for the 500mm lens? Or do I need a 3541 rated for 39 lbs. I don't have enough experience to know and these are very expensive tripods and I don't want to make a mistake. Is there a camera-lens weight to tripod ratio which I should know about. One article I read said tripod should be rated for 3 to 4 times camera lens weight. I would appreciate any help on this subject.
Posted by Kent Staubus on July 13, 2008 at 12:54 PM
I have the Gitzo 1325 tripod which is rated for 26 pounds. It was able to hold a 500mm f4 P lens OK, but it was close to its limit. I do love the tripod though. It's my single most favorite piece of gear.
I second Bill's suggestion of the 3541. The 4 legs take a small amount of time to get used to, but the short length when collapsed make it very easy to travel with. Very general rule is to have legs that can support close to 3 times what you will put on them.
You should consider a high quality ball head as well. Many of us use the RRS BH-55. It is a super piece of equipment.
The Gitzo weight ratings are based on metric units, so that 31# equals about 18 Kilos, and 26# is about12 Kilos. These values are very conservative, as I routinely use my 1228 CF to hold my BH-1, Sidekick, and 500 f/4 Nikkor and a TC 14B.
I use the 2560 with a Mongoose 3.5 and the 500f/4 P, and the 200-400mm with extension. You have to use good technique, but plenty satisfactory. Nice setup and alot lighter than the Wimberly + Gitzo 1325 setup of my heavier tripod. It to me is all about how much you want to haul--young and strong--go for it; old and feable like me, think about that weight. I know several using this setup with the new 500's, I have yet to try my 500 VR on this setup, I will soon give it a try. Also, isn't the 3541 the old 1325, which supports a 600mm without problem with a Wimberly and good technique?
Another note on the RRS BH-55--a great piece of equipment, but if birds, etc. are you like, I fine the Mongoose alot more versatile. It is not a good lock-down piece like the BH-55, but most of the time with what I am chasing that is not an issue. My two cents!!
Mac McGlamery said "Also, isn't the 3541 the old 1325?"
Close, but not quite. The actual equivalent is the GT3530LS. Same specs as the old 1325 as to height, weight, min. height, and closed length, but will support almost 40 lbs vs almost 27 for the 1325. The GT3541LS is a wee bit shorter, has a shorter min. height, and is almost 5" shorter in closed length. The GT3541LS also has 4 legs sections vs 3 leg sections for the GT3530LS and old 1325.
I have a Gitzo 3530LSV with a RRS BH-55 that I'm using with the Nikon 200-400 and a 1.4 teleconverter. I like the combination, but would hesitate to use a lighter tripod. When I bought the tripod and ball head the folks I spoke with at RRS advised against a lighter tripod than the 3530LSV.
Just as a side note, the GT3530LSV has been replaced with the GT3530LS. The only difference is that it doesn't include a video bowl. It's flat plate now has a hook included to add additional weight to if you desire.
Discussion
12 repliesKent in SD
You should consider a high quality ball head as well. Many of us use the RRS BH-55. It is a super piece of equipment.
Close, but not quite. The actual equivalent is the GT3530LS. Same specs as the old 1325 as to height, weight, min. height, and closed length, but will support almost 40 lbs vs almost 27 for the 1325. The GT3541LS is a wee bit shorter, has a shorter min. height, and is almost 5" shorter in closed length. The GT3541LS also has 4 legs sections vs 3 leg sections for the GT3530LS and old 1325.
Dave