EB-1 wrote:
Interesting, but the leg angle looks really narrow. Does it go a bit wider or is that the upper leg stop?
EBH
That's a valid concern. . . The "effecive leg-angle" becomes even steeper as you raise the column. The 21-degree angle occurs only when the column is down.
..I'd be wary of placing an expensive camera on this type of tripod.. The feet would be yet another factor.
Bobarino wrote:
That's a valid concern. . . The "effecive leg-angle" becomes even steeper as you raise the column. The 21-degree angle occurs only when the column is down.
..I'd be wary of placing an expensive camera on this type of tripod.. The feet would be yet another factor.
I would not use a tripod like that for general photography — I’ll use something bigger and more sturdy that usually doesn’t require me to extend the center column.
However, if you use it prudently it can be a fine solution for things like some hiking and for travel.
I was using a bigger one that weighed a pound more and was longer. A small increase in size and weight made a real difference in packing and lugging up the mountains. If you guys know of something better in this weight and closed length then I’m all ears.
DaveInHawaii wrote:
I was using a bigger one that weighed a pound more and was longer. A small increase in size and weight made a real difference in packing and lugging up the mountains. If you guys know of something better in this weight and closed length then I’m all ears.
I think it all depends on how reliant you are on the tripod, how heavy your camera and lenses are, and what you are willing to sacrifice a bit of weight. As a backpacker myself (for decades) I do understand the lengths folks will go to in order to lighten their packs. (One ultra lite aficionado friend of mine literally files down bumps on the inside of his bear canister to save a few grams, and he makes his own alcohol stokers out of cut up soda cans!)
I think it is possible to get some useful service out of a small and light tripod if you are careful, conditions are pretty good, and you use very light gear — perhaps a smaller APS-C or MFT camera, for example. Downsides are that it may be less easily adjustable, less stable, and you are going to rely on that fully extended center column a lot.
Some will compromise on a larger but not quite as heavy tripod in the backcountry. My “light” tripod is one of the long models of the Gitzo mountaineer series, with a somewhat iighter Acratech Ultimate Ballhead. I sacrifice some ease of control with that ballhead, and the tripod isn’t quite a rock solid as the even larger one I use for non-backpacking photography.
How to balance the trade-offs is up to each person, I’d say.
Thanks, I agree with your earlier message regarding using it prudently. The camera I'm using is a A7CR and the lens I generally use is the 20mm G.
Having it short enough to fit in the water bottle pouch is a huge benefit. The longer tripod had to be strapped on the bottom of my pack and one side would stick out a little further catching bamboo or trees on the trail.
It's a good little tripod. Maybe not perfect, but I'm quite pleased with it.
p.1 #10 · Nice little tripod for hiking and travel
With any small tripod,, it's important to consider the center of gravity of the load.(camera and lens) The longer and heavier the lens, the more off-balance the load becomes, and the load is no longer evenly distributed to the three legs..
With a tight leg-angle and raised load, you reduce the circle of stability, and increase the possibility of tip-over. Furthermore, as you raise the column, the footprint remains the same, yet the heightened load decreases the "effective" leg-angle.
The "effective" angle is the angle between the vertical centerline, and a new line drawn from the camera center of gravity, to the foot..
Oben unfortunately, does not specify the tripod's column up vs. column down height. They simply show a "working range". If I had that info, I could tell precisely how much lean that tripod could tolerate before tip=over occurs.
p.1 #11 · Nice little tripod for hiking and travel
I am also in the market for a lighter tripod for longer / tougher canoe trips (with lots of portages) so the Oben interests me. Unfortunately it is no longer in stock at B&H and they told me it has been discontinued.
I’ve ordered the Sirui AT-125 that is a pound lighter than my Gitzo. Hopefully it will work for milky way photos.
p.1 #14 · Nice little tripod for hiking and travel
I got one of these for a backpacking trip to Olympic NP last summer, and it performed very well, all things considered. (Used an A7C2 with the 28-60 and Voigtlander 21.) The criticisms of it are valid - obviously it's a seriously compromised tripod. And those leg locks are indeed suspect (but very easy to use!) But I can't think of anything of its weight that would do any better, and can think of many heavier ones that perform worse. I stumbled on to this one a couple weeks before the trip and decided to give it a shot. The pod that would have gone with me otherwise was a glorified tabletop tripod, about 28 inches high with a flimsy screw-on column about as stiff as a fly rod, but only about 3 ounces lighter than this one. At my size, age, and condition, carrying anything heavier on a multi-day backpack is just out of the question.
p.1 #15 · Nice little tripod for hiking and travel
Thanks for the report Dave. Sounds like you found something that works great for you. I found a Leofoto travel tripod that is similar in size to yours. It's great having such a small lightweight tripod when out in the field. Looks like it works fine for your pictured setup.
p.1 #16 · Nice little tripod for hiking and travel
The funny thing is, in the past, I passed on the smaller travel Slik tripods because of the low 4.4 LBS load rating. Turns out Slik was pretty excessively conservative in their load ratings. I briefly owned a Manfrotto BeFree tripod with a 8 LBS load rating. The Slik I own is stiffer! It however starts to flex a bit too much if you make the legs wider which is different vs my other tripods. I never use the legs wide, I just shorten the legs to get lower.
The one most similar to my old Slik is this one at B&H. It looks exactly the same but is 2" longer folded and has a different head (much better than mine). It will work fine for a 3.5 LBS camera, the heaviest combination I had on it. Most times, my camera/lens combination is just under 3 LBS.
The center column is in two pieces, you can remove the bottom half to further reduce the weight. Only 1.9 LBS and removing that bottom half of the center column will push the weight down a hair.
I know, 4.4 LBS rating seems too low but it is legit stronger than that. Stiffer than others twice the rating somehow. Just lower it instead of widening the legs, tho. So this is a worthy backpacking tripod that weights 1.9 LBS. Just putting out an alternative tripod.
p.1 #17 · Nice little tripod for hiking and travel
Yesac13 wrote:
The funny thing is, in the past, I passed on the smaller travel Slik tripods because of the low 4.4 LBS load rating. Turns out Slik was pretty excessively conservative in their load ratings. I briefly owned a Manfrotto BeFree tripod with a 8 LBS load rating. The Slik I own is stiffer! It however starts to flex a bit too much if you make the legs wider which is different vs my other tripods. I never use the legs wide, I just shorten the legs to get lower.
The one most similar to my old Slik is this one at B&H. It looks exactly the same but is 2" longer folded and has a different head (much better than mine). It will work fine for a 3.5 LBS camera, the heaviest combination I had on it. Most times, my camera/lens combination is just under 3 LBS.
The center column is in two pieces, you can remove the bottom half to further reduce the weight. Only 1.9 LBS and removing that bottom half of the center column will push the weight down a hair.
I know, 4.4 LBS rating seems too low but it is legit stronger than that. Stiffer than others twice the rating somehow. Just lower it instead of widening the legs, tho. So this is a worthy backpacking tripod that weights 1.9 LBS. Just putting out an alternative tripod. ...Show more →
As I’ve written before, I normally use much heftier tripods. (A high-end RRS with the BH-55 head or, for something a bit lighter, a Gitzo mountaineer in large size with an Acratech Ultimate Ballhead.) But I also have a littel tripod quite similar to the one you mention, equipped with the very smallest RRS head.
By “serious” standards it is too short, not stiff enough, and has a head without full adjustments. But for something purposes (emergency use while travelling, sticking into a very small pack) when I don’t need a tripod for all of my shooting, it can be a useful tool.
