August 27, 2014, 11:40:58 PM

Author Topic: Induro C314 vs CT314  (Read 1750 times)


  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 75
    • View Profile
Induro C314 vs CT314
« on: April 13, 2013, 02:00:58 PM »
Hi, I am looking to get a sturdy tripod for landscape and wildlife. It needs to be able to support a gripped 7D with 100-400. I have ready very good things about the Induro CT314. When I was looking for the best price I found someone selling the "C314" on eBay for $100 less than the CT314 currently goes for. Turns out the C314 is the previous model. The features look generally the same, the specs looks quite different. However, I believe the difference in specs could just be marketing talk..maximum load 22lbs vs 39lbs. I read a very good review of the "C413" (the same production year as the C314) on Luminous Landscapes so I believe the Induro CF tripods to be very capable.

Anyway does anyone have experience with either the C314 or CT314? any real life differences?

Also I have researched manfrotto, gitzo, RRR, and others and am pretty set on the induro based on price, value, and favorable reviews. That said I am not looking for "well you should really get a Gitzo for $800 or a RRR for $1000." My budget allows <= $1000 for legs and a gimbal with the induro I can easily stay within budget.

Thanks for your help!!!


  • Power Shot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 14
    • View Profile
    • Portfolio
Re: Induro C314 vs CT314
« Reply #1 on: April 20, 2013, 05:16:53 PM »
Would also be very interested in feedback on that topic.
Looking for a carbon tripod myself and Induro is one of the brands that are in my closer selection.



  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 865
  • Easily intrigued :)
    • View Profile
Re: Induro C314 vs CT314
« Reply #2 on: April 20, 2013, 05:29:07 PM »
I borrowed two different induro CT's, one with a Gimbal Head to support the Canon 800 F5,6L, and one with a ball Head to support the Canon 500 F4.0L IS II USM. Never have I tried a better tripod. Its tough, lightweight (carbon), very stable. Myself I have two Manfrottos and a Benro monopod. That will change when I get the money :)
1Dx, 5DII w/grip, 3x600 EX RT, ST-E3
Canon: 8-15L, 16-35L II,  24-105L , 70-200L IS II, 17L TS, 135L, 100L, 2x III TC, 40 F2.8 STM, 50 F1.4. Sigma 35 F1.4 Art, Sigma 85 F1.4, Sigma 150-500.


  • Power Shot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 14
    • View Profile
Re: Induro C314 vs CT314
« Reply #3 on: April 22, 2013, 07:58:58 AM »
You could also look into Feisol. I recently purchased Ct-3442 and so far I am really impressed with the build quality.

I also looked into the Induro, but in my evaluations Feisol seemed to give more bang for the buck and be of higher quality production.


  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1501
    • View Profile
Re: Induro C314 vs CT314
« Reply #4 on: April 22, 2013, 08:28:12 AM »
Recently I was shopping for a new ball head. At a local Induro showroom, I stress tested the heavier ballhead models. Even when fully locked off, you could drag/move the head. Absolutely not good enough. All the Induro ballheads did this. At half the price I got a completely satisfactory Manfrotto ballhead.

Induro legs may be perfectly fine, but I'd recommend avoiding their ballheads.



  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 129
    • View Profile
Re: Induro C314 vs CT314
« Reply #5 on: April 22, 2013, 08:47:16 AM »
I have the Induro CT214 and Induro BHL2 ballhead. They work extremely well with the 5D3 and all of the lenses listed in my profile below. There is absolutely NO slippage in the ballhead whatsoever. Here's a good review:

If I was using a super-tele and gimbal mount, I'd probably want to step up to the CT314, but for anything less, save yourself the weight/bulk and get the CT214. I purchased mine at B&H, along with the Induro ELC-2 short column for ground work. These tripods are extremely well made, set up fast, and are an excellent value.
T3i • 10-22 • 15-85 • 70-300DO *** 5D3 • 35 f/2 • 50 f/1.8 • 24-105L • 100L • 70-300L • 35-350L • 400L f/5.6