I have to rethink my camera decision (7D vs 5d Mark II)

[lady]

One last thing to consider with tripods is leg flexibility... Manfrotto on a lot of legs have a sliding locking horizontal support bar that connects to the legs to the center column. You will want to be able to control each leg individually.. Sometimes you may be on unstable grounds in which one leg is shooting out at the standard 30 degrees angle and another leg, given your location, maybe 50-60 degrees, etc.... If you dont have that control on your legs, it can hinder your photo shoot. You will know what i'm talking about as you play with the tripods... lastly on heads, see if you can get a nice sturdy ball head. Ball heads carry the weight better over the tripod where as standard pan/tilt heads are cheaper but instead of holding the weight directly on the body, you are carrying the weight on a few screws and metal/plastic as it hovers above the center column. It's just not as secure. Manfrotto has high quality heavy duty pan/tilts but you still can beat a nice ballhead.

Do you have any specific recommendations?

Whoo. It's gonna take a bit but I'm going to read through the rest of the responses and then reply to them.

I wasn't intending on being condescending and or rude, I was just seeking clarification about how you said you had it, tested it, and loved it and then "just got it" the other and are having buyers remorse. Do keep in mind regarding distortion... this lens is designed as a 17-40 on a full frame camera... 17mm on any camera will have some level of distortion... Same as the 17-55 in some regards on the 17 end, as well as lets say the tokina lens and the 16-35 I or II... The full frame will show the distortion more than crops, but it's still there.

Ah okay! It was just a misunderstanding then. My apologies. I agree that that there will always be some sort of distortion. However I have learned that photoshop has a feature built into CameraRAW that can fix most distortion problems. This will come in handy, though I do need to get a legitimate copy of photoshop since I cannot borrow my friend's forever. That's gonna be a little pricy.

Some lenses to keep in consideration that will have fast(er) speeds and keep distortion in check (20mm 2.8, 24mm 1.4, 24mm 2.8, 35mm 1.4, they are all within the range of the 17-40, should keep distortion better in check, and 2.8 or faster) It's a great outdoors/travel/walk-around lens, but indoors, you will need to have a fast prime if you really want to shoot handhold. I do architecture (one of my specialties) and real estate photos... I shoot with the 10-20 and 17-40... But then again I shoot low apertures, tripod always, and they are static. Sometimes if I cant shoot tripod I still use low ISO but throw in off camera flash or strobe. Light will always be an issue indoors so either use a faster lens or use a flash (ideally either strobe or off camera flash). The 7D has a great commander feature if you can pick up some 580's or 430's... scatter them around the scene out of view from the camera and you never have to worry about lack of light.

I am in need of a good tripod. Somebody recommended manfrotto and I'm currently weighing my options.

Lighting is something I'll definitely need to invest in. Before getting external flash, though, I want to try to make the pictures as good as possible without flash. Force myself to practice, so to speak. You have some good suggestions here.

I never said it was foolish not getting the 17-55... I said I liked the 17-40 personally, however you need to really and fully know it's capabilities and limitations to get the most out of it.

I mixed you up with somebody else who said that to me, oops.

By going in a shoot fully educated on your gears limits will allow you to forward think so you know how to counter the limitations and push the limits to get awesome shots. Also remember the 17-40 can be used by the 7d and 5d whereas the 17-55 can only be used on crop cameras. Regarding your expectations of high ISO, check out the link i posted earlier... it'll give you a good idea of what this camera can do not only against itself but competitors.

Thanks

While at school, I used manfrottos tripods almost exclusively... We shot with 4x5's and medium formats so i needed heavy duty gear to handle the weight and strain of the cameras... I dont shoot much 4x5's any more but now my gear includes a Slik Pro 700 legs (i think thats the number) and manfrotto heads... The legs are aluminum and light weight compared to my old heavy duty manfrottos... I would love a carbon fiber manfrotto or better, but the slik is light weight yet extremely sturdy for me. Keep weight and load in mind... Weight because you have to haul this puppy with you on shoots and load because if the head AND legs aren't strong enough to hold secure your gear, you can not only lose shots but damage your gear. I had an old tripod fail on me wading in a river waiting for the lighting to be right before I shot the image... I barely caught the camera in time before it fell in the river.

Go to your local store and they should have a nice selection of tripods... feel them, hold them, and do your research. Regarding the photoshop... look on craigslist and look at your local colleges... A lot of them sell photoshop and or creative suite at student prices... At my local university in nevada, they have the entire creative suite for $299 student price. Fully legit copy. I knew a few college students there but see if your local college has software discounts at the student store. Also keep in mind adobe typically has a product cycle on a strong 18 month cycle... CS6 should be out sometime in the second/third quarter of 2012 so perhaps you will see CS5 at a discounted price. Lastly, i heard adobe now has a subscription option? You pay a monthly fee and you get to use their software... Doing that for i think for a few months pays for the entire purchase price but if you need to have it now and cant pony up $699, then that's a good option.

Good suggestions! Thanks!

 

[awinphoto]

One last thing to consider with tripods is leg flexibility... Manfrotto on a lot of legs have a sliding locking horizontal support bar that connects to the legs to the center column. You will want to be able to control each leg individually.. Sometimes you may be on unstable grounds in which one leg is shooting out at the standard 30 degrees angle and another leg, given your location, maybe 50-60 degrees, etc.... If you dont have that control on your legs, it can hinder your photo shoot. You will know what i'm talking about as you play with the tripods... lastly on heads, see if you can get a nice sturdy ball head. Ball heads carry the weight better over the tripod where as standard pan/tilt heads are cheaper but instead of holding the weight directly on the body, you are carrying the weight on a few screws and metal/plastic as it hovers above the center column. It's just not as secure. Manfrotto has high quality heavy duty pan/tilts but you still can beat a nice ballhead.

Do you have any specific recommendations?

Whoo. It's gonna take a bit but I'm going to read through the rest of the responses and then reply to them.

I wasn't intending on being condescending and or rude, I was just seeking clarification about how you said you had it, tested it, and loved it and then "just got it" the other and are having buyers remorse. Do keep in mind regarding distortion... this lens is designed as a 17-40 on a full frame camera... 17mm on any camera will have some level of distortion... Same as the 17-55 in some regards on the 17 end, as well as lets say the tokina lens and the 16-35 I or II... The full frame will show the distortion more than crops, but it's still there.

Ah okay! It was just a misunderstanding then. My apologies. I agree that that there will always be some sort of distortion. However I have learned that photoshop has a feature built into CameraRAW that can fix most distortion problems. This will come in handy, though I do need to get a legitimate copy of photoshop since I cannot borrow my friend's forever. That's gonna be a little pricy.

Some lenses to keep in consideration that will have fast(er) speeds and keep distortion in check (20mm 2.8, 24mm 1.4, 24mm 2.8, 35mm 1.4, they are all within the range of the 17-40, should keep distortion better in check, and 2.8 or faster) It's a great outdoors/travel/walk-around lens, but indoors, you will need to have a fast prime if you really want to shoot handhold. I do architecture (one of my specialties) and real estate photos... I shoot with the 10-20 and 17-40... But then again I shoot low apertures, tripod always, and they are static. Sometimes if I cant shoot tripod I still use low ISO but throw in off camera flash or strobe. Light will always be an issue indoors so either use a faster lens or use a flash (ideally either strobe or off camera flash). The 7D has a great commander feature if you can pick up some 580's or 430's... scatter them around the scene out of view from the camera and you never have to worry about lack of light.

I am in need of a good tripod. Somebody recommended manfrotto and I'm currently weighing my options.

Lighting is something I'll definitely need to invest in. Before getting external flash, though, I want to try to make the pictures as good as possible without flash. Force myself to practice, so to speak. You have some good suggestions here.

I never said it was foolish not getting the 17-55... I said I liked the 17-40 personally, however you need to really and fully know it's capabilities and limitations to get the most out of it.

I mixed you up with somebody else who said that to me, oops.

By going in a shoot fully educated on your gears limits will allow you to forward think so you know how to counter the limitations and push the limits to get awesome shots. Also remember the 17-40 can be used by the 7d and 5d whereas the 17-55 can only be used on crop cameras. Regarding your expectations of high ISO, check out the link i posted earlier... it'll give you a good idea of what this camera can do not only against itself but competitors.

Thanks

While at school, I used manfrottos tripods almost exclusively... We shot with 4x5's and medium formats so i needed heavy duty gear to handle the weight and strain of the cameras... I dont shoot much 4x5's any more but now my gear includes a Slik Pro 700 legs (i think thats the number) and manfrotto heads... The legs are aluminum and light weight compared to my old heavy duty manfrottos... I would love a carbon fiber manfrotto or better, but the slik is light weight yet extremely sturdy for me. Keep weight and load in mind... Weight because you have to haul this puppy with you on shoots and load because if the head AND legs aren't strong enough to hold secure your gear, you can not only lose shots but damage your gear. I had an old tripod fail on me wading in a river waiting for the lighting to be right before I shot the image... I barely caught the camera in time before it fell in the river.

Go to your local store and they should have a nice selection of tripods... feel them, hold them, and do your research. Regarding the photoshop... look on craigslist and look at your local colleges... A lot of them sell photoshop and or creative suite at student prices... At my local university in nevada, they have the entire creative suite for $299 student price. Fully legit copy. I knew a few college students there but see if your local college has software discounts at the student store. Also keep in mind adobe typically has a product cycle on a strong 18 month cycle... CS6 should be out sometime in the second/third quarter of 2012 so perhaps you will see CS5 at a discounted price. Lastly, i heard adobe now has a subscription option? You pay a monthly fee and you get to use their software... Doing that for i think for a few months pays for the entire purchase price but if you need to have it now and cant pony up $699, then that's a good option.

Good suggestions! Thanks!

If you tell me your budget you would be willing to spend (on the set) I can give you specific suggestions... There are SO MANY brands and quality types it really is very broad.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I think the Manfrotto legs with the horizontal bars are the video supports, defnintely stay away from those.

Do you have any specific recommendations?

I use a Manfrotto 190CXPRO4 with a 488RC2 ballhead. It's a great tripod, and it easily supports a gripped body and big white zoom (100-400mm or 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II).

Manfrotto makes both aluminum and carbon fiber (CX in the name) legs. Carbon fiber is lighter, damps vibration better than aluminum, and is easier to handle in the cold (aluminum feels much colder to the touch), but it's more expensive. For both aluminum and carbon fiber, the 190 series has smaller diameter tubes, the 055 series has larger diameter tubes (bigger tubes support more weight). The number on the end of the CX series names is 3 or 4, and refers to the number of sections in the legs. Some will say fewer sections is more stable, but 3- and 4-section tripods have the same weight specification. More sections means a shorter folded length, but also an extra set of sections to extend so setup takes slightly longer.

I picked the 190CXPRO4 for it's light weight and the fact that when folded, it will fit in a carry-on rollerboard suitcase (the 3-section version is too long, although if you remove the ballhead it should fit - but that's a pain because it requires carrying tools).

 

[awinphoto]

I think the Manfrotto legs with the horizontal bars are the video supports, defnintely stay away from those.

They can do video but we needed them for our 4x5's and shoot, you could set them up near a tornado and they probably would stay still haha. Plus the quick release legs were wonderful but VERY heavy and overkill if you dont need it.

I use a Manfrotto 190CXPRO4 with a 488RC2 ballhead. It's a great tripod, and it easily supports a gripped body and big white zoom (100-400mm or 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II).

The number on the end of the CX series names is 3 or 4, and refers to the number of sections in the legs. Some will say fewer sections is more stable, but 3- and 4-section tripods have the same weight specification. More sections means a shorter folded length, but also an extra set of sections to extend so setup takes slightly longer.

I would be among the few who say the more sections it is the less stable it is on the heavier gear... Then again the same can be said by extending the center column. The more sections, the taller it potentially can get but only you can gauge how important that is for you. His tripod is a very nice tripod and a hair over $300 on adorama legs only. I would recommend an action grip ball head such as:

http://www.adorama.com/BG322RC2.html
http://www.adorama.com/BG3265.html ... They take a little getting used to but once you master them, they are easy to set up and run with. The cheaper one carries less load weight so that is something to consider.

tripods, well feel free to peruse
http://www.adorama.com/SearchSite/Default.aspx?searchinfo=carbon%20fiber%20tripod

They are all excellent choices however they each have their own quirks...

http://www.adorama.com/BG190CX3.html... another nice choice with 3 sections... But dont take my word for it.. go to your local store/stores and look at them... hold them... operate them... see what feels best for you given your new knowledge about tripods.

 

[neuroanatomist]

http://www.adorama.com/BG190CX3.html... another nice choice with 3 sections... But dont take my word for it.. go to your local store/stores and look at them... hold them... operate them... see what feels best for you given your new knowledge about tripods.

Did a double-take there, 190CX3 vs. 190CXPRO3. The "pro" version has a CF center column (the CX3 has an aluminum center column). Probably more importantly, the CXPRO3 has the adjustable center column - it can be turned 90° or even 180° to hang upside down from the legs, which I've used for a close-to-the-ground perspective on macro and landscape shots.

The difference between 3- and 4-section legs is probably real, but minor (I've tried both, and while the 3-section version 'feels' more stable, test shots with the same camera/lens on both did not show a difference). Raising the center column definitely reduces stability - that effect is far greater than the difference in number of leg sections.

 

[lady]

Well, my budget is complicated. I don't want to spend over $500 on the tripod and ball head for now, though it it would make a significant difference I might stretch up to $650. Height is important to me, and I also need something that can handle itself on uneven ground (trails, for example). If my budget is unrealistic, please let me know.

In short, I need...

• Flexible, sturdy legs for uneven ground such as trails, hikes, etc.
• Under $650, preferably under $500. May save up to stretch further if necessary.
• Stable and capable of handling a 300mm zoom lens in the future.
• Easy to travel with (though I may just get a second, cheaper, foldable tripod for traveling purposes)
• Over 60" tall.

 

[awinphoto]

Well shoot $500 on a tripod will give you a very fine tripod. Unlike cameras/lenses there are a plethora of different brands all competing in this market, each with it's own quirks and goods/bads/uglys. I cannot recommend any stronger than to not go by blind faith of the internet on this purchase because in many ways, you may become as intimate with your tripod as part of your gear as the camera itself... But what I would do is run some searches, I can even do an initial search on adorama... search under your criteria... 60" check, carbon fiber or light weight aluminum... heavy load (the more the load, the more stable it should be)... and then print out your list and take it with you to the store... compare prices, compare tripods... they should have several out on display... find those particular models on your list (and even some that may not be on that list as long as it's meeting your criteria via specs). Hint... even if the tripod is not on display but in stock, if the camera store thinks theres a potential of a sale, they'll help you take out the tripod and test them... anything to get a sale. Lastly, there are 2 heights to consider... a height with a closed center column and a height with an extended column... ONLY USE THE CENTER COLUMN FOR EMERGENCY OH CRAP SITUATIONS.... you severely lose stability and do not rely on that to always be there for you.

http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=itemlist&cat1=Tripods&cat2=Tripod%20Legs%20%26%20Leg/Head%20Combos&cat3=Leg%20%26%20Head%20Combo%20for%20Still%20%26%20Video&Feature2=10%20To%2019.9%20Lbs&Feature3=60%22%20to%2072%22&Startat=61

http://www.adorama.com/BGMT294A3327.html

http://www.adorama.com/BGMT294A3324.html

This is a good generic lists of aluminums and carbons meeting your broad needs of 11 plus load weight and 60" tall min. They are head/leg combos but you can get more specific and better gear mixing and matching... I stand by my recommendations on heads earlier and already gave you those links but for legs $300 an under...

http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=itemlist&cat1=Tripods&cat2=Tripod%20Legs%20%26%20Leg/Head%20Combos&cat3=Tripod%20Legs%20for%20Still%20%26%20Video&Feature3=10%20to%2019.9%20Lbs&Feature4=60%22%20to%2072%22&Startat=1

Broad search...

some highlights:

http://www.adorama.com/BG055CXPRO3.html

http://www.adorama.com/FPTPF1228.html flashpoint is adoramas house brand... you probably wont be able to test them at a local store but they are at a great value...

http://www.adorama.com/GTMT8260.html

http://www.adorama.com/SLP500DXLBK.html I've used this one... true to description and light weight despite look.

http://www.adorama.com/SLP723CF.html

http://www.adorama.com/SLP823CF.html

Anyways heres some quick suggestions to look at (at the stores...) play with them and see what feels the best for you and your budget. Good luck once again.

 

[UncleFester]

Well, my budget is complicated. I don't want to spend over $500 on the tripod and ball head for now, though it it would make a significant difference I might stretch up to $650. Height is important to me, and I also need something that can handle itself on uneven ground (trails, for example). If my budget is unrealistic, please let me know.

In short, I need...

• Flexible, sturdy legs for uneven ground such as trails, hikes, etc.
• Under $650, preferably under $500. May save up to stretch further if necessary.
• Stable and capable of handling a 300mm zoom lens in the future.
• Easy to travel with (though I may just get a second, cheaper, foldable tripod for traveling purposes)
• Over 60" tall.

My thoughts: you don't need to spend a lot of money on a tripod if you're just trying to stable a 3-4lb set-up for landscapes or long exposures. You don't need a fancy head. you just need something that will lock down and not fall over. Buy used if you can. Almost everyone has a couple a tripods they don't use. Get theirs. Then, if it's not working out - upgrade.



.

 

[awinphoto]

Well, my budget is complicated. I don't want to spend over $500 on the tripod and ball head for now, though it it would make a significant difference I might stretch up to $650. Height is important to me, and I also need something that can handle itself on uneven ground (trails, for example). If my budget is unrealistic, please let me know.

In short, I need...

• Flexible, sturdy legs for uneven ground such as trails, hikes, etc.
• Under $650, preferably under $500. May save up to stretch further if necessary.
• Stable and capable of handling a 300mm zoom lens in the future.
• Easy to travel with (though I may just get a second, cheaper, foldable tripod for traveling purposes)
• Over 60" tall.

My thoughts: you don't need to spend a lot of money on a tripod if you're just trying to stable a 3-4lb set-up for landscapes or long exposures. You don't need a fancy head. you just need something that will lock down and not fall over. Buy used if you can. Almost everyone has a couple a tripods they don't use. Get theirs. Then, if it's not working out - upgrade. .

Tripods are probably the one thing people skimp out on the most... can you blame them? Spending $1000-2000, another couple grand combined on lenses, etc... Whats next, a tripod? But then again a good tripod would be like buying a good car... If you buy the right one, it can last you almost forever. If you skimp out on one that "just locks down", you may have failures at bad times like I did with in the river shot. Like a good car, or lens for that sake, it can last you a long time, longer than any modern camera.

 

[CanineCandidsByL]

IMO, either spend big or spend small. I spent about $700 on a tripod and head nearly 15 years ago. Until I damaged the head a year ago, there was no reason to replace it. A great tripod now will still be, at least, a very good tripod a decade from now. They may continue to get lighter, but lighter works against steady. I have used super light tripods and I always end up having to achor them to stay steady. Fluid heads were a game changer, but didn't make the non-fluid any worse. Maybe one day we will see gyros systems for cheap, but that doesn't invalidate a steady base.

I do occasionaly forget my tripod. As such, I have bought some of those horrible $50 tripods. In a pinch, they can work and you don't worry about forgetting them or damaging them. The secret is to buy the simplest ones anchor them till the legs are starting to bend (seriously, get a ground anchor and teather it tight), keep the head very loose if doing following work (hey its just a pivot point), and if doing stationary work, expect to have to move the head back and forth a lot to get it in the right position.

Also, ask yourself if you will ever do video. If you will, you need either a head that can pan very smoothly (more smoothly than one normally needs for photo work) or you need the option to switch to a good video head. The major brands produce compatible heads for years. The cheap ones, if they are arround at all, may not be compatible with tripods make just a year ago.

 

[UncleFester]

Well, my budget is complicated. I don't want to spend over $500 on the tripod and ball head for now, though it it would make a significant difference I might stretch up to $650. Height is important to me, and I also need something that can handle itself on uneven ground (trails, for example). If my budget is unrealistic, please let me know.

In short, I need...

• Flexible, sturdy legs for uneven ground such as trails, hikes, etc.
• Under $650, preferably under $500. May save up to stretch further if necessary.
• Stable and capable of handling a 300mm zoom lens in the future.
• Easy to travel with (though I may just get a second, cheaper, foldable tripod for traveling purposes)
• Over 60" tall.

My thoughts: you don't need to spend a lot of money on a tripod if you're just trying to stable a 3-4lb set-up for landscapes or long exposures. You don't need a fancy head. you just need something that will lock down and not fall over. Buy used if you can. Almost everyone has a couple a tripods they don't use. Get theirs. Then, if it's not working out - upgrade. .

Tripods are probably the one thing people skimp out on the most... can you blame them? Spending $1000-2000, another couple grand combined on lenses, etc... Whats next, a tripod? But then again a good tripod would be like buying a good car... If you buy the right one, it can last you almost forever. If you skimp out on one that "just locks down", you may have failures at bad times like I did with in the river shot. Like a good car, or lens for that sake, it can last you a long time, longer than any modern camera.

"Tripods are probably the one thing people skimp out on the most..."

I'll bet it's one of the most miss-used photography items of all times (that along with buying lenses just to fill bag compartments).

"If you buy the right one, it can last you almost forever."

How's $79 for a clunker Slik back in 1986. Still have it. Still works like day one. Never failed. Ever.


And actually. It's more about weight, balance, and speed of setting up than longevity with cf tripods.

 

[UncleFester]

BTW, a few years ago I was walking through the woods and stumbled upon about a dozen really old cars ('30's,some '50's) and to this day I'm still kicking myself for not having brought a flash or soft box. I could have just hung the box from some branches and none-the-wiser.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

BTW, a few years ago I was walking through the woods and stumbled upon about a dozen really old cars ('30's,some '50's) and to this day I'm still kicking myself for not having brought a flash or soft box. I could have just hung the box from some branches and none-the-wiser.

Out where we live, the farmers just park their old cars, trucks, equipment out in a field or behinf their house and buy another running one. Some have a hundred or more. Its pretty incredible.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I'll bet it's one of the most miss-used photography items of all times

Do you mean under-used, as in people buy them and then don't use them? Possibly...but I wonder how much of that is because they bought a cheap one that was hard to use or didn't provide sufficient stability to make a difference in the shooting...

Or, do you mean misused, as in:

 

[UncleFester]

I'll bet it's one of the most miss-used photography items of all times

Do you mean under-used, as in people buy them and then don't use them? Possibly...but I wonder how much of that is because they bought a cheap one that was hard to use or didn't provide sufficient stability to make a difference in the shooting...

Or, do you mean misused, as in:

No. Over-used. Sorry, I don't have any pics.