Which Gitzo: GT3532LS or GT3542LS?

[EvilTed]

I toyed with the idea of getting a RRS 34L but it is a lot more expensive for a California resident than the Gitzo.
I bought a Gitzo GT3542LS for $724 from B&H and use an Arca Swiss Z1 + RSS quick release clamp.

The whole kit is cheaper out the door than the RSS 34L.

ET

 

[jrista]

Aye, I couldn't justify the TVS-34L. It sounds really cool, and I am sure the technology is very advanced. It can apparently handle more than 100 pounds of load, too. However...I won't be putting 100 pounds of load on my tripod. Hell, I probably won't ever put 50 pounds of load on it. So, despite all of its more advanced awesomeness, I really couldn't justify the nearly-double cost.

I pulled the trigger on the GT3542XLS. I figure I'll only need to use three and a half legs most of the time, which is fine...that should mean better stability. I did want the extra flexibility to drop one of the legs down the side of a hill or mountain, though, to get better stability on uneven terrain. I think it should make it easier to get my camera right up to eye level than a 57" tripod, too. Additionally, for birds in flight, where the lens is pointed up and the viewfinder tends to drop a couple inches, the option for greater height would also be there.

I saved a bundle by buying through Amazon, and only spent about $650. That is about 60% the cost of the TVS-34L, however I think it is more like 90% as good...so it feels like a great deal to me. Should arrive tomorrow, so I'm pretty excited! Will be nice to use a more stable tripod than I have for the last year (my old one, even before breaking, was never really great...it was my first tripod ever, about four years old, a rather creaky thing, and it tended to shift at the upper joint where the legs met the tripod plate.)

 

[Flemming]

Very interesting topic. I am 6"3 (191 cm) and have been eyeing the GT3542XLS as well. I have also looked at the RRS but since I am being located in Europe it will be very expensive after added VAT and import duties. Regarding the GT3542XLS I have been wondering the following. Since it so tall, I recon it will often be used with the last section only partially extended. How difficult is it to adjust the partially extended legs to make it level. Is it easy or does it involve a lot of fidling to get all 3 legs evenly extended?

What do you think.

/Flemming

 

[Loswr]

How difficult is it to adjust the partially extended legs to make it level. Is it easy or does it involve a lot of fidling to get all 3 legs evenly extended?

Not too difficult to get close (I usually only partly extend the last leg sections on my TVC-33). But unless you're shooting on flat ground (and sometimes even then), getting the platform perfectly level does mean fiddling. But with a ballhead, there's no need to level the platform. With a gimbal head, there is - that's why I recommend the leveling base - you don't need to worry about the legs to get the platform level.

 

[dolina]

The suggested Gitzo tripod legs that has been suggested are the 3, 4 and 5 Series for the 600mm IS II. I'm eying the GT3542LS.

I am also looking for legs as well. Will be attaching it to the Mongoose 3.6 due to the weight. It weighs 1 lbs. 8 ounce or about 680g.

 

[Flemming]

Not too difficult to get close (I usually only partly extend the last leg sections on my TVC-33). But unless you're shooting on flat ground (and sometimes even then), getting the platform perfectly level does mean fiddling. But with a ballhead, there's no need to level the platform. With a gimbal head, there is - that's why I recommend the leveling base - you don't need to worry about the legs to get the platform level.

Thanks. Really helpful info.

 

[deleteme]

I looked at the RRS tripods and went with a Gitzo 5532LS.
I liked the RRS but my local camera store stocks Gitzo.
I cannot imagine any gear that I may own in the future that would tax this tripod.
Yes its heavy-ish but I shot mostly architecture and transport is not an issue.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Three years ago I bought a GT3541LS and it's extraordinarily stable compared to any Manfrotto I've tried. But it's achillies heel is sand and sea water. In fact it's so bad in coastal conditions that they are appalling. I recently did a trip on the Lincolnshire coast shooting grey seals and the tripod needs so many replacement parts in only 9 hours of shooting. It needs three lower tubes and all the locking joints need replacing.
In my opinion, these tripods are useless in extream sea salt and sandy conditions. They literally seize up or fall apart.

 

[jrista]

Well, received my new tripod a short while ago. It is a thing of beauty, I'll definitely offer that. I think I may have...miscalculated...the height though. This thing is WAAAY TALL. I all four leg sections fully extended, it is way, way above my head. Even with only three out of four sections extended, with my Jobu Pro 2 gimbal head and camera attached, the viewfinder is right at the very top of my head. I guess I forgot to account for the fact that my eyes are actually a couple inches below the top of my head. Even though I am just over 6' tall, my eye level is more like 5'8" high.. To get it all set for eye level, I have to drop the top section a couple inches, at which point it ends up just right for eye level.

I may end up having to return this in favor of the GT3532LS or GT3542LS. I am not sure I'll EVER use the fourth leg section, in which case this thing is larger at minimum size, heavier, and slightly bulkier than I really need. I guess there are a few cases where a slight overhead advantage might be worthwhile, such as BIF, or maybe night sky photography...but in general...yeah, this puppy is freakin super-tall!

Three years ago I bought a GT3541LS and it's extraordinarily stable compared to any Manfrotto I've tried. But it's achillies heel is sand and sea water. In fact it's so bad in coastal conditions that they are appalling. I recently did a trip on the Lincolnshire coast shooting grey seals and the tripod needs so many replacement parts in only 9 hours of shooting. It needs three lower tubes and all the locking joints need replacing.
In my opinion, these tripods are useless in extream sea salt and sandy conditions. They literally seize up or fall apart.

That is really surprising to hear. While I think the RRS sounds awesome, and would have picked one up instead if the price had been right, I read a LOT of bird photographer blogs and personal sites. Just about all of them, including Art Morris who is often thought of as the worlds premier bird photographer, use Gitzo on sandy beaches on a continuous basis. Many also frequently use them IN sea water if that is what is necessary to get the shot. Art Morris has some good articles about the care and maintenance of Gitzo tripods, with his preferred being the GT3532LS.

 

[Loswr]

Well, received my new tripod a short while ago. It is a thing of beauty, I'll definitely offer that. I think I may have...miscalculated...the height though. This thing is WAAAY TALL.

Don't say you weren't warned...

For that reason, I'd consider the 3542XLS instead of the 3452LS (although that's really a tall set of legs!). XLS too tall, LS too short, TVC-34L would be just right.

 

[jrista]

Well, received my new tripod a short while ago. It is a thing of beauty, I'll definitely offer that. I think I may have...miscalculated...the height though. This thing is WAAAY TALL.

Don't say you weren't warned...

For that reason, I'd consider the 3542XLS instead of the 3452LS (although that's really a tall set of legs!). XLS too tall, LS too short, TVC-34L would be just right.

Hah, true...I was warned. Although you also said the LS would be too short! Actually, I think it will be just perfect for the bird photography. On top of eye height, you still have to lean into the camera a bit, which shaves off about another inch. I've measured it several times now, and the height I need when I am fully forward, looking into the viewfinder, with the lens pointed down towards the relatively near ground, is about 63" (when pointed at the sky, it is about 60"). The other Gizo pods are 58" high, and the Jobu adds another 68", which puts it about 5" higher than I need in the worst-case scenario. I think even a 68" high tripod would be too much, as with the Jobu attached, I'm back to 78" high, or 15" too tall!

Well, live and learn, I guess.

 

[dolina]

Went cheap with the Manfrotto and really regretted buying it. I ended up buying a Gitzo that I am superbly happy with.

Three years ago I bought a GT3541LS and it's extraordinarily stable compared to any Manfrotto I've tried. But it's achillies heel is sand and sea water. In fact it's so bad in coastal conditions that they are appalling. I recently did a trip on the Lincolnshire coast shooting grey seals and the tripod needs so many replacement parts in only 9 hours of shooting. It needs three lower tubes and all the locking joints need replacing.
In my opinion, these tripods are useless in extream sea salt and sandy conditions. They literally seize up or fall apart.

 

[jrista]

I will say this...the design of the GT3542XLS is wonderful. I have not had the pleasure of trying out the RRS tripod in person, so it may be a bit above this tripod. But...WOW. This thing is ROCK-SOLID. I locked down the Jobu, started recording video, then stomped around on my deck (which is getting a little rickety). The camera hardly registered any vibration at all, where as my old tripod usually registered a ton.

I can't imagine needing extra height with my Jobu attached to this thing, and the Jobu is very similar in design and dimensions to the Wymberly and Mongoose. I'd suspect you would have around 68" of total height, and around a 65" eye height with a camera attached to any one of those tripods, which is just about perfect for a 6' person. I figure I'll need some additional height for landscape photography, especially if I need to drop a leg down a slope or something for better leveling. Given the stability of the GT3542XLS at full extension, I am not worried about using a center pole base to give me the extra height I need. With the wide angle lenses I use for landscapes, the tiny amount of vibration that might actually reach the camera shouldn't be an issue (especially with a camera with a less-dense sensor than the 7D.)

So, for those of you who are wondering about what tripod to get next, and are interested in Gitzo Systematic...I'd say only consider the XLS if you are nearly 7' tall!!! I can't imagine any other reason someone would buy this thing for general purpose use. If you really need the "overhead" capability, then it will serve that need superbly well. The base was about a foot over my head when fully extended, and with the Jobu attached, the camera was nearly 2 feet over my head. For all other circumstances, the GT3532LS or GT3542LS will probably serve you well. I had a little bit of a hard time with the four leg sections on the XLS, and not just because the legs were so long. I've ordered the GT3532LS as the replacement instead, as I think the fewer leg sections will be easier to work with.

Well, hope that information helps other prospective buyers out. If you are a giant, get the XLS. If not, get one of the other Systematics. If you got the cash, the RRS sounds pretty awesome, but I would have to actually test one out side-by-side with my Gitzo to really feel out any real-world differences. I wouldn't be hanging from the tripod myself, either...and I suspect the differences are minor.

 

[docholliday]

Went cheap with the Manfrotto and really regretted buying it. I ended up buying a Gitzo that I am superbly happy with.

Three years ago I bought a GT3541LS and it's extraordinarily stable compared to any Manfrotto I've tried. But it's achillies heel is sand and sea water. In fact it's so bad in coastal conditions that they are appalling. I recently did a trip on the Lincolnshire coast shooting grey seals and the tripod needs so many replacement parts in only 9 hours of shooting. It needs three lower tubes and all the locking joints need replacing.
In my opinion, these tripods are useless in extream sea salt and sandy conditions. They literally seize up or fall apart.

I had a Bogen/Manfrotto that shattered on me at 20F - and dropped my Hasselblad 203FE with 110/2 on the ground when I was shooting. Yeah, that was the last of my touching anything Manfotto branded.

 

[dolina]

Not to say Manfrotto does not have it's uses but it isn't to be used with gear exceeding $4,000.

You are courting trouble if you do.

Went cheap with the Manfrotto and really regretted buying it. I ended up buying a Gitzo that I am superbly happy with.

Three years ago I bought a GT3541LS and it's extraordinarily stable compared to any Manfrotto I've tried. But it's achillies heel is sand and sea water. In fact it's so bad in coastal conditions that they are appalling. I recently did a trip on the Lincolnshire coast shooting grey seals and the tripod needs so many replacement parts in only 9 hours of shooting. It needs three lower tubes and all the locking joints need replacing.
In my opinion, these tripods are useless in extream sea salt and sandy conditions. They literally seize up or fall apart.

I had a Bogen/Manfrotto that shattered on me at 20F - and dropped my Hasselblad 203FE with 110/2 on the ground when I was shooting. Yeah, that was the last of my touching anything Manfotto branded.