why buy an expensive tripod?

[silentanarchy]

I was wondering if there is a benefit to an expensive tripod. I know the tripod head is important. So why not get a $20 tripod and get an expensive head.

[Peter Vaughan Truslow]

I was wondering if there is a benefit to an expensive tripod. I know the tripod head is important. So why not get a $20 tripod and get an expensive head.

an inexpensive tripod will have wobbly joints and unstable legs.

I have a 30 year old stainless steel tripod that's got a crappy head, but what it has is stability.

[ShadowCaptain]

I was wondering if there is a benefit to an expensive tripod. I know the tripod head is important. So why not get a $20 tripod and get an expensive head.

 

Because there is more to a tripod than just a head

 

Weight, strength, Build quality, materials (steel, carbon fibre etc) leg stability, features such as inverting the head, laying the tripod legs flat, weight hooks 

[EarthboundHero]

A good tripod has better bearings for smoother movements. Also, what everyone else said.

[Guest]

It's like a chair.

 

You can get a cheap one but it will be horrible after a couple of years.

[Bsmith]

mostly reliability, cheap tripods sometimes aren't even verified for a certain weight they claim or don't have anything noted at all.

 

example:

my old full steel tripod form unkown age doesn't have a known weight limitation, the legs already bend when i put my 1200D with 18-200mm lens(totals 1.2kg) on it, while my joby gorrilapod can handle up to 3KG

[Silvercall]

I always refer to this article by on the Strobist website: http://strobist.blogspot.ca/2014/09/choosing-tripod.html

 

Good Tripods aren't cheap and cheap tripods aren't good....

 

A quality tripod will be made of quality material that will reduce vibrations.  Important especially for longer exposures, you want the tripod to be as stable as possible.  The tripod should be rated for the weight that you need it to carry.  A lot of the cheaper tripods are only good for lighter gear and will not hold the weight of a pro camera and lens.  A good tripod will have a reliable leg locking mechanism.  The last thing you want is for your legs to collapse under the weight of your gear or due to mechanical failure.  The warranty is usually better with quality tripods.  If you want a light but stable tripod, you will most likely have to pay more.

 

A tripod can be TWO of the following, but rarely all three:  CHEAP, LIGHT, STABLE

 

Its up to you to decide what you need in a tripod.  I have two tripods.  I have a small carbon fiber Gitzo tripod that I take on hikes.  It is relatively small, very light but was pretty expensive.  It holds the gear that I typically take with me when I hit the trails or travel.  My second tripod is an aluminum Manfrotto that can hold anything I throw at it, was a lot cheaper than my Gitzo but is big and somewhat heavy.  I use it for planned shoots.

[Williamchan87]

A high quality tripod does a few things, its more stable, it can hold more, weight, can be lighter, more functions, better built

[silentanarchy]

My mom has had her $30 tripod for over 15 years and it still looks new. It doesn't wobble. The only thing it doesn't do is reduce vibration.

[Silvercall]

Again, it really depends on what you need. If you need the best image quality, you probably shouldn't skimp on your tripod. If you don't care for IQ and just need quick shots, or if you think a "better" tripod won't benefit you, stick with what you have.

[Blade of Grass]

My mom has had her $30 tripod for over 15 years and it still looks new. It doesn't wobble. The only thing it doesn't do is reduce vibration.

No offense, but I'm doubtful it was new $30, or that it doesn't wobble. Extremely unlikely.

Then again, I could be completely wrong and things were that different back then, but currently, you'll need to spend minimum $100 (on average I would say) to get something half decent.

A good quality tripod will also last you a long time, a cheap one will break.

[EpicGeekonFire]

You buy an expensive camera to hold your expensive camera. It's for better stability and strength. Have you seen profession rigs/cameras?

[GzeroD]

You buy an expensive camera to hold your expensive camera. 

 

 

When I read this I instantly pictured a EOS 5D mounted to another EOS 5D with a piece of threaded rod.

[Dredgy]

The difference is amazing.

I used a $60 tripod for a while until it started buckling and upgraded to something worth $600 and it is the greatest thing ever, though Ive sacrificed portability.

[Williamchan87]

My mom has had her $30 tripod for over 15 years and it still looks new. It doesn't wobble. The only thing it doesn't do is reduce vibration.

well first it depends on what camera you put on the tripod, it prob can hold a compact no problem, also depends on the type of tripod head, quick release. Also have in mind 15 years ago $30 is like nowadays $45. There are a few decent cheap tripods out there that are fine with lighter cameras for normal usuages like the Slik Sprint/Slik compact.

[Nexxus]

out of curiosity I have a manfrotto 728B. How would those who are more experienced then me see this one? (ive only used 2 tripods and mock my buddies that had a hook on the bottom of the center shaft so you could hang...shit off it to help keep it more stable)

[vembutech]

Tryipod is main to hold camera and also you want a tripod to hold your camera steady. That is the absolute, most important reason for getting one. Expensive tripods are simply more stable and more durable.

[Williamchan87]

out of curiosity I have a manfrotto 728B. How would those who are more experienced then me see this one? (ive only used 2 tripods and mock my buddies that had a hook on the bottom of the center shaft so you could hang...shit off it to help keep it more stable)

It's an alright tripod, the head seems to sag a bit after it's tightened and has a camera on it

[Nexxus]

It's an alright tripod, the head seems to sag a bit after it's tightened and has a camera on it

Really? never noticed that. but im just using a d40 which I know is pretty lightweight in terms of dslrs

[creatip123]

Stumbled upon this sub, looks lively here

 

This is my own experience: At this one particular time, my main tripod was borrowed by someone, so I used my 'backup' tripod to shoot in my studio. This backup tripod was actually given to me (free). Don't know the brand or anything, but it's made of thick aluminium pipes. Heavy as a brick, but the legs were also very strong. I couldn't bend it with my hands, at all. I could even step on one section of the leg, and it still held its shape. So I thought, yeah this tripod should be strong enough.

 

The problem lies in the locking mechanisms, which turned out to be utter craps. After shooting, I put it aside, and one of the leg locking failed, slammed my camera to the ground. To be clear, there was nothing wrong with the legs themselves, it's the locking mechanisms. Cost me a lens, 70-200 f2.8. Painful? You bet!!

 

Lesson learnt. After I got a replacement (I need the 70-200 for my jobs), I went and bought a Manfrotto, and the one that used to be my main tripod now becomes my backup tripod. 

[HatallaS]

Don't get tripods. Get a monopod with feet. It's easier to carry and more polivalent.

[Silvercall]

Don't get tripods. Get a monopod with feet. It's easier to carry and more polivalent.

 

These are meant for two totally different uses.  When you need a tripod, a monopod won't cut it...  Monopods have their place, but they cannot replace a tripod when the situation calls for one... 

 

For example, taking photos on a slope or hill.  Or taking photos in a moving water like a stream or river. Or taking photos where the ground is uneven....  I would choose a tripod over a monopod anyday...