Fs100 weight fully loaded
 

I'm trying to decide on a tripod, no this isn't a "which tripod do you suggest" thread. I'm curious if a tripod rated for 11 pounds max, would be good enough for a fully outfitted fs100? I plan on outfitting with full rails, matte box, and possibly monitor. I see the camera body only is 2.2 pounds. Not having much experience with all this, I'm wondering about the added weight on all the accessories? I won't always be fully loaded, so I'm trying to pick a tripod that is good both with a light camera, and loaded down. The rating of my first choice is 11 pounds max, while my 2nd choice is 20 pounds. Although I do worry the 2nd choice, while giving me headroom for the accessories, might not be as good at the light end.

Any thoughts from fs100 owners?

Thanks as always for the advice,
Jeff

Re: Fs100 weight fully loaded
 

My advice is not to cut it too close. Buy the biggest, best, tripod you can afford - even if that means foregoing a matte box or other toys. A tripod/head is the most important accessory you will ever buy and should outlast your next few cameras -- after the FS100 is long gone. I'm talking about investing in something you will be happy with for the next 10-15 years. Don't skimp. Spend the money.

Any setup that is good for a heavy configuration should be fine for a light configuration, too. My Cameras range from 2 to 35 pounds, and I use the same tripod/heads with all of them.

Re: Fs100 weight fully loaded
 

I agree with you Doug. My price range is in the $1500 area. I just wasn't sure how much weight all the support equipment might add. I'm also looking at getting a Kessler crane, and will be getting their tripod support system for that (along with their k-pod, and dolly system). I'm thinking I can go with the lower rated tripod (Vinten Vision Blue, in case anyone is wondering). I should be able to use that for all but the heaviest loads, which at that point I don't need to be as portable, and the k-pod system can take over.

Re: Fs100 weight fully loaded
 

For the smaller cameras I use my old Ronford F4 head, which was designed for 16mm and has a 150mm bowl. The surprising thing is that often in the behind the scenes documentaries for BBC landmark series the F4 is still in use as the tripod head. I think they stopped making them in the early 1990s and replaced it with with a counterbalanced model. So good quality tripods really last and you should go for the best you can afford..

BTW I use the carbon fibre legs from my large Sachtler head, it's amazingly quick to set up compared to the lighter tripods and not too heavy.

Re: Fs100 weight fully loaded
 

While I generally agree with Doug that you should buy the best tripod you can afford, I do have one reservation:

- it's not always true that "Any setup that is good for a heavy configuration should be fine for a light configuration, too".

Why? Simply because - when you check some good head specs - you will find both the upper AND the lower payload limits. And this means that putting a very lightweight setup (like the naked FS100 on a heavy-duty tripod with high payload, you will not be able to adjust the counterbalance spring to low enough tension, and the camera will spring back at you when tilted.

On the other hand, when choosing the upper payload limit of a head to buy, it's not only the rig's maximum weight that you should consider. Two rigs of the same weight, but different CoG heights, will demand quite different head's capabilities!

Hope this helps,

Piotr

Re: Fs100 weight fully loaded
 

Good point Piotr. I am spoiled by my O'Connor tripod and forget that cheaper brands are not as sophisticated.

Re: Fs100 weight fully loaded
 

Checking the Sachtler Video 18 specs, you're talking about a minimum weight of possibly 2.1Kg, so you might get away with a rigged up FS100, but not a basic camera body.