Maybe it's just me, but I like my tripods to be nice and heavy. Unless you are hiking or backpacking with it, the added weight is only going to make it more stable. I have a cf tripod for my still camera, and I've always regretted purchasing it.

I think Wade is right on the mark; heavier is better unless portability is the primary concern. A lot of comparisons between aluminum and CF are apples and oranges because it isn't clear whether stability or light weight is more important.

Best,
Peter
www.parkfilms.com

I agree with Wade. For me, heavier is better (within reason -- I have a wonderful Davis and Sanford Mark II with the FM-25 head that you could mount an elephant on, and it weighs about as much), though I suspect it's from my days as a still photographer where one-to-six MINUTE exposures were not uncommon at all. The Davis and Sanford was a real lifesaver during a 14 hour marathon documentary shoot. By the end of the day, the tripod was holding ME up as well.

Martin

Hi Jack............
 

Nope, didn't mean that at all.

If you took note of Martins post a short way back, when he talks about different materials behaveing in different ways, that's what I was reffering to.

I have no doubt that a suitably designed and constructed CF tube can out run a similar metal tube without breaking a sweat.

It is, however, still a tube, with a tubes inherant design limitations. By it's very design it will flex in any direction when a lateral force is applied to it, for example panning with head drag applied.

The FiberTecs use a box girder design that to all intents and purposes is immune to lateral (rotational) flex of the tripod. To move it requires flexing a 50 mm CF box girder sideways - I cannot induce such flex using every ounce of strength and I weigh in at 240 lbs and mean with it.

There is no way on the planet a tube smaller than a scaffold pole could totally resist such flex with the usual weights and drag found in everyday videography.

Does that mean the Gitso's you pointed out are rubbish? Of course not. I actually like the look of them a lot.

I suppose my point is that the FiberTecs show no visible artifacts whatsoever when shooting HD with full 20X zoom under any conditions. I don't believe the same could be said of those Gitso's under the same circumstances.

However, if anyone's prepared to stump up with a set, I'll run 'em through my chamber of horrors and find out once and for all.


CS

Hello Chris
 

The Fibertec looks very nice and I like the 99 lbs. load limit.

Regarding flex, rotational or otherwise, I am amazed at how the Gitzo series 3 I recently got does not seem to have any. They just don't move.

The light weight does require some care to make sure they stay on the ground, but I am amazed at how solid they are. I just used them with the 1380 head and an XH-A1 to shoot a dance performance. Panning back and forth, slow or fast, and in the video I don't say any evidence of flex.

With the 100mm bowl Cartoni tripod I have, with mid spreader, there is a bit of flex, and in the 75mm bowl Cartoni there is a lot.

The Gitzo legs are not the most convenient to setup, but they do excel in the situations they are suited. They let you use a full size tripod in situations where a full size tripod is too heavy and awakward.

Same here. I just bought a Miller Solo 75mm alum. sticks, and this tripod is "twisting" even at 4' tall, when I apply drug to the pan. My Gitzo 1410 tripod I sold (but still have one more) was a aluminum and at 7 1/2' hight was STABLE never "twisted" at all. It's amazing. If I can turn back the time, i never sell that beauty. The Miller is nice, about half of the weight but who cares. I never put on my back for hiking. Problem is it's "twisting" when pan drug is applied. For me it's almost useless.

Laszlo