Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/07/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Joseph, I work in television (as a producer/director) and can talk with some knowledge of carbon fibre tripods. They are rigid, but rigidity is not everything, if you work in windy conditions you need wieght as well, and the carbon fibre tripod was designed to reduce the weight carried in a tripod whilst still offering rigidity. So, they're great in studios, for example, or non windy conditions, and there's always the argument that a traditional video camera is quite heavy so that helps too, BUT, most cameramen would choose a stainless steel tripod to use if they didn't have to carry it themselves, it's just so much more rigid and stable because of the weight. The weight of a 35mm camera is peanuts in comparison (to a video camera) and as such it isn't a great idea to stick one on an expensive carbon fibre tripod. Some people would suggest hanging a sack of stones from the tripod to increase the weight, sure, that's the best way to get the solidity from carbon fibre. The fluid head is largely irrellevant, though again it adds weight to decrease the risk of camera shake. The main advantage of a fluid head is that the camera platform can easily (in one action) be levelled in all planes, and then smooth pans made in all 3 planes too. As we don't pan in stills photography the second use is unneccersary and the first is arguably useful. A normal pan and tilt head is usually just as useful for stills photography. Carbon fibre is great for monopods however, when those are used there is pressure exerted downwards and therefore the rigidity is maximised. 'Hope this helps. Jem ---------- There is no question that good equipment is required to obtain good results. However I fail to see how a "a carbon fibre television tripod with a fluid head " can be better than a good conventional tripod. Do you (or anyone else) have any thoughts on this point? Joseph Codispoti