ClubSNAP Photography Forums

Go Back   ClubSNAP Photography Forums > Equipment Discussions > Fujifilm


 
Thread Tools
Old 8th January 2003   #1
mpenza
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 13,397
Default Stabilising a tripod....

Use a big head! It really helps.... however, it made the light and compact tripod much heavier



(afternote: the small ballhead is mounted just to show the relative size... it won't be mounted on the big ballhead in actual use. )

Last edited by mpenza; 8th January 2003 at 11:05 PM.
mpenza is offline  
Old 8th January 2003   #2
Kei
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,090
Default




u sure it wouldn't topple more easily ?
Kei is offline  
Old 8th January 2003   #3
Zerstorer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,610
Default

Man..you are abusing your sprint pro.

Aren't the legs buckling at all this weight?

Tried portrait orientation with flash+tele?
Zerstorer is offline  
Sponsored Link
Old 8th January 2003   #4
SzennyBoy
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 694
Default

Actually, the most stable position for the ball head to be on the tripod is to be at the base of the column or as low down as possible on a adjustable column!
SzennyBoy is offline  
Old 8th January 2003   #5
mpenza
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 13,397
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Zerstorer
Man..you are abusing your sprint pro.

Aren't the legs buckling at all this weight?

Tried portrait orientation with flash+tele?
nah... the legs are still standing strong. It's meant to take 2kg anyway..... I tried portrait orientation with tele and it's ok... haven't tried the flash yet. I doubt the original ballhead would be stable though when the tele is mounted.
mpenza is offline  
Old 8th January 2003   #6
mpenza
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 13,397
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Keito



u sure it wouldn't topple more easily ?
hee hee... have to be careful I guess. But it's more stable than with just the small ballhead. The weight down the centre helps in stabilising.
mpenza is offline  
Old 8th January 2003   #7
mpenza
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 13,397
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by SzennyBoy
Actually, the most stable position for the ball head to be on the tripod is to be at the base of the column or as low down as possible on a adjustable column!
True!
mpenza is offline  
Old 8th January 2003   #8
ckiang
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 6,597
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by mpenza


True!
Actually, you've just made it a bit more unstable.

Regards
CK
ckiang is offline  
Old 8th January 2003   #9
mpenza
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 13,397
Default

Hmm.... Oh! I won't be using the small ballhead on the big ballhead would just use one of them at any time Guess I should have been clear about that in the original post

Blur me....
mpenza is offline  
Old 8th January 2003   #10
Pricess Leia
Guests
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I suggest you read this before your modification goes anywhere else!!

http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/tuto...ods/index.html
 
Old 8th January 2003   #11
mpenza
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 13,397
Default

Thanks Princess The link was informative.
mpenza is offline  
Old 8th January 2003   #12
tsdh
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 360
Default

I'm not sure about big ball-head.
So far, a simple method I use to stabilise the tripod: by hanging a weight down the center column (can be the camera bag with lenses inside), and put a bag leaning to the tripod's leg.
Then make it even better by using Darren's Arcatech ball head
tsdh is offline  
Old 8th January 2003   #13
Zerstorer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,610
Default

Hmm..in theory, wouldn't this be more unstable? Since the horizontal displacement of the of the camera (when the base ballhead is oriented away from vertical) is actually greater in this config than with the original config?
Zerstorer is offline  
Old 8th January 2003   #14
mpenza
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 13,397
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Zerstorer
Hmm..in theory, wouldn't this be more unstable? Since the horizontal displacement of the of the camera (when the base ballhead is oriented away from vertical) is actually greater in this config than with the original config?
It's a balance I guess. With the small ball head, the whole CG (above the centre column) is towards the top of the camera (portrait orientation). With the big ball head, the CG is shifted more towards the ballhead....

Last edited by mpenza; 9th January 2003 at 01:30 AM.
mpenza is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +8. The time now is 10:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2002 - 2009 ClubSNAP.com
Page generated in 0.09606 seconds with 7 queries