Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 39

Thread: Tripod for Macro (suitable for women)

  1. #1

    Default Tripod for Macro (suitable for women)

    As I am female, i don't think i can carry a heavy tripod (if together with my existing gear).
    Any recommendations for a tripod that is somewhat weight-friendly and suitable for macro?
    I do mainly macro these days.
    How much do i need to spend?
    Not really particular about brands (tripod and ballhead) as long as it is flexible enough for macro and light enough for me to lug around.
    thanks


  2. #2

    Default Re: Tripod for Macro (suitable for women)

    Most good tripods are very lightweight already. I suggest you simply do a search on here for "recmmend tripod" to see the 100+ threads on this already.
    Alpha

  3. #3
    Senior Member Leong23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    within myself
    Posts
    3,186

    Default Re: Tripod for Macro (suitable for women)

    At a start, Manfrotto 190XPRO is relatively good and cheap.

    If you mainly doing macro and foresee that you will be holding on doing it for sometime, invest a Gitzo explorer series.

    A good ballhead is also very important.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Tripod for Macro (suitable for women)

    Quote Originally Posted by mimeow View Post
    As I am female, i don't think i can carry a heavy tripod (if together with my existing gear).
    Any recommendations for a tripod that is somewhat weight-friendly and suitable for macro?
    I do mainly macro these days.
    How much do i need to spend?
    Not really particular about brands (tripod and ballhead) as long as it is flexible enough for macro and light enough for me to lug around.
    thanks

    If weight is your concern then look for carbon-fibre, preferably a Gitzo.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Legs or head more impt for Macro?

    Hi Rashkae, thanks for the reply.

    Was reading some reviews here and noticed the manfrotto 190cxpro3 and pro4 paired with the 488Rc2 seems okay.
    Worth plonking so much on a pricey tripod?
    The reviewers never said whether the setting up was fast or not in terms or the center column being adjusted horizontally when out shooting.
    I don't think i can pay for a gitzo because i won't have enough $ for the ballhead.
    And if i go for the manfrotto, i can't afford a markins.

    For Macro, which is more impt?
    Legs? or head?

  6. #6
    Senior Member Leong23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    within myself
    Posts
    3,186

    Default Re: Legs or head more impt for Macro?

    Quote Originally Posted by mimeow View Post
    Hi Rashkae, thanks for the reply.

    Was reading some reviews here and noticed the manfrotto 190cxpro3 and pro4 paired with the 488Rc2 seems okay.
    Worth plonking so much on a pricey tripod?
    The reviewers never said whether the setting up was fast or not in terms or the center column being adjusted horizontally when out shooting.
    I don't think i can pay for a gitzo because i won't have enough $ for the ballhead.
    And if i go for the manfrotto, i can't afford a markins.

    For Macro, which is more impt?
    Legs? or head?
    Get a better head.....if not the creep will drive you crazy......

    Maybe you can state your budget, easier for ppls to advise you.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Legs or head more impt for Macro?

    Quote Originally Posted by mimeow View Post
    Hi Rashkae, thanks for the reply.

    Was reading some reviews here and noticed the manfrotto 190cxpro3 and pro4 paired with the 488Rc2 seems okay.
    Worth plonking so much on a pricey tripod?
    The reviewers never said whether the setting up was fast or not in terms or the center column being adjusted horizontally when out shooting.
    I don't think i can pay for a gitzo because i won't have enough $ for the ballhead.
    And if i go for the manfrotto, i can't afford a markins.

    For Macro, which is more impt?
    Legs? or head?
    forget about Manfrooto ballheads, they creep. Markins is much better. But you should not get anything worse than Manfrotto or Slik legs.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Legs or head more impt for Macro?

    Quote Originally Posted by Leong23 View Post
    Get a better head.....if not the creep will drive you crazy......

    Maybe you can state your budget, easier for ppls to advise you.
    er.. i think i can afford up to the follow types of config (not too sure about other tripod prices but can use these as a base)

    1) 190cxpro3 + 488rc2
    2) Situi T-1004 + Markins Q3T

  9. #9
    Senior Member Galdor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Planet Gaia
    Posts
    9,544

    Default Re: Tripod for Macro (suitable for women)

    A tripod must be steady enough to be able to hold the weight of the head together with your gears. A carbon fibre tripod will be lighter than the common ones we see/use but it's more expensive.

    Before we can recommend something to you, please tell us what are your gears. Anyway, most people do not use a tripod for macros.
    Minolta. Konica Minolta. Sony

  10. #10
    Senior Member Leong23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    within myself
    Posts
    3,186

    Default Re: Legs or head more impt for Macro?

    Quote Originally Posted by mimeow View Post
    er.. i think i can afford up to the follow types of config (not too sure about other tripod prices but can use these as a base)

    1) 190cxpro3 + 488rc2
    2) Situi T-1004 + Markins Q3T
    Let say your budget is S$600......will not ask you to up you budget because most of us here is shooting for hobby.......

    I personally recommend.........Kangrinpoche NB-1 + QR Plate + Manofrotto 190XPRO......price will be around there......

    It wouldn't be light......but it is very stable........
    My Kangrinpoche NB1 can support
    D700 + 200mm macro + 2 x Wimberley Macro bracket + 3x flashes without much problem, of course markin will be better.

    Weight differences between a CF tripod and a Aluminium tripod is not very big......the major advantage of CF tripod when shooting macro is the dampering effect to reduce vibration.

    When time passes, then you might want to slowly upgrade you gears if you still doing it often.
    Last edited by Leong23; 8th July 2009 at 02:50 PM.

  11. #11
    Member Cartman2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    1,732

    Default Re: Tripod for Macro (suitable for women)

    At a start, Manfrotto 190XPRO is relatively good and cheap.
    Yes. but it is also heavy.

  12. #12

    Default Re: Tripod for Macro (suitable for women)

    Quote Originally Posted by Galdor View Post
    A tripod must be steady enough to be able to hold the weight of the head together with your gears. A carbon fibre tripod will be lighter than the common ones we see/use but it's more expensive.

    Before we can recommend something to you, please tell us what are your gears. Anyway, most people do not use a tripod for macros.
    okie.. i'm using a d80 + sp90 + sb600 and might add on a ring flash.
    may get a tele (max 200mm)
    i usually shoot handheld but is thinking of a tripod to help along with flower shots (and the occassional low light situations).
    * er... i got myself a remote shutter already (although no tripod yet)

  13. #13
    Senior Member Leong23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    within myself
    Posts
    3,186

    Default Re: Tripod for Macro (suitable for women)

    Quote Originally Posted by Cartman2000 View Post
    Yes. but it is also heavy.
    If one interested in nature-photography....he/she must prepared to carry certain amount of load to the field and trek to the particular location. It is physical demanding, or you can hire a porter to carry for you. Think most of the serious birders and macro shooters will know where am i coming from.

    Everyone also wish to have a light and stable setup, but the many time we have to work within the budget.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Legs or head more impt for Macro?

    Quote Originally Posted by Leong23 View Post
    I personally recommend.........Kangrinpoche NB-1 + QR Plate + Manofrotto 190XPRO......price will be around there......
    The NB-1 is very solid but very heavy too (0.74kg?). The TS is looking at the Markins Q3T, the equivalent Kangrinpoche would be an NB-3 (0.34kg?), which might still be good enough for her.

  15. #15
    Senior Member Leong23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    within myself
    Posts
    3,186

    Default Re: Legs or head more impt for Macro?

    Quote Originally Posted by An drew View Post
    The NB-1 is very solid but very heavy too (0.74kg?). The TS is looking at the Markins Q3T, the equivalent Kangrinpoche would be an NB-3 (0.34kg?), which might still be good enough for her.
    But Q3T will cost her around $480 without QR Plate........unless she is willing up her budget.....

    Not sure about the performance of NB-3, so can't comments much.

  16. #16

    Default Re: Legs or head more impt for Macro?

    Quote Originally Posted by Leong23 View Post
    But Q3T will cost her around $480 without QR Plate........unless she is willing up her budget.....

    Not sure about the performance of NB-3, so can't comments much.
    Yes, Kangrinpoche is cheaper, NB-3 is below $400. The Q3T is smoother than the NB-3, but NB-3 should be good enuff

  17. #17

    Default Re: Legs or head more impt for Macro?

    how much is the QR for the markins?

  18. #18
    Senior Member Galdor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Planet Gaia
    Posts
    9,544

    Default Re: Tripod for Macro (suitable for women)

    Quote Originally Posted by mimeow View Post
    okie.. i'm using a d80 + sp90 + sb600 and might add on a ring flash.
    may get a tele (max 200mm)
    i usually shoot handheld but is thinking of a tripod to help along with flower shots (and the occassional low light situations).
    * er... i got myself a remote shutter already (although no tripod yet)
    I guess you can go for the 190cxpro3 + 488rc2 setup bah. Go to the shop to try and see if you're ok with the weight cos personally I find it too heavy for me.
    Minolta. Konica Minolta. Sony

  19. #19

    Default Re: Tripod for Macro (suitable for women)

    Quote Originally Posted by Galdor View Post
    I guess you can go for the 190cxpro3 + 488rc2 setup bah. Go to the shop to try and see if you're ok with the weight cos personally I find it too heavy for me.
    488rc2 (0.46 kg) + 190cxpro3 (1.3kg) = 1.76 kg....

    Glador, what you consider as not heavy?

  20. #20
    Senior Member Leong23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    within myself
    Posts
    3,186

    Default Re: Tripod for Macro (suitable for women)

    Quote Originally Posted by Galdor View Post
    I guess you can go for the 190cxpro3 + 488rc2 setup bah. Go to the shop to try and see if you're ok with the weight cos personally I find it too heavy for me.
    I agreed that going down to shop to try is the best......

    If you are mainly doing floral shot, not very high magnification shooting and using light camera setup, 488RC2 is a good start, i actually start off with that too.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •