How long are these man?Originally Posted by junyang
wah, so many white white lensesOriginally Posted by 2100
Canon rulez in sports I guess (though i am a Nikon user). Still don't know how to differentiate between EF500/4 and EF600/4 by just looking at them.Originally Posted by Wai
Even da monopods are BIG.
You sound like a snob when you say that. No wonder not all of my friends that I introduced to photography became active participants here in Clubsnap. I'm just glad I didn't meet you when I first started off. I'd have been quite turned off if that's the prevalent attitude here.Originally Posted by nightwolf75
Anyway, Bromba, I used to make do with a hand-me-down tripod that cost a mere $24.99 even at Safe Superstore online. Some of my friends bought $50 tripods, $75 tripods and I couldn't justify the cost for those either. Slik tripods were already like "Woah!".
Let's just say I wasn't tuned into the world of these three legged beasts yet.
Partly due to necessity, when I went to shoot Asian Aerospace earlier this year, I asked to loan a long telephoto lens with a teleconvertor, the owner kindly loaned me his tripod setup as well - one of these carbon fibre jobs with the Markins ballhead. I went into it with no expectations other than my previous experience with the cheap tripod, and after that I returned it and decided to get a proper tripod, but I was less than happy to learn that tripod setup would've cost close to $1000......
I went shopping for tripods and heads, but couldn't really find anything that offered what I liked in that setup, the smoothness of the ballhead, the tension control, the ease of use, the height, and of course, the weight. It was a given that since I was only prepared to spend $200+ I wouldn't be anywhere close, but in the end I splashed out for a Manfrotto 055 with a Slik Pro 800 ballhead - not the best of the best setup, but one that doesn't leave my wallet crying out for mercy.
What you have to do is try out a good tripod, and only then you will know what you are missing.
In the link.... those are EF 400mm f/2.8 IS without the hood and EF 70-200mm f/2.8Originally Posted by 2100
Food for though : Isn't this true of everything ? From cars to houses to computers to lifestyle to beer to food to tripods to cameras. There is always something better and more expensive. Question is, do you need it ? Or just want it ? No shame in wanting something. Next question is : is it worth it ? Only you can answer it.Originally Posted by r32
Some people think nothing of spending $300K on a fancy car. Others want something that is good enough to get from A to B, safely, and under $80K.
Yeah, the fancy car lets you get there in style and luxury and in greater comfort, is a status symbol, and goes 0-100km/h in 7 seconds, and has top speed of 240km/h. But the $80K car does perfectly well for a drive to the Orchard Road and back home.
Just curious, but what's the point of learning to identify lenses at a glance ?Originally Posted by 2100
Haiyah Chriszzz, most people here are saying just buy what you need, and if you have a heavy expensive system, probably prudent to by a more sturdy and functional (= more expensive) tripod mahhh......surely you don't disagree with that? If you can show me a $50 tripod that can support a 10D and 70-200/2.8 without wobbling, I'll sell my Manfrotto straightaway. Dun need to be so dogmatic mahh.....Originally Posted by chriszzz
Unlike thing like watches and cars, in photography, paying more USUALLY buys you more functionality and is less an issue of buying style......after all, which babe would care if I'm carrying a carbon fibre tripod?
I agree with it. I'm just saying that some people often buy expensive "cool" stuff, as opposed to what they need. Using equipment used by professional photographers as a yardstick is inappropriate. Your mother or wife I'm sure doesn't run out and buy a $5000 professional oven or $4000 professional coffee maker just because some chef says it helps him cook better.Originally Posted by dkw
A Manfrotto isn't exactly the Ferrari of tripods. Reasonably priced, stable, and robust. If you bought it because you need it, all the more power to you.
Your 10D + 70-200 isn't heavier than my EOS 5 + VG + 80-200L. So my tripod will probably fit it fine. It's actually a Taiwanese brand called Centaur ( I don't see them around anymore though), and fully extended, is around 1.6m high. The tripod itself weights around 1.5-2kg in weight, so its not one of those flimsy things (cheap doesn't always mean flimsy). Its feet has both spikes and rubber pads.
Well, this applies to anyplace, not just in photography. A more expensive car gives you more performance, better noise insulation, better sound system, climate control, acceleration, smoother ride, etc etc. A more expensive watch may give better water-resistence to deeper depths, may have goodies like self-recharging batteries, perpetual calendars, etc, etc.Unlike thing like watches and cars, in photography, paying more USUALLY buys you more functionality and is less an issue of buying style......after all, which babe would care if I'm carrying a carbon fibre tripod?
Lastly, let me re-iterate. I agree you should buy what you need.
With very few exception, who here dare say that those expensive things they bought is 100% from functional consideration - I bet you to the last dollar!
Let be honest, this is a hobby and 'shiok' factor, a little 'peer pressure' and a little self ego and the ' I also have' feeling are involved, but not necessarily for showing off per se - just to be known -by yourself and/or by your buddies, that you are in the know! Personally, I have another hobby which cost me lots of money (by my std, - can buy many nikon VR lens ) - but I do in solitaire - very seldom with others. I 'show off' to myself only.
I read one member posting here (cannot remember who), who gave his reason of selling his 468 ballhead for the ultimate one - his is very candid reason - for that 'mong tak teng' feeling (copying his words) and he also think his shot may most probably not improved by this new head.
Yes, if I can afford it, I will buy the best I can. I can then also craft out all the reasons - but what for and for what? And in all honesty, I do not need a DSLR and since I bought it until now (more than a month), I have not gone out for a single outing with the camera! CAn you imagine I tried to tell the no-so-informed that P&S is like that and you do not know and hence you must get DSLR..........????
Did anyone asked you to spend 24/7 in front of the computer in the first place?Originally Posted by Bromba
Hey that is you. Others are not like that. Just because you don't feel that it is worth it doesn't mean that others should feel the same.
Originally Posted by r32I am not sure whether I would need a really good tripod. After reading the discussion here, I now see the importance of having good tripod for using with very long/heavy lens and long time exposures like in low light conditions. But if I think what I shoot and what I am interested in shooting, I feel like I can do with my lousy tripod as well.Originally Posted by r32
I am still not outgrowing my G5 that I bought about half a year ago. As for my Nikon F60, I would like to have a bit longer zoom (maybe some aspherical Sigma going uo to 100+). As for body, I crave for F80 which actually is more than what I need, but I could do as well with F75. Anything above it, really long lens or a higher class body - I already read the reviews and the specs and I really don't need it.
Anyway I don't plan to upgrade soon since I feel like I can still get some more from F60 despite its limitations. So, newbie or not, I think I will stay with my cheap tripod. But if one day I switch to heavier/more expensive gear, I will know whom to thank for teaching me about merits of proper tripods. So, thank guys for interesting and informational discussion.