# Kickstarter: Peak Design Unveils The Next Generation of Camera Tripods



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 21, 2019)

> Peak Design has launched their 9th Kickstarter campaign and it looks like it’s going to be another rousing success. This time, Peak Design is launching its travel tripod. Designed to be both compact and sturdy as well as easy to use.
> This is one of the rare campaigns on Kickstarter that I have pledged, this one looks too good to pass up.
> We don’t promote a lot of Kickstarter campaigns, as too many go unfulfilled, but you don’t have to worry about Peak Design delivering on a product.
> Check out the Peak Design Travel Tripod
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## gbc (May 21, 2019)

Man.... I love Peak Design's stuff. I've just spent so much on their bags and other gear that this one would be hard to justify even though it looks great. Love how easy it seems to extend all the legs at once and love the compact size...


----------



## bsbeamer (May 21, 2019)

Looks like a great travel design. Do wish there was a SLIGHTLY larger version that would be more beneficial for video users with a compact fluid head. The Benro Travel Angel (Aero) is still the most useable compact I've tried. 

At the prices and December 2019 target, I'll probably wait for commercial availability before considering. Maybe wait for first gen kinks to be worked out. Do have a need for a useable compact tripod, but adding the universal plate and a fluid head with pan arm would make this much more bulky than it needs to be.


----------



## amorse (May 21, 2019)

Looks neat, but I really wonder about stability. My tripod is anything but small, but I tend to make it work for travel because I really want that stability. I'll wait until it's a bit more accessible before I make final decisions on it.


----------



## miketcool (May 21, 2019)

Backed. The design solves so many of my travel tripod issues.


----------



## leviathan18 (May 21, 2019)

trying to mentally justify the price increase of the CF version


----------



## Jack Douglas (May 22, 2019)

I find it hard to believe that the stability/strength is comparable to larger tube tripods - there's got to be flex in those smaller lower members??

Jack


----------



## degos (May 22, 2019)

What has this to do with Canon rumors?

Looks like someone is promoting someone...


----------



## Martin.D (May 22, 2019)

Over priced compared to it's competitors.. I see the ball head has already caused injury. "Tony & Chelsea Northrup" latest video...


----------



## slclick (May 22, 2019)

I guess I'm a curmudgeon since I always get irked with these kickstarter product funding promotions. Too much money, too long of a wait and it's always a gamble. (Yeah, and it's a bit small for true stability) My Feisol works just fine and gives me no GAS.


----------



## Chris Burch (May 22, 2019)

degos said:


> What has this to do with Canon rumors?
> 
> Looks like someone is promoting someone...


It's the "Gear Talk" forum...sounds like gear to me. Clearly it's of interest because people are discussing and some are buying (me included).


----------



## Chris Burch (May 22, 2019)

leviathan18 said:


> trying to mentally justify the price increase of the CF version


Agreed. It would be great to have the lightest option available, but $190 for only .63lbs less is a hard sell. That said, I just found myself digging through my pantry to find something of that weight (2 cans of tuna did the trick) and it's more than expected -- would be nice not to have to lug around on a hike. Packing it in a suit case would be irrelevant though in my opinion.


----------



## ElementaryWatson (May 22, 2019)

“Travel Tripod eliminates bulky and confusing knobs with a single adjustment ring for simple and smooth 360-degree adjustment.”

Exactly the same way the approximately 10-year old design of the Arca-Swiss p0 works.


----------



## Tahoejr (May 22, 2019)

I backed this to compare to my 10 year old Gitzo 1541 carbon fiber model. I definitely like to compactness of the Peak Design model but want to test out the stability as others have brought up. 

If nothing else, I can still sell it for what I paid for it which I was able to do on a previous Peak Design backpack.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 22, 2019)

degos said:


> What has this to do with Canon rumors?
> 
> Looks like someone is promoting someone...



A few things

Last I checked, Canon didn't make tripods, so we have to buy other peoples tripods. This is relevant content.
Of course I'm promoting something as an affiliate that I think people would find value in. This site is free for you to use, but it's not free for me to run.
I rarely post Kickstarter stuff unless I know the product will be delivered, which this one will be.
I pledged for the carbon fibre version out of my own pocket, with no favours from Peak Design.


----------



## FramerMCB (May 22, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> A few things
> 
> Last I checked, Canon didn't make tripods, so we have to buy other peoples tripods. This is relevant content.
> Of course I'm promoting something as an affiliate that I think people would find value in. This site is free for you to use, but it's not free for me to run.
> ...


By-the-by - I really appreciate this site! Excellent value and excellent offerings: as far as valuable information as well as a place to share thoughts back-and-forth. As well as the occasional picture...


----------



## unfocused (May 22, 2019)

degos said:


> What has this to do with Canon rumors?
> 
> Looks like someone is promoting someone...



I shocked...shocked that commerce is going on here.

At times I may disagree with Canon Rumors Guy's predictions and opinions, but not with his right to run his site and earn a profit. He's actually very tolerant of posts (mine included) that cite competing sites.


----------



## LDS (May 22, 2019)

degos said:


> What has this to do with Canon rumors?



I come here regularly because there are other photo-related news that aren't Canon only and striclty - i.e. the new "medium" format Fuji. It would be quite boring if there were endless discussion about what people would like to see in the next 7D.

About promoting - I get everything with a pinch of salt - and here it's still quite better than elsewhere.


----------



## Daner (May 22, 2019)

I am happy with my Peak Design carry system, and my current knockoff brand tripod only comes with me on car trips because it is bulky and heavy. It also has a tilt/pan head that works well for video, so I have that for when I need it. This hits several useful points for me, so I am in on the Aluminum version.


----------



## slclick (May 22, 2019)

Confusing knobs?

Who has that issue.....well, except for maybe messing with the locals in the wrong side of Salford.


----------



## tmc784 (May 22, 2019)

made in china ?


----------



## NeverPlayMonopoly (May 22, 2019)

10 points to whoever guesses Peak Design's "Influencer" budget.


----------



## Hector1970 (May 22, 2019)

I've have some very mixed experiences with Kickstarter. Alot of the projects are completely rubbish. I've one project its almost 3 year waiting. I've no faith it will be delivered but they keep posting positive updates.
I'd give Peak Design their due. They always deliver and pretty much on time. Communication is excellent.
There are a number of positive comments here on their bags. 
I have two the Messenger Bag and a 30L Backpack.
The messenger bag looks great but its the most uncomfortable bag to carry with any weight on board.
The 30L Backpack is more comfortable and parts of the design are nice.
Typically I don't use either because the traditional makers like Lowepro make much more practical and useful camera bags.
I have their shoulder strap and a clutch and a Pro pad clip.
In every case they look beautifully designed but other less glamourous and cheaper alternatives work better.
There's almost too much clever design and not enough practical design.
I find with Peak Design its a cult like following and they are very clever with their collaborations with people like Trey Radcliffe to promote their items.
This tripod will be interesting. 
It's expensive and its not possible to know in advance whether it is good.
I have a Gitzo travel tripod and its very expensive but its a great tripod. I use it all the time as its so easy to carry. 
I had the reassurance before buying it that many of its users were very happy with it.
Anyway buyer beware - I'd have far more faith in Peak Design than other fly by nights on Kickstarter. 
The locking mechanism on the plate / tripod head looks interesting. Long term alot will depend on whether the ball head maintains its grip. Usually the ball is supported / locked from below rather than above.
The tripod seems to be a little short as well (a travel tripod has to have some sort of compromise on height). Not sure what the centre column brings the height up to. I think its a short centre column.
As for the rest of Kickstarter. I wouldn't recommend it all unless you are prepared to get nothing or something crappy for your money.


----------



## aslsw66 (May 23, 2019)

I'm a massive fan of Peak Design gear. It's well designed and fit-for-purpose but where they absolutely shine is in their support. A few examples:

I noticed one of my anchor links was fraying so posted a photo on Twitter about it. They responded by saying they had upgraded their anchor links and posted new ones out to me free of charge,
last year, when we visited San Francisco we dropped by their only retail outlet. Almost immediately, the guy there noticed that both my wife and I were using the first generation slides and swapped them both for the latest model - again, totally free,
on the same visit, I mentioned that my back pack had a internal zip that had always been 'sticky'. So I took it back the next day and again they exchanged it for a brand new bag.
So, yes their gear is expensive. But it is so well designed, it solves problems and they are committed to their products. I'm going to back this one, it's just pity that it comes too late for my overseas holiday this year.


----------



## aslsw66 (May 23, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> The messenger bag looks great but its the most uncomfortable bag to carry with any weight on board.


I had the original Messenger bag and have to agree with this. I took it to NZ and with camera, lenses and tripod it was too much. Mind you, I'm a small-framed skinny person so it might be better for someone who is more 'robust'.



Hector1970 said:


> The 30L Backpack is more comfortable and parts of the design are nice.


I've got the 20L version (see my comment above about being small) and I love it. In particular, the ability to swing it across your torso, open the side and do a lens change in the body of the bag is a great concept. It's surprisingly waterproof - we had a downpour in Rome where I was so wet that the papers in my wallet were drenched but the inside of the pack was dry. My only quibble is the waist strap could be bulkier - I do use it to drop the weight on to my hips but it's pretty narrow.



Hector1970 said:


> I find with Peak Design its a cult like following


I think I resemble that comment!


----------



## GMCPhotographics (May 23, 2019)

I think that it's an interesting design. I think it's incredibly compact and small...but here are a few of my thoughts. 
Firstly it's got a lot of leg levers to undo...it's going to be slow to operate. Have a look at the Sachtler Flowtech 75 for a better design of top operated leg levers....one lever undoes the whole leg.
The other problem with this design is the very thin center pole. It's very thin and looks wobbly. I like the integral ball head...but it's using it's own clip / camera mount design which is a mistake. It really needs to be Arca / Swiss compatible or it's a no - go for me. Any tripod that can't use an Arca Swiss L bracket is pointless in my opinion.


----------



## andrei1989 (May 23, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> The other problem with this design is the very thin center pole. It's very thin and looks wobbly. I like the integral ball head...but it's using it's own clip / camera mount design which is a mistake. It really needs to be Arca / Swiss compatible or it's a no - go for me. Any tripod that can't use an Arca Swiss L bracket is pointless in my opinion.



the head is arca swiss compatible


----------



## Valvebounce (May 23, 2019)

Hi GMCPhotographics. 
The demo I saw showed all the leg clamps being undone with one swift one handed operation, does the Sachtler lock all the legs with the one lever or only unlock? If it is only unlock, it seems pretty much equal to me. 
The very thin centre pole looks triangular (ish) in form, so possibly stiffer than a round pole that fit the same minor dimension? 
The head is Arca Swiss compatible, I think I saw it in the specs or heard it in the review, compatible with Arca Swiss plates and L plates. 

Still not going to invest in one, waaaay too rich for my budget! Money no object I might try one but until the numbers come up.......

Cheers, Graham. 



GMCPhotographics said:


> I think that it's an interesting design. I think it's incredibly compact and small...but here are a few of my thoughts.
> Firstly it's got a lot of leg levers to undo...it's going to be slow to operate. Have a look at the Sachtler Flowtech 75 for a better design of top operated leg levers....one lever undoes the whole leg.
> The other problem with this design is the very thin center pole. It's very thin and looks wobbly. I like the integral ball head...but it's using it's own clip / camera mount design which is a mistake. It really needs to be Arca / Swiss compatible or it's a no - go for me. Any tripod that can't use an Arca Swiss L bracket is pointless in my opinion.


----------



## sfeinsmith (May 23, 2019)

This is overpriced and not worth device. It will wobble if you extended the legs. No compare with Gitzo. It just a ripoff and not a recommendation.


----------



## PGSanta (May 23, 2019)

sfeinsmith said:


> This is overpriced and not worth device. It will wobble if you extended the legs. No compare with Gitzo. It just a ripoff and not a recommendation.



How would you know? You've got one to test?

Obviously the "influencer" push is lame... all of them harping on the same points and using the same verbiage like "negative space" is hilariously transparent. I've lost a lot of respect for a bunch of these guys just watching all of these videos on this tripod. 

That said... the design looks really good. I backed a carbon fiber version because packing my mefoto tripod sucks. I don't even try to take my Gitzo traveler series 2, it's way too big to fit in my carry ons. 

We'll see how it performs, I think it'll be good, and for me if it is as stable as my mefoto carbon fiber, and saves what appears to be about 33% of the volume... it's worth the extra money.

My only real concern is that center column. If it is solid carbon fiber it might be stable, if it's not... it probably isn't and the tripod will be nearly unusable with the column extended much.


----------



## another_mikey (May 24, 2019)

I have an RRS TV-24 that has served me well. I currently take it on trips. But it is just a little large for smaller suitcases I might want to use, and a little long when it comes to comfortably strapping it on to my camera bag. So there are times I just don't take it out with me. The Peak Design model looks to solve those problems. For me then the trade off is not whether it is the most stable tripod out there (I am sure my TV-24 beats it in that regard) but whether it is more stable than me hand holding my shots. I have high confidence it will succeed in that regard. And due to the shorter length and lesser weight, it will also be included in virtually any trips or hikes I might take. And lastly for me, since my main tripod head that I use on my TV-24 *is* an Arca Swiss P0, this thing will be very familiar to operate. I love that type of design. I will slightly miss the panning adjustment, but in the interest of size and weight I understand it. I pledged for the carbon fiber model as soon as I found out about it and expect to be fully satisfied for my travel use cases. For times when I want or need to use the TV-24 instead I will do so, but this tripod looks to be a great option if smaller and lighter is required while still getting decent stability.

ML


----------



## GMCPhotographics (May 24, 2019)

Valvebounce said:


> Hi GMCPhotographics.
> The demo I saw showed all the leg clamps being undone with one swift one handed operation, does the Sachtler lock all the legs with the one lever or only unlock? If it is only unlock, it seems pretty much equal to me.
> The very thin centre pole looks triangular (ish) in form, so possibly stiffer than a round pole that fit the same minor dimension?
> The head is Arca Swiss compatible, I think I saw it in the specs or heard it in the review, compatible with Arca Swiss plates and L plates.
> ...


The Sachtler is a one click lock or unlock the whole leg extension and operated at the head. So you hold the tripod head where you want the pod to stay...unclick and click. the legs extend to where you need them in one motion and then re-click. It's so amazingly quick and simple...it's the fastest tripod I've ever used and incredibly stable. Way faster and more stable than anything in the Gitzo range.


----------



## slclick (May 24, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> The Sachtler is a one click lock or unlock the whole leg extension and operated at the head. So you hold the tripod head where you want the pod to stay...unclick and click. the legs extend to where you need them in one motion and then re-click. It's so amazingly quick and simple...it's the fastest tripod I've ever used and incredibly stable. Way faster and more stable than anything in the Gitzo range.


While I do agree it's functions and construction are fantastic, it's also priced out of most shooters budgets. Some might say this Kickstarter is as well.


----------



## Valvebounce (May 24, 2019)

Hi GMCPhotographics. 
Thank you for the clarification, as you say, this would appear to be a superior system. 

Cheers, Graham. 



GMCPhotographics said:


> The Sachtler is a one click lock or unlock the whole leg extension and operated at the head. So you hold the tripod head where you want the pod to stay...unclick and click. the legs extend to where you need them in one motion and then re-click. It's so amazingly quick and simple...it's the fastest tripod I've ever used and incredibly stable. Way faster and more stable than anything in the Gitzo range.


----------



## PGSanta (May 24, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> The Sachtler is a one click lock or unlock the whole leg extension and operated at the head. So you hold the tripod head where you want the pod to stay...unclick and click. the legs extend to where you need them in one motion and then re-click. It's so amazingly quick and simple...it's the fastest tripod I've ever used and incredibly stable. Way faster and more stable than anything in the Gitzo range.



I call BS on this one. Hope I’m wrong, but I highly highly doubt it’s sturdier than a series 2 traveler. It’s rated to 2/3 the weight.


----------



## FramerMCB (May 24, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> I've have some very mixed experiences with Kickstarter. Alot of the projects are completely rubbish. I've one project its almost 3 year waiting. I've no faith it will be delivered but they keep posting positive updates.
> I'd give Peak Design their due. They always deliver and pretty much on time. Communication is excellent.
> There are a number of positive comments here on their bags.
> I have two the Messenger Bag and a 30L Backpack.
> ...


 For any interested in this - Tony Northrup has a pretty good review of this tripod. He's actually being filmed using it and discussing it strength's and weaknesses whilst he's using it. With some close-up filming of most of his main discussion points... It's available on YouTube - and recent.


----------



## slclick (May 24, 2019)

FramerMCB said:


> For any interested in this - Tony Northrup has a pretty good review of this tripod. He's actually being filmed using it and discussing it strength's and weaknesses whilst he's using it. With some close-up filming of most of his main discussion points... It's available on YouTube - and recent.


I hope it's recent, the things still in the funding phase!


----------



## sfeinsmith (May 25, 2019)

PGSanta said:


> How would you know? You've got one to test?
> 
> Obviously the "influencer" push is lame... all of them harping on the same points and using the same verbiage like "negative space" is hilariously transparent. I've lost a lot of respect for a bunch of these guys just watching all of these videos on this tripod.
> 
> ...



When you get the tripod and you can test it. My experience is a long length regardless of what kind of materials. It tends to create a wobble problem. I learned and avoid it and then it was successful to avoid the wobble situation. In fact that my camera and lens are very heavy. I have to put my tripod as short as possible to increase stability. My oldest tripod, 58 years old with all metal constructed and it very stable. The disadvantage was weight as much as if I carry barbell to the site where I shot the images. Today, the tripod becomes more and more expensive and use carbon fiber materials for the lightweight purpose included compact designed. I love the Gitzo but I hate their price tag. Another point that tripod has a hook so you can put heavy such as carrying a bag to create more stable as possible by hold toward to ground. Sometimes it works but not always, for example, face wind direction that impacts the carrying a bag will swing forward and backward that create unstable. Get my points?


----------



## PGSanta (May 25, 2019)

sfeinsmith said:


> When you get the tripod and you can test it. My experience is a long length regardless of what kind of materials. It tends to create a wobble problem. I learned and avoid it and then it was successful to avoid the wobble situation. In fact that my camera and lens are very heavy. I have to put my tripod as short as possible to increase stability. My oldest tripod, 58 years old with all metal constructed and it very stable. The disadvantage was weight as much as if I carry barbell to the site where I shot the images. Today, the tripod becomes more and more expensive and use carbon fiber materials for the lightweight purpose included compact designed. I love the Gitzo but I hate their price tag. Another point that tripod has a hook so you can put heavy such as carrying a bag to create more stable as possible by hold toward to ground. Sometimes it works but not always, for example, face wind direction that impacts the carrying a bag will swing forward and backward that create unstable. Get my points?



Of course added length given all other equal variables creates a less stable structure... I have no clue what you’re trying to say other than the obvious. 

This tripod is not a tall tripod, it’s not meant to compete with a Gitzo mountaineer or a RRS, it’s meant to compete with compact travel tripods. It’s an interesting design, specifically because the legs are not circular tubes (this fact alone probably accounts for the bulk of the cost, molding carbon fiber to shaped like that can be expensive). Maybe it’s just a gimmick, but the design looks to me like it might be on to something. Only tests will tell. Automatically dismissing it is your choice, I’d prefer to wait and see.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (May 25, 2019)

Just looked at the link and that dinky little tripod looks like it is going to cost a little more than my Gitzo GT4542LS Systematic and this is the most expensive of my 4 current Gitzos - I just can't afford these cheaper (!?) tripods and it has flippy leg locks too.
My pennies are safe.


----------



## AntlerstoPeaks (May 25, 2019)

Asked them about the weight breakdown and got a quick response. 

Carbon Fiber -- Ball Head: 0.2 kg (.4 lbs), Legs: 1.0 kg (2.26 lbs)
Aluminum -- Ball Head Only: 0.2 kg (.44 lbs), Legs Only: 1.3 kg (2.9 lbs)
Center Column: 0.05 kg (0.11 lbs)
Load Hook: 0.009 kg (0.02 lbs)
Mobile Mount: 0.01 kg (.03 lbs)
Universal Adapter -- 0.09 kg (0.19 lbs)

The legs are decently heavy they saved most of their weight in the ball head. Will end up being pretty heavy if you use a third party ball head.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (May 25, 2019)

PGSanta said:


> I call BS on this one. Hope I’m wrong, but I highly highly doubt it’s sturdier than a series 2 traveler. It’s rated to 2/3 the weight.


Are you talking about the Sachtler? I have a 5 Series and 3 Series Gitzo and my Sachtler eats both of those for stability.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (May 25, 2019)

slclick said:


> While I do agree it's functions and construction are fantastic, it's also priced out of most shooters budgets. Some might say this Kickstarter is as well.


Yes....but if you have a £10000 lens on a £5000 camera...a £1000 tripod makes a lot of sense. I use a mk1 400mm LIS and it's a VERY heavy lens. I need the robust stability that only a video tripod can bring.


----------



## dave61 (May 25, 2019)

Just backed this, exactly what I need for travelling by air. If it is stable enough I will see my current tripod.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 25, 2019)

Looks interesting, but I’ll stick with my RRS TQC-14. The new PD is shorter when collapsed because of the 5th leg section, but that decreases stability and my 4-section TQC-14 w/ BH-30 LR fits vertically in my carryon. They tout the 3.1” diameter, the TQC-14 is 3.18”, and with the ballhead also has a similar max height.

I like the blurb on the PD campaign about the fast setup with an office record of 9.4 s to deploy, because they don’t use ‘tedious twist locks’. I just timed the my setup of the TQC-14 at 8.6 s on the first go. They also don’t time the reverse procedure, which in my experience (a few years with Manfrotto) is slower with flip locks.

I’m also certain the RRS TQC-14 is more stable. It’s not just that it’s rated to a slightly higher capacity. It’s that the actual capacity of the TQC-14 is much, much higher. Those of you who get one of these PD tripods, would you do what RRS owner Joe Johnson did with a TQC-14, which I’ve also tried on mine without issues?







Somehow, I doubt it...


----------



## PGSanta (May 25, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Looks interesting, but I’ll stick with my RRS TQC-14. The new PD is shorter when collapsed because of the 5th leg section, but that decreases stability and my 4-section TQC-14 w/ BH-30 LR fits vertically in my carryon. They tout the 3.1” diameter, the TQC-14 is 3.18”, and with the ballhead also has a similar max height.
> 
> I like the blurb on the PD campaign about the fast setup with an office record of 9.4 s to deploy, because they don’t use ‘tedious twist locks’. I just timed the my setup of the TQC-14 at 8.6 s on the first go. They also don’t time the reverse procedure, which in my experience (a few years with Manfrotto) is slower with flip locks.
> 
> ...


 
No way the TQC-14 with the ballhead folds up to a 3.18 diameter. Measure yours.


----------



## Valvebounce (May 25, 2019)

Hi sfeinsmith. 
I think the point you and many others are missing is the size /weight advantage, you gave up carrying your barbells for a Gitzo Carbon Fibre tripod! 
This small lightweight TRAVEL tripod will be more stable than most of us handholding a shot, especially when the exposures get a bit longer! 

Cheers, Graham. 
Ps. Still not getting one, but I see it’s merits! I’m still going to be limited to my lower cost items including my wrestling octopus (Benbo) tripod.



sfeinsmith said:


> When you get the tripod and you can test it. My experience is a long length regardless of what kind of materials. It tends to create a wobble problem. I learned and avoid it and then it was successful to avoid the wobble situation. In fact that my camera and lens are very heavy. I have to put my tripod as short as possible to increase stability. My oldest tripod, 58 years old with all metal constructed and it very stable. The disadvantage was weight as much as if I carry barbell to the site where I shot the images. Today, the tripod becomes more and more expensive and use carbon fiber materials for the lightweight purpose included compact designed. I love the Gitzo but I hate their price tag. Another point that tripod has a hook so you can put heavy such as carrying a bag to create more stable as possible by hold toward to ground. Sometimes it works but not always, for example, face wind direction that impacts the carrying a bag will swing forward and backward that create unstable. Get my points?


----------



## JPAZ (May 25, 2019)

Every so often, a new product comes along that intrigues me. This is one that has my attention. Reason?

My present travel tripod is the RRS TCQ-14 with a Markins Q10. It is solid even with a DSLR and big lens (OK, maybe not as solid as my TVC-24). Downside, without the head it is about 17.3 inches folded and weighs 2.3#. To fit it into my carry-on luggage, I put it in diagonally and it does use up much of the suitcase volume. Add the head and it is more like 4.1# all in. I almost never extend the center column but it is there if needed. But, you all know this.

What would the PD do for me? Shorter length and a little less volume in my bag and the head is included (even with the possible shortcomings of the head as noted in some of the videos) for the entire setup . At this price, it is hard for me to jump unless I know the PD tripod will be stable enough. But, any tripod under my camera is better than one I'd leave at home because of its weight and size. 

This is never easy, is it?


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 25, 2019)

PGSanta said:


> No way the TQC-14 with the ballhead folds up to a 3.18 diameter. Measure yours.


I did, and you’re right – I measured the at the top of the legs which is 3.18”, but the first twist lock extends wider, the correct max diameter is 3.4”...still plenty compact.

Incidentally, from my perspective there’s no real benefit to the more compact design of the PD tripod legs. There would be if I needed to fit it into a rigid shipping tube, but it goes in a carryon suitcase, filled mainly with clothing that fills in the peripheral space between the legs, so that space isn’t wasted. 

Basically for me, as long as a tripod fits in a carryon (I typically use a Pelican Elite 22”), having a more stable support trumps saving a few cubic inches.


----------



## PGSanta (May 25, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> I did, and you’re right – I measured the at the top of the legs which is 3.18”, but the first twist lock extends wider, the correct max diameter is 3.4”...still plenty compact.
> 
> Incidentally, from my perspective there’s no real benefit to the more compact design of the PD tripod legs. There would be if I needed to fit it into a rigid shipping tube, but it goes in a carryon suitcase, filled mainly with clothing that fills in the peripheral space between the legs, so that space isn’t wasted.
> 
> Basically for me, as long as a tripod fits in a carryon (I typically use a Pelican Elite 22”), having a more stable support trumps saving a few cubic inches.



Length wise it's what... 20 inches with a ball head? I know, because I've owned one. It's not a compact tripod, if it works for you, great, more power to you. It's definitely a stable beast given its size.

I can't say if there's a real benefit to the compact design of the PD or not. I don't know yet. The only folks who can really speak to stability are all basically shills, and have not done complete reviews yet. 

I will say that the space savings look to be VERY real (and significant enough to ME). The only real questions I have about the design is stability. If it's not a stable tripod relative to what I currently use as a travel tripod, then it's a no go.

I currently have a few Gitzos, a Sirui, and Mefoto globetrotter CF. I used he Mefoto for travel specifically because I can disassemble it removing the monopod leg, and the center column to make it almost flat, so it fits on the top or bottom of my carry on bag easily... with no "negative" space wasted. The peak design might fix this... I'm willing to give it a chance. 

I'm NOT willing to pack up my Gitzos, or something like the TQC-14 because it's too bulky in my bag. Just my experience. If it works for you, it's certainly a great tripod.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 26, 2019)

Well, I wouldn’t mind 4” shorter but not at the cost of stability. Incidentally, if I remove the center column from the TQC-14 (RRS now sells a version like that), the bottom of the legs close tighter and the top of the legs becomes the max diameter at 3.18”.


----------



## tar4heel2 (May 30, 2019)

Yet another misguided attempt at tripod design. Class, what is a tripod supposed to do? Hold your camera steady in a variety of shooting environments. A tripod needs weight and mass and simplicity; it should not take away from shooting. Yet, manufacturers continually make products that are...lightweight! And camera store employees wrongly sell carbon fiber tripods as lightweight platforms. Spindly, too-short and more resembling toothpicks, people continually buy and use the wrong tripod. "It's easy to carry!" or "I can hike with it!" or "It fits in my suitcase" is the refrain I hear all the time. Folks, buy a tripod for the first reason; as a stable platform to hold your camera still. All other considerations are secondary. You like to hike? Schlepp it up. If it's heavy you'll get a better workout on your hike as well as get better pics. Travel? Buy a suitcase that holds your heavy tripod.

Folks, your buying decisions for tripods is way out of whack. This "new" tripod is bad on so many levels. Spindly, too short, and, I predict, way too expensive.


----------



## PGSanta (May 30, 2019)

tar4heel2 said:


> Yet another misguided attempt at tripod design. Class, what is a tripod supposed to do? Hold your camera steady in a variety of shooting environments. A tripod needs weight and mass and simplicity; it should not take away from shooting. Yet, manufacturers continually make products that are...lightweight! And camera store employees wrongly sell carbon fiber tripods as lightweight platforms. Spindly, too-short and more resembling toothpicks, people continually buy and use the wrong tripod. "It's easy to carry!" or "I can hike with it!" or "It fits in my suitcase" is the refrain I hear all the time. Folks, buy a tripod for the first reason; as a stable platform to hold your camera still. All other considerations are secondary. You like to hike? Schlepp it up. If it's heavy you'll get a better workout on your hike as well as get better pics. Travel? Buy a suitcase that holds your heavy tripod.
> 
> Folks, your buying decisions for tripods is way out of whack. This "new" tripod is bad on so many levels. Spindly, too short, and, I predict, way too expensive.



No. 

We all don’t need to subscribe to your prescriptions on life. I’m sure this will fit the needs of plenty of people very well, and others not so much.

If it works for me I’ll keep it, if not I’ll move on.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 30, 2019)

tar4heel2 said:


> A tripod needs weight and mass and simplicity; it should not take away from shooting. Yet, manufacturers continually make products that are...lightweight! And camera store employees wrongly sell carbon fiber tripods as lightweight platforms. Spindly, too-short and more resembling toothpicks, people continually buy and use the wrong tripod. "It's easy to carry!" or "I can hike with it!" or "It fits in my suitcase" is the refrain I hear all the time. Folks, buy a tripod for the first reason; as a stable platform to hold your camera still. All other considerations are secondary. You like to hike? Schlepp it up. If it's heavy you'll get a better workout on your hike as well as get better pics. Travel? Buy a suitcase that holds your heavy tripod.
> 
> Folks, your buying decisions for tripods is way out of whack. This "new" tripod is bad on so many levels. Spindly, too short, and, I predict, way too expensive.


Sorry, no. Tripods don’t need to be heavy. They need to support sufficient weight and damp vibrations (carbon fiber does that well). My carbon fiber tripod is light, fits in a suitcase, and I can hang a 15-20 lb backpack from the hook during use to provide ample stability.


----------



## knight427 (May 31, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I think that it's an interesting design. I think it's incredibly compact and small...but here are a few of my thoughts.
> Firstly it's got a lot of leg levers to undo...it's going to be slow to operate. Have a look at the Sachtler Flowtech 75 for a better design of top operated leg levers....one lever undoes the whole leg.
> The other problem with this design is the very thin center pole. It's very thin and looks wobbly. I like the integral ball head...but it's using it's own clip / camera mount design which is a mistake. It really needs to be Arca / Swiss compatible or it's a no - go for me. Any tripod that can't use an Arca Swiss L bracket is pointless in my opinion.



The Flowtech looks like a really great design...for a giant tripod. I'm guessing that system wouldn't scale down well. 

I backed the aluminum, this will be my first travel tripod. When I travel for work, I get to check a bag, so I pack a normal sized photo tripod into my largest suitcase. I will still check a bag with the PD tripod, but will be able to take my medium suitcase instead and have the option to use a carry-on suitcase when I am not traveling for work. I also hope to also use it for hiking and biking.


----------



## tar4heel2 (May 31, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sorry, no. Tripods don’t need to be heavy. They need to support sufficient weight and damp vibrations (carbon fiber does that well). My carbon fiber tripod is light, fits in a suitcase, and I can hang a 15-20 lb backpack from the hook during use to provide ample stability.



...and hooray to you for spending WAY more money than you should have. Some people throw obscene money at carbon-fiber thinking it's the best way to go. $1,200 for a tripod? $800 even... Seriously? How about $100 and it will last for many, many years and is easy to fix should one of the knuckles goes bad.

To each his own, but I teach workshops. Over 700 students in 14 years. I can predict how many people will bring tripods that simply will not do what they say. I spend more time with students trying to untangle and fix cheap and poor tripod and ballhead choices than I ever do teaching composition and exposure. And EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM made the decision to buy it based on weight and travel convenience, with no consideration on how it would affect their photography effort.

Students will bring too-short, toothpick-looking tripods with cheap or poorly designed ballheads all in the name of weight considerations. Then, they want me to help them figure out why they can't get the shots others are getting because they have to spend so much time figuring out their tripod/ballhead configuration. For instance, many, many times they don't even know they have a rotation collar on their 70-200mm f/2.8. They gaze in amazement when I show it to them ON THEIR OWN EQUIPMENT! It's amazing how people react when I let them use my tripod/ballhead. It is the proper height, proper stability, only 3 sections to telescope, and...only $100! (The Slik Pro700 DX) Suddenly they explode into new creativity in their photography when they don't have to wrestle with their ballhead not drifting, making it more likely that slow shutter photography will have tack-sharp results because the center post is not raised. 

Look at the pictures on the Peak Design website; replete with pictures of people using it with the center post extended topped with a heavy 70-200mm f/2.8 and a Sony 7R-type camera. I would love to use this photo to demonstrate what not to do. Does anyone here know how long it takes for the vibration to dissipate in this kind of setup? Sometimes 3 and 4 seconds, IF the wind is not blowing and your camera strap is not flapping. Meanwhile, the clouds have moved, the animal has scampered off and the shot is gone while you scratch your head trying to figure it all out.

The company means well. Kudos for the new space-saving design. They are honest people who truly believe. Yay. It's a too-short tripod with 4 sections on each leg, meaning unlocking 12 levers?? The bottom section is very thin and means it will vibrate and sway with stiff winds or uneven terrain, especially with the center post extended. The ballhead, while brilliant in design and function, forces users to position the vertical shot in a horribly unbalanced position, shifting the center of balance severely on a spindly tripod, making it more likely that you'll do a face-plant into the ground with your equipment if you're not very careful.

They did not think this through. All they've done in invent a new space-saving design for a tripod that doesn't do what a tripod/ballhead is supposed to do, that is, keep the camera/lens setup STILL! It's a better metronome than a tripod. Yet, people will flock to this product because sites like this continue to flaunt it as the Newest Groovy Thing.

Do not fall prey to this marketing hype. I guarantee many of you who buy and use this will immediately recognize it's shortcomings.


----------



## knight427 (May 31, 2019)

tar4heel2 said:


> It's amazing how people react when I let them use my tripod/ballhead. It is the proper height, proper stability, only 3 sections to telescope, and...only $100! (The Slik Pro700 DX)



What's your ballhead?


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 31, 2019)

tar4heel2 said:


> ...and hooray to you for spending WAY more money than you should have. Some people throw obscene money at carbon-fiber thinking it's the best way to go. $1,200 for a tripod? $800 even... Seriously? How about $100 and it will last for many, many years and is easy to fix should one of the knuckles goes bad.
> 
> To each his own, but I teach workshops. Over 700 students in 14 years. I can predict how many people will bring tripods that simply will not do what they say. I spend more time with students trying to untangle and fix cheap and poor tripod and ballhead choices than I ever do teaching composition and exposure. And EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM made the decision to buy it based on weight and travel convenience, with no consideration on how it would affect their photography effort.
> 
> ...


Hooray to you for buying an inexpensive, heavy tripod with a relatively low load capacity that is way to large for air travel. Perhaps you’d be happy putting a load of ~17 lbs on it (just a couple pounds shy of it’s rated capacity), I certainly would not. I make careful, well-informed buying decisions, and I’m fortunate enough to have a personal income that allows cost to be at or near the bottom of my priority list, although I recognize that’s certainly not the case for everyone. 

I’m a fan of using the right tool for the job, and a strong, light, short-collapsed-length tripod with a good ball head that doesn’t drift (e.g. the RRS BH-30 LR) is the right tool for my travels. The most it needs to hold is a 1D X and something up to a 70-300L, and with some weight on the hook it’s very stable. However, it’s not robust enough for routine use with my 600/4L IS II – for that, I have an RRS TVC-33 (yet another >$1000 tripod) and a gimbal head. 

Not that it matters, but I don’t find this new PD tripod particularly appealing.


----------



## slclick (May 31, 2019)

tar4heel2 said:


> ...and hooray to you for spending WAY more money than you should have. Some people throw obscene money at carbon-fiber thinking it's the best way to go. $1,200 for a tripod? $800 even... Seriously? How about $100 and it will last for many, many years and is easy to fix should one of the knuckles goes bad.
> 
> To each his own, but I teach workshops. Over 700 students in 14 years. I can predict how many people will bring tripods that simply will not do what they say. I spend more time with students trying to untangle and fix cheap and poor tripod and ballhead choices than I ever do teaching composition and exposure. And EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM made the decision to buy it based on weight and travel convenience, with no consideration on how it would affect their photography effort.
> 
> ...


My experience is that I have RRS quality with a Manfrotto pricetag with a Feisol. I can do the same thing with my Tournament tripod that Joe can do with his. The thing that is the real trap with tripods which very few people tell you about is that when you first get into photography, you buy an inexpensive one and you find besides functionality and weight, the load and stability has serious shortcomings. As many progress in the craft, the body size and glass size not to mention accessories such as filters and whatnot increase and you might as well be handholding. 

I think tripod purchases are more important from the get go to future proof even more-so than camera bodies. How many 'pods have most of us (and bags as well) purchased until we found the type which works for us in all or most circumstances?


----------



## tar4heel2 (May 31, 2019)

knight427 said:


> What's your ballhead?


The RRS BH-55 lever clap w/ L-brackets.


----------



## tar4heel2 (May 31, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Hooray to you for buying an inexpensive, heavy tripod with a relatively low load capacity that is way to large for air travel. Perhaps you’d be happy putting a load of ~17 lbs on it (just a couple pounds shy of it’s rated capacity), I certainly would not. I make careful, well-informed buying decisions, and I’m fortunate enough to have a personal income that allows cost to be at or near the bottom of my priority list, although I recognize that’s certainly not the case for everyone.
> 
> I’m a fan of using the right tool for the job, and a strong, light, short-collapsed-length tripod with a good ball head that doesn’t drift (e.g. the RRS BH-30 LR) is the right tool for my travels. The most it needs to hold is a 1D X and something up to a 70-300L, and with some weight on the hook it’s very stable. However, it’s not robust enough for routine use with my 600/4L IS II – for that, I have an RRS TVC-33 (yet another >$1000 tripod) and a gimbal head.
> 
> Not that it matters, but I don’t find this new PD tripod particularly appealing.


You, my friend, are the exception to the rule. You know what you're doing you are an experienced, informed consumer. Most are not, I can tell you. The sales pitch put on beginners is just awful. They don't know what they're buying. I hear "...but the sales guy said it would work..." all the time. 

I put a Pentax 645Z w/ the 28-45mm f/4.5 on there as well as my Canon 5D MKIII w/ the 150-600mm Sigma f/5.6 and it works perfect. I haven't weighed what that load is, but it doesn't drift and my 50mp 645Z images are tack sharp. So maybe you're correct on the load oimits, but I've been using this tripod for over 10 years and it just keeps on ticking. I haven't overloaded it yet. And it isn't too large for air travel. I go to Europe all the time and it fits perfect in my checked luggage. It is heavier than other choices I could make, but FOR THE MONEY I get one hell of a value. Good choice on the ballhead; I take my BH 55 in my carry-on camera bag when I travel.


----------



## knight427 (May 31, 2019)

tar4heel2 said:


> The RRS BH-55 lever clap w/ L-brackets.



So your $100 non-travel tripod solutin is actually $590?


----------



## tar4heel2 (May 31, 2019)

knight427 said:


> So your $100 non-travel tripod solutin is actually $590?


That is correct. As opposed to $1,000, $1,500 or $1,600. Less cost than a Peak Design and is the proper height, more stable and center-of-gravity does not change.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Jun 1, 2019)

tar4heel2 said:


> That is correct. As opposed to $1,000, $1,500 or $1,600. Less cost than a Peak Design and is the proper height, more stable and center-of-gravity does not change.



Sorry about the picture quality! 
Please see my lighter and slightly cheaper setup below. The head is a Triopo RS3 - holds anything Canon up to my 800mm F5.6. The 3 Series Gitzo Systematic has now been replaced with an even cheaper 4 series Systematic. The cost of the current setup (at today's exchange rates) is $524, all bought brand new.
I don't normally use 600-800mm lenses with this head but it is fully up to the job - I bought it as a lightweight travel head!

I fully agree people spend far too much on tripods and heads, imagine spending nearly $600 on an aluminium tripod and an overweight head when stuff like this can be had for less.................


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 1, 2019)

slclick said:


> How many 'pods have most of us (and bags as well) purchased until we found the type which works for us in all or most circumstances?


For me, one tripod and one monopod. I started with a Manfrotto 190CXPRO4, later added a Manfrotto 694CX when I started shooting birds with a 100-400L. Those two lasted me from my Rebel T1i + EF-S 17-55 through its replacement by a 7D, an added 5DII, and the replacement of both by a 1D X and also a bunch of L lenses...until I got the 600/4 II. I replaced the monopod with an RRS MC-34 and added the TVC-33, BH-55 LR and PG-02 gimbal. I kept the 190CX for travel, until I started doing more short trips and grew tired of removing the ballhead so it would fit in a carryon, at which point I replaced it with the RRS TQC-14 w/ BH30-LR. 

Now...bags are a different story. There is no one perfect bag that will hold some number of lenses between one and 6-7, of varying sizes, with or without a flash, with or without a laptop, with or without personal items...and with little to no wasted space. Thus, I have more camera bags than my wife has purses.


----------



## knight427 (Jun 1, 2019)

tar4heel2 said:


> That is correct. As opposed to $1,000, $1,500 or $1,600. Less cost than a Peak Design and is the proper height, more stable and center-of-gravity does not change.



$590 is also less than $1,700, $1,800, $2,345 and lots more numbers!!! I'm not really sure how that is relevant though.

Also, I see now that you are relying on L-brackets to avoid a changing CoG (a solution that is perfectly compatible with the PD tripods btw). If your L-bracket is RRS, then your solution is over $700.

Thanks for the money saving tips on an aluminum tripod that is annoyingly large to travel, hike and bike with. But I already have one of those solutions. I suspect my $290 PD tripod will provide sufficiently stable performance for my needs, but if not I'm guessing I'll be able to get all of my money back out of it and try something else.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 1, 2019)

tar4heel2 said:


> You, my friend, are the exception to the rule. You know what you're doing you are an experienced, informed consumer. Most are not, I can tell you. The sales pitch put on beginners is just awful. They don't know what they're buying. I hear "...but the sales guy said it would work..." all the time.
> 
> I put a Pentax 645Z w/ the 28-45mm f/4.5 on there as well as my Canon 5D MKIII w/ the 150-600mm Sigma f/5.6 and it works perfect. I haven't weighed what that load is, but it doesn't drift and my 50mp 645Z images are tack sharp. So maybe you're correct on the load oimits, but I've been using this tripod for over 10 years and it just keeps on ticking. I haven't overloaded it yet. And it isn't too large for air travel. I go to Europe all the time and it fits perfect in my checked luggage. It is heavier than other choices I could make, but FOR THE MONEY I get one hell of a value. Good choice on the ballhead; I take my BH 55 in my carry-on camera bag when I travel.


Agreed that many people get suckered, which is sad. I’d rather do research and buy right the first time if possible. Thus, when considering getting back into photography in 2009, after a long P&S hiatus from the times I shot a film SLR and developed/printed myself, I set a $2500 budget and got a T1i body only, EF-S 17-55/2.8, 85/1.8 and the 190CX legs with a hydrostatic head. The only part of that initial setup I ended up regretting was the Manfrotto RC-2 plate/clamp system (I ended up going Arca-Swiss after a couple of years, fortunately the ballhead had a replaceable clamp, unlike some Manfrotto models). 

A bigger tripod is ok if one is checking luggage. I replaced the Manfrotto tripod after I started doing more short trips where there would be urban photo ops (mainly business overnights where I’d be free at blue hour), and I would not want to check a suitcase solely because of a too-long tripod. 

For your needs, the Slik 700 sounds like a great value! The BH-55 is a good head, I swap it out for the gimbal for local use when not using the 600mm (I have a leveling base on the platform, which is great with a gimbal to avoid futsing around to level it with the leg lengths, and the base has an integrated LR clamp with dovetails on the bottoms of both heads for a quick swap).


----------



## Kit. (Jun 1, 2019)

tar4heel2 said:


> "It's easy to carry!" or "I can hike with it!" or "It fits in my suitcase" is the refrain I hear all the time. Folks, buy a tripod for the first reason; as a stable platform to hold your camera still. All other considerations are secondary. You like to hike? Schlepp it up. If it's heavy you'll get a better workout on your hike as well as get better pics.


If you need some extra weight to carry on your hike, you can always pack more lenses.

I bought a Feisol Tournament tripod when I found out that while I _can_ carry 100-400 and Manfrotto 055 together on a mountain hike, I don't really enjoy that.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Jun 1, 2019)

Kit. said:


> If you need some extra weight to carry on your hike, you can always pack more lenses.
> 
> I bought a Feisol Tournament tripod when I found out that while I _can_ carry 100-400 and Manfrotto 055 together on a mountain hike, I don't really enjoy that.



Two of my friends have the Feisol Tournament tripods (one 3 section and one 4 section). For their size and weight (or lack of it) they are a really nice design and work very well.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 5, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> A bigger tripod is ok if one is checking luggage. I replaced the Manfrotto tripod after I started doing more short trips where there would be urban photo ops (mainly business overnights where I’d be free at blue hour), and I would not want to check a suitcase solely because of a too-long tripod.


I fly regularly and have never had an issue carrying a Manfrotto 055 on with me, normally strapped to the side of either my carry on or my ‘personal item’ though when I only have one carry on item i’ll carry it by itself.


----------



## scottsworld (Jun 5, 2019)

Um, er, a "tripod for professionals and first-time tripod owners alike" ?
holy cr4p, Batman. I don't know too many _*first-timers *_who would blow US$350 (A$503) to US$600 (*A$860!*) on a tripod.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 6, 2019)

scottsworld said:


> Um, er, a "tripod for professionals and first-time tripod owners alike" ?
> holy cr4p, Batman. I don't know too many _*first-timers *_who would blow US$350 (A$503) to US$600 (*A$860!*) on a tripod.


When I bought my first tripod, I spent ~US$450 on a Manfrotto CF tripod and head. Better to do your research, and buy once. 

Or twice, in my case — at the time, I didn’t foresee I’d eventually get a 600/4 and need more robust support.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jun 15, 2019)

I've supported Peak Design on a few of their bags and while they have some very nice design features I haven't found their bags practical for photography. I tend to use my Lowepro and Tamrac bags. They are perhaps slightly less design advanced than Peak Design but they produce bags that work and are comfortable to use fully loaded with gear. This is the biggest problem I find with Peak Design bags. They are fine for light loads.
What I will give Peak Design credit for is they will deliver the project and communicate really well (unllike alot of Kickstarter projects I've backed which are either rubbish end product or not delivered at all - buyer beware on other projects).

Peak design this time have decided to take on tripods. It's an earnest effort but personally I'll stick with companies who've been making tripods for years.
I teach alot of beginners and a common mistake it to buy a cheap tripod that doesn't work really well.
Very few beginners are in the privileged position that cost won't be a factor.
Fortunately there are alot of well made reasonably priced tripods available. Sirui , Benro, Manfrotto , Slik and many others to make good reasonably priced tripods that will do service for many years.

I used a Gitzo Traveller for my travelling. I remove the Arcatech ballhead and I can fit it in my travel bag. For sure expensive but well used by me. Very convenient size and weight and no problems with a full frame and up to a 300 2.8. 
For heavy duty I have an Induro CF tripod and the RRS BH-55 with a lever.
Like many other things in life its a pity there are so many tripod head styles. 
I've settled on Swiss Arca as a format.
It's not a perfect system but its good to be down to one format.
I use Fusion Gear Arca plates on the bottom of the camera as I can screw a black rapid into it and unscrew to place the camera on the tripod quickly.
On rare occasions I've thought the Arca plate is connected to the tripod head correct but its actually slight off and the camera has tumbled off the tripod.
I've been lucky and unlucky what's its fallen on. I've got into the habit of giving it a good check.
I use a Wimberly Gimbal for the 600 F4 II. That's very important to be slotted on 100% correctly. I also need to be careful taking it off.

My simple advice would be the get the best solid tripod you can afford. Use if because it really improves photography It's a good investment.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 15, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> I use Fusion Gear Arca plates on the bottom of the camera as I can screw a black rapid into it and unscrew to place the camera on the tripod quickly.


Not a fan of screwing/unscrewing the BR lug. My two lugs (one for a regular BR strap, one for the left-handed strap I use with my 600 II) are each Loc-tite attached to a Kirk 1” clamp. Makes it easy to move the attachment point from body to lens (e.g. when I attach the 70-200/2.8) or remove it for use on a tripod.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jun 15, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Not a fan of screwing/unscrewing the BR lug. My two lugs (one for a regular BR strap, one for the left-handed strap I use with my 600 II) are each Loc-tite attached to a Kirk 1” clamp. Makes it easy to move the attachment point from body to lens (e.g. when I attach the 70-200/2.8) or remove it for use on a tripod.


The Fusion Gear Plates have a pull out loop that you can connect the carabiner from a Black Rapid Strap to. 
It makes it a very secure option as long as you have the plate attached tightly.
It's quite a clever option. There may be others do that but its the only plate I've seen with that option.
I just screw it in and am used to making sure its tight. There is potential it can become lose but I've not had an incident yet.
If I have a 70-200 or 100-400 I move the strap to the foot of the lens as it balances easier for carrying.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 16, 2019)

@Hector1970 – that’s a nice feature!


----------

