I'm looking for a lightweight cheap tripod I can throw in my backpack for day hiking. B&H has lots of choices. Under $30 would be good. I have a big heavy one as my primary, but need something for outdoor shots.
I took a lightweight tripod on a two week hike in central Australia and it was almost a complete waste of time, especially for golden hour shots or if it was a bit windy. There might be good options out there so I'll keep an eye on this thread, but next time I'd be tempted to go with something low tech like a bean bag. Just my 2c, but I lost a lot of potentially decent shots.
@klemieux I'd advise against light weight.
IME lightweight can be effected too much just by the mirror clicking up. Case in point, the waterfall behind me in my avatar. I spent all morning photographing it using slower shutter to get a nice fogged effect. Thought I had a lot of good shots till I looked closer and saw they were all a little blurry, even around the rocks. Since I had used the self timer and was very careful my only deduction was that it was the mirror clicking up and back down that caused a little shake.
It really depends on what you're using the tripod for I guess.
I echo the comments against light weight. Sure, it makes it easier to carry, but then everything is a lot more prone to blur and camera shake, especially if there is wind.
@neda Does the lens on the camera you were using for these shots have image stabilization? If so, be sure to turn it off for tripod shots. I learned that about 6 months ago. Didn't realize that not tuning it off, especially in an extended time shot, can give it the appearance of a slight shake. So that could have possibly been the problem if it wasn't the tripod.
@hmgphotos@neda@leahfu I'd go so far as to say a lightweight tripod is worse than none at all because it lulls you into thinking 'well it might work out ok'. If you do go lightweight make sure to use mirror lock-up and a cable release as the mirror shake can be really bad, especially at intermediate shutterspeeds.
@klemieux ha! no :) my budget extends to good quality glass only. Image stabilisation is an expensive luxury I can't afford, or choose not to. I have no use for it anyway* :)
*EDIT, haha, no that is a complete lie. I would love to have IS, but you can't have everything ;)
I found that light weight, quality, good and worthwhile do hog equal cheap. I tested an Induro Travel model made of carbon but at $300 I bought the $100 aluminim and while satisfied can tell the difference. Also tripod heads can get heavy.
@klemieux It does have IS, not sure if I turned it off or not, will do some trials with it, I have learned about turning off IS for extended shots since then, just havnet been tested it out. I've stopped carrying my tripod on hikes, not sure when the last time I used it was.
The fact that the rocks were blurry as well lead me to think it wasn't the IS causing trouble.
Are you looking for a full size tripod or just something to keep the camera stable?
I received the DSLR version of the Gorillapod for Christmas and am looking forward to trying it out on some longer hikes soon. It seemed to do a good job of holding the camera steady for the couple of indoor shots I've used it for so far.
A tripod under $30 is almost useless, like @dieter said. I had the same thought and it messed up some good shots. You're better off with a mono pod than a cheep tripod.
However the weight of your camera will affect how well a cheap tripod will perform. If it's a point and shoot camera it might not be so bad, DSLR cameras not so much.
In the case of hiking, a monopod might work better, I tend to not use tripods simply because I spend more time setting them up than using them. I'd rather be resourceful and find a rock or something and get to the fun part: shooting. That said I usually shoot portraits, rarely nature. I've still had good luck with monopods though and (mine) is lighter than my $300 "light" tripod lol
i have to agree with the general sentiment in this thread. I went on a hiking day trip a few weeks ago and carried my heavy manfrotto 190XPROB and dslr all day (hiked about 7-8km under midday sun). It was tiring stuff, but i'm glad i had a sturdy tripod when i took shots.
In any case, a $30 experiment is hardly risky, you have nothing to lose if you buy it and try it out for the day. If it works for you then great, if not then you know for next time.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
IME lightweight can be effected too much just by the mirror clicking up. Case in point, the waterfall behind me in my avatar. I spent all morning photographing it using slower shutter to get a nice fogged effect. Thought I had a lot of good shots till I looked closer and saw they were all a little blurry, even around the rocks. Since I had used the self timer and was very careful my only deduction was that it was the mirror clicking up and back down that caused a little shake.
It really depends on what you're using the tripod for I guess.
Do you want to walk 5 hours with a tripod that is heavy to get the shot or would you prefer to walk with a light tripod and NOT get the shot.
You might find the carbon fiber ones are rigid enough but you arn't going to get them for under $50.
*EDIT, haha, no that is a complete lie. I would love to have IS, but you can't have everything ;)
http://photojojo.com/store/awesomeness/pocket-pod/
http://photojojo.com/store/awesomeness/folding-tripod/
The fact that the rocks were blurry as well lead me to think it wasn't the IS causing trouble.
I received the DSLR version of the Gorillapod for Christmas and am looking forward to trying it out on some longer hikes soon. It seemed to do a good job of holding the camera steady for the couple of indoor shots I've used it for so far.
However the weight of your camera will affect how well a cheap tripod will perform. If it's a point and shoot camera it might not be so bad, DSLR cameras not so much.
In any case, a $30 experiment is hardly risky, you have nothing to lose if you buy it and try it out for the day. If it works for you then great, if not then you know for next time.