Phil Battley
01-01-2010, 02:53 AM
Hi all,
I somewhat unexpectedly managed to procure a Canon 500 mm lens last year for research purposes (I work on shorebirds), which raised a new issue. I use a spotting scope on a Manfrotto fluid video head as my standard fixture, and that was fine with a 400 f5.6 lens. Now I want to be able to move between that head/scope pairing and a Mongoose 3.5/500 mm combo, in the field, often on a tidal flat (where I don't want to drop any screws or tools) without having to lug two tripods around.
One option I have seen mentioned is using cut-off centre columns and having a different rig on each. Has anyone tried this with the Gitzo GT3531 or GT3541L? I would prefer a 3-section tripod rather than 4, as I usually have to have the bottom section out to keep the first joint out of the mud or water, and the 3-part legs are fatter (and I presume sturdier) than 4-part bottom sections. However, the height of the 4-section tripod (150 cm without column extended) is better than the 3-section one (133 cm). And has anyone ever compared these for functionality with a 500 mm against the standard non-column versions?
Many thanks in advance for your comments!
Cheers from a windy NZ,
Phil
I somewhat unexpectedly managed to procure a Canon 500 mm lens last year for research purposes (I work on shorebirds), which raised a new issue. I use a spotting scope on a Manfrotto fluid video head as my standard fixture, and that was fine with a 400 f5.6 lens. Now I want to be able to move between that head/scope pairing and a Mongoose 3.5/500 mm combo, in the field, often on a tidal flat (where I don't want to drop any screws or tools) without having to lug two tripods around.
One option I have seen mentioned is using cut-off centre columns and having a different rig on each. Has anyone tried this with the Gitzo GT3531 or GT3541L? I would prefer a 3-section tripod rather than 4, as I usually have to have the bottom section out to keep the first joint out of the mud or water, and the 3-part legs are fatter (and I presume sturdier) than 4-part bottom sections. However, the height of the 4-section tripod (150 cm without column extended) is better than the 3-section one (133 cm). And has anyone ever compared these for functionality with a 500 mm against the standard non-column versions?
Many thanks in advance for your comments!
Cheers from a windy NZ,
Phil