Tripods: the necessary evil

Clearly, since motion induced blur is a major limiting factor on image quality when digiscoping, the tripod you use will have a big influence on the number of quality images you bring home.

The ideal tripod

• would provide a stable platform for the scope and camera, at heights from 2 to 6 feet
• would not pick up “environmental vibrations”…from you, from the wind, from passing trucks and distant construction, and any vibrations would fade out quickly (be “damped”)
• would be quick to set up and take down
• would allow for smooth easy motion of the scope in at least the vertical and horizontal dimensions
• would stop and stay where you want it once pointed at the subject without finding too many locking levers or knobs
• would be light enough to carry comfortably for long distances, and heavy enough not to blow over in the wind

You probably wouldn't be surprised to hear that the "ideal" tripod doesn't exist. You might, though, be surprised that, by the standard above, there isn't even a single excellent tripod on the market. Sad but true. There are a few tripods that are a bit better than average for digiscoping, a fair number of average tripods, and a huge number of totally inadequate tripods. And, also sad but true, “average” performance, by the standard above, provides only a marginally acceptable experience in the field.

Tripod nomenclature:  (see images below each section)

• Legs: 3, aluminum or carbon fiber: support the weight of your rig
• aluminum is less expensive, and, in heavier weights, can provide a stable support. It is also a fairly “resonant” material. It picks up environmental vibrations and the vibrations can “persist” over time. Another way of saying this is that aluminum is not “well damped.”
• carbon fiber is more expensive (often by a factor of 3 to 5). It is “well damped”. It does not pick up environmental vibrations and vibrations die out rapidly. It is lighter for equivalent leg diameters. Provides perhaps the current best combination of light weight and stability.
• legs: round or not
• round legs are what you would expect: complete round tubes. Structurally the most stable, but also the heaviest. (occasionally you see “round” aluminum legs with three flats or facets. These are essentially as stable as full round, but lower in weight). There are thick walled round tubes and thin walled round tubes. From a physics standpoint thin-walled tubes are just as strong in the vertical dimension as thick-walled tubes, but they lack the mass for real stability.
• light weight extruded or folded aluminum "tubes" in a variety of non-round shapes. They are not as stable as full round, but they sometimes weigh considerably less: used in inexpensive and light-weight tripods sold in department stores and at the lower end of the price spectrum in camera shops. (They used to make "channel" legs: aluminum legs, rectangular in profile, with one side open. Haven't seen those in a while...but they were never very stable.)
• legs: braced or adjustable spread
• non-round leg tripods, and some light weight round leg tripods often have “braces” which extend from the three legs to the center column for added stability. Many have a locking collar or lever where the braces join the center column so the legs can be locked in a partially spread position (when space is limited or extra height is needed). The bracing mechanism also helps in set up and take down as pushing any one leg in our out moves the other legs as well.
• In theory, heavier, round legged tripods do not need braces. Many compensate for the lack by providing "adjustable spread”. Where the leg joins the leg collar at the top of the tripod below the head, there are a set of levers which allow one or more of the legs to go beyond their normal spread. This can be handy on uneven ground, and can, if you spread all the legs, provide a wide, very stable, low base for windy situations.
• Leg locks: rotating or “flip”: keep the legs extended
• rotating collar locks, only used on round legs, screw to tighten a slotted outer tube around the inner tube. Relatively secure once tight enough. Sometimes difficult to tighten and loosen. Slower to set up and take down than flip locks.
• flip locks use a lever to press against the inner tube or channel. Relatively secure if properly made. Plastic versions wear rapidly and no longer hold. Metal versions can also wear but the best are adjustable to compensate (and to set the lever tension you prefer). Some lever locks are very difficult to operate without pinching fingers. Levers stick out where they can catch things, and, in my experience, suffer damage during transport. Flip locks are much faster to set up and take down than rotating collar locks.

• Center columns: geared or friction , the center column allow the height of the tripod to be extended above the leg collar and the height of the legs.

• many channel legged tripods feature a “geared” center column which you raise or lower by turning a crank on the leg collar. Most have a friction adjustment which can be set so that the center column stays put at the height you want it, without being locked down. For digiscoping or general observation there is no advantage to a geared center column.

• most round legged tripods have center column which you have to lift into place by hand, and then lock down with a friction screw on the side of the leg collar.
  (since the best advice for either digiscoping or observing is “don’t use the center column” (it always adds potential motion to the image), how the center column works is not as important as you might think.)

• Heads: plastic or metal: the head is part that turns on a tripod, the part directly below the scope.
• plastic heads are featured on inexpensive channel leg tripods. They can wear rapidly, and, except for the most heavy duty of them, do not provide adequate support for the substantial weight and torque of a spotting scope. They are very light weight.
• metal heads weigh more but are superior on all counts.
  (note: the Swarovski tripod head is made of a composite material and is, in my opinion, somewhere between plastic and metal in both weight and usability: over toward the metal side on both counts.)
• Heads: quick release or standard.
• quick release heads have a small plate that locks into the tripod head. This plate contains the attachment screw for the scope. It can be removed to mount on the scope, and then the whole thing, scope and plate can be locked into the head. If you buy additional plates you can leave them right on the equipment you want to use on the tripod.
  (quick release systems vary greatly in quality. The best feature some kind of secondary lock, often a friction screw, in addition to the lever lock that hold the plate into the head. The best are metal, as are the heads they fit.)
• standard heads have the screw for mounting the scope right in the head itself, generally under the scope platform. They are not as handy as quick release heads.
• Heads: pan: a pan head has both vertical and horizontal axis of motion, allowing to follow a subject as it moves both up and down and right to left.
• Heads: pan handle. Almost all tripod heads have a handle, from relatively short, to quite long, that sticks out from the head to increase leverage and control as you pan the head.
• Heads: single or multiple control
• single control heads come in two flavors, those with handle locks and ball heads
• handle lock heads lock and unlock the vertical axis of movement by twisting the pan handle. There is generally as second lock on the horizontal axis, but since the scope is not likely to drift horizontally, most people leave it loose for panning, and only lock it down if they are doing “hands-free” image capture with a remote release. For some reason, handle lock heads never seem to be available for high quality tripods. They are readily available on department store, channel leg, plastic head specials. But not on most tripods you might actually want to use.
• ball heads have only one lock which locks both the vertical and horizontal axis…in fact, since the whole head moves on a ball, there are really an infinite number of motion axis available. Some people I know and respect like these, and there are some truly professional ball heads out there (that cost as much as a good set of carbon fiber legs), but I find that the scope is always flopping over on its side when all I want to do is pan.
  (A variation on the ball head is the “pistol grip” head, a small ball with a large grip with a trigger lock that falls under your fingers as you grasp the grip to move it. They are tall, and, in my opinion, not as stable as other heads, plus I have never used one for long without pinching the flesh of my first finger joint in the trigger. I don’t like them.)
• multiple control heads have a lock on each axis, separate from the pan handle: one lock for horizontal, one lock for vertical, and, sometimes, another lock for a second vertical axis that allows you to tip head and scope over on its side for portrait format shots. Some of the most stable heads on the market use this arrangement, but…
  it is not an easy system to use or get used to. You have to have one hand for the pan handle and very likely you keep one on the focus or the camera. You have to let go of one or the other to tighten the vertical axis, and, on most heads (where the two controls are on opposite sides of the head), you have to let go with other hand to reach the horizontal control. It is a juggling act that just never does seem to come naturally. I have learned to use these heads in the field (for their other benefits) but I have never like them.
• Heads: fluid, fluid between the bearing surfaces of each axis of motion acts to smooth the motion AND to dampen backlash and limit drift. When you turn something on an axis with friction, when you stop applying force, the part in motion tends to spring back a short distance (backlash), and when you stop applying force to the axis, gravity takes over to induce its own motion…fluid heads combat both kinds of unwanted motion…but mostly they just provide for that silky smooth feel as you pan. Necessary for video shots…just nice to have for stills.

quick release head with plate lock, and notice that all the motion locks are on one side, making for easy, one handed operation. This is becoming my favorite head of all time.

So basically there are three types of tripods:

1)          $39-$150: light weight aluminum tripods sold in discount stores, or, at the lower end of the price range, in camera stores as well. These generally have braced “non-round” legs with plastic flip locks, plastic pan, quick-release, non-fluid heads with handle locks on the vertical axis. They often have geared center columns. They are made for light-weight still and video cameras and they aren’t much use, even for their intended application. There are a thousand different brands. Under a scope they provide the illusion of support without its substance. There are exceptions. Some of the more expensive and larger name-brand “video” tripods are actually sturdy and stable enough for field use under a digiscoping rig…but they are as expensive as a conventional round leg, metal pan head tripod (see below).

        $129-$400: round (or faceted), aluminum leg, metal quick-release head tripods. The vast majority of these are made by Manfrotto (imported by Bogan Imaging, and known for years in the US as “Bogan Tripods”). Manfrotto makes a few light weight leg and head sets with permanently attached heads, but most of their products are sold as leg sets, with a variety of interchangeable head choices. Almost all have “adjustable spread” legs and no leg braces. Any of the flip lock leg sets are relatively stable. As the leg diameters go up, so does the weight. Interestingly, my own experience, backed by some formal testing, indicates that the increase in stability does not rise proportionally with the weight or tube diameter of the leg set. Doubling the weight of the tripod only increases stability by about 10%, if that. I tend to favor the lighter leg sets, with one of the standard fluid, quick-release, head choices (despite the fact that they are all “multiple control” heads).

For years my favorite tripod was the Bogan Junior…one of the light weight legs sets with a permanently mounted, handle lock, pan head. It had twist collar locks on the legs…which I hated, but I lived with them for light weight and ease of use of the tripod. This tripod has been reincarnated in the Manfrotto Digi line as the 728B, with (drum roll) flip locks. I have used this tripod under a full digiscoping rig and found it to be just about as stable as tripods weighing twice as much. Your mileage may vary.
(Please note: most of the major optics makers sell a tripod under their own label: all most all of these tripods are actually made by Manfrotto.)

3)          $350-$600: Carbon fiber tripods with interchangeable heads. Carbon fiber provides what is almost certainly the best current compromise of light weight, high stability, and high damping. Only a few years ago the only carbon fiber tripods on the market cost at least half the price of the best spotting scopes made. Today you can buy a set of light duty Manfrotto carbon fiber legs with a light-weight magnesium fluid pan head for under $400. Of course you and also spend $700 on a heavy duty set of Gitzo legs alone, without the head.

Bottom line: none of these tripods are going to do what you want them too…none of them are going to do what you expect them to…and none of them are going to do what the digiscoper needs done. None of them provide the kind of stable, reliable support for your rig that you need or want. I know people who use 35 lbs. wooden or fiberglass surveyor's tripods. They don't do the job either. So, what do you do? My opinion: either buy a set of light weight aluminum legs and decent pan head ($150-$200) or go for the lightest or next to lightest carbon fiber legs and a appropriate head ($400-$500). Either choice will weigh about the same. The carbon fiber will be considerably more stable.

My current tripod is a Manfrotto Mag-fiber from the “View” line: I bought it as a set, the 190MFV legs and the 700RC2 head together at one price. I like it as much as I have ever liked any tripod, better than most. I can live with it, and I get a fair percentage of good shots off it. That’s about as much as I am willing to say for any tripod currently made.