Have I bought a lemon?

[Paul Shields]

I was in need of a new tripod (already have an old Slik that I find is mostly OK but not very sturdy). In an impulsive mood I snagged the following on evilbay, mainly cos I was attracted to the price and name (cost was around $28 + shipping).

Problem is, I'm not sure if it will work OK - will the fixings be compatible with an SLR?

Description:
Linhof (all metal) Sturdy Professional Tripod. 2ft to 5ft Extendable. Includes all fixings.

Information Sticker: Linhof Light Weight Pro Tripod, Identity Number 003319.

[deluco]

This is a video tripod. If you want a tripod for still camera's you will also need to purchase a head. I recommend a decent ball head with something like Bogen or Gitzo legs. You can get a decent tripod and a ball head for probably just over $150 or so.

The only person who can answer the question you ask is you. Is this tripod you bought going to do the job for you? If not, you can return it...or give it away. May not be worth the insured postage to return it.

Here's some very good Bogen legs(Bogen / Manfrotto 3001BN Tripod Legs (Black)) for under $100


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...goryNavigation

Here's a ball head that will work very well(Bogen / Manfrotto 486RC2 Compact Ball Head with Rapid Connect System 2 (Quick Release)):

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...goryNavigation

The problem is that there are so many to choose from it's difficult to know what to get. Try to find a friend who can
assist you.

[Paul Shields]

Jim thanks for the info. If it's specifically for video then that's not a problem as I have a video camera that it can be used with. The brief googling I did seemed to indicate that it was used for film. I'm a bit bewildered by all the options just for a tripod, but I do know that I need a better one, one that is a lot more stable than my current cheapo.

I'll keep with the transaction and see what it's like - it's not exactly the most expensive bit of equipment I've bought and I'm sure it will find a use.

[deluco]

Originally Posted by Paul

Jim thanks for the info. If it's specifically for video then that's not a problem as I have a video camera that it can be used with. The brief googling I did seemed to indicate that it was used for film. I'm a bit bewildered by all the options just for a tripod, but I do know that I need a better one, one that is a lot more stable than my current cheapo.

I'll keep with the transaction and see what it's like - it's not exactly the most expensive bit of equipment I've bought* and I'm sure it will find a use.

You can use it for film camera's but you'll find it not very easy to use. It does have a tilt left feature but it's not very user-friendly. I've used these for film cameras long ago, and it didn't work out.

The one you display also does not seem very stable...not even for video, which usually requires even more stability at the longer focal lengths.

[Paul Shields]

Well I'll give it a whirl and let you know how it pans out (is there a pun in there?). I just need something that is a bit more stable than my current flimsy setup. In what way does the pic indicate that it may not be stable (I ask out of ignorance, so looking for some pointers here).

[rsprouse]

No offense, but that looks like a real flimsy setup. If you are serious about your photography, heed Thom Hogan's advice. Give this a read:

http://www.bythom.com/support.htm

After agonizing about this for a while, I recently "bit the bullet" and ordered a Gitzo 1327 tripod and a Markins M-20 ballhead. I could not be more happy. But I am over a thousand dollers poorer. The good news is, I will never need a sturdier setup.

-- Russ

[JDArt]

Originally Posted by rsprouse

No offense, but that looks like a real flimsy setup.* If you are serious about your photography, heed Thom Hogan's advice.* Give this a read:

http://www.bythom.com/support.htm

After agonizing about this for a while, I recently "bit the bullet" and ordered a Gitzo 1327 tripod and a Markins M-20 ballhead.* I could not be more happy.* But I am over a thousand dollers poorer.* The good news is, I will never need a sturdier setup.

* -- Russ*

The 13xx series is indeed very good. I can vouch for that.

[Paul Shields]

Well, yah boo sux to you etc . I got it delivered a few days ago (with nice case), and in my opinion it really rocks. For $28 I didn't think it was a big gamble, and it really does work very well. Construction quality and weight is exceptional. I can't see it being any hinderance in the area I needed it - landscape photography. I'm really very impressed with it!

[edit]

well, you were right in the end. I've just got myself a more flexible head as in the end I did miss not being able to do portraits.

[nancyangermeyer]

I have been given the same tripod and have used it on a 35 mm camera. I never liked the quick release screw head. So this tripod is for a video camera? that might explain the difficulties in using it. I have now lost the quick release screw and am looking for another. (It kept loosening) Any idea where to get one? I would like to keep the tripod at least useable. suggestions appreciated. nancy

[Jacco]

I've found it really useful to pay close attention to the tripod you plan to purchase, as chances are that it may be with you for the rest of your life. I have 5 tripods. Bought my first one, carefully, in 1978. That paid off, because I still use it today, 30 years later. And it looks like I'll keep using it in the next 20 years too. I got my Canon A-1 at the same time, at 20 times the price of the tripod. I had another camera not 5 years later...

[Harry]

Have you bought a lemon? I don't think so. I have converted my lower end tripods like this into lightstands for outdoor shoots. Works great for holding off camera flash.

[w7apd]

From the look of it, that tripod is not going to work out if you put any kind of real load on it. Harry is right, though: you'll find yourself needing an extra pod to hold flash, or to hold up a scrim or whatever. And a lightweight tripod will improve a little point/shoot digital camera immensely, esp. if you're making panoramas with it. Keep it, see if it works for you, but don't be too surprised if a heavier pod is in your future.

[dougsmit]

I sincerely doubt this tripod was ever intended for video but Linhof cameras have adjustments on the back that would make it unnecessary to turn the camera on its side to do verticals so there would be no reason to put that feature on a tripod. I never saw this model or anything that light so I assume it was intended for their 2 1/4" press type cameras (smallest format they offered). In general, Linholf products are built well enough that they could be classified as weapons. My 4x5 view from the 1950's is a horse and was considered their amateur model back then.

I'd use it with confidence but consider adding a vertical adapter (Really Right stuff makes one but the can be home made) or using with lenses having a tripod ring.

Parts: Rumor says old Linhof parts are a problem but it might be worth a call if you are in the US.
LINHOF and WISTA
MARFLEX SERVICE
117 Anchorage Rd.
Havelock, NC 28523
Phone: 1.252 652-4401

marflex@aol.com

[garyosborne]

Lol...gotta laugh, you guys are responding to the OP who posted in 2005. I'm guessing that crappy tripod he bought has long been in the bin. IMO anything where the legs only come up to half the height of the tripod is next to useless.

[Songman45]

Originally Posted by garyosborne

Lol...gotta laugh, you guys are responding to the OP who posted in 2005. I'm guessing that crappy tripod he bought has long been in the bin. IMO anything where the legs only come up to half the height of the tripod is next to useless.

Maybe with the bump, we'll find out if it was a lemon or if he liked it.

[Harry]