Full System Operation
Straight out of the box, er, bag, the minute spreader on the Libec showed it was going to live up to my rather low expectations. At full height with the spreader fully retracted, the whole system looks like it would blow over with a small gust of wind, and loading the camera and slide plate without holding onto the tripod with one hand is inviting it to simply tip over.
Having got it loaded, getting a hand to the clamp knob under the receiver is a mission, even for someone with average sized hands, like myself. The legs subtend such a small angle to the receiver that it’s almost easier to put your hand between the top stage tubes to level the head. From that point onwards, things got, er, exciting. Even at the minimum drag settings, firm but gentle panning could lift a leg, scarier still, the amount of wind up visible when panning was totally eye watering.
Things improved quite a bit on the timber deck when I removed the little rubber spitballs from the steel spikes. More improvement was noted when I moved the system onto flat concrete with the main boots fitted, but it still didn’t feel as solid as it should. Click both drag knobs to their higher setting and things go downhill even further.
Having by this point decided that using the system with the spreader in full retract was not to be recommended except in a true emergency, I took some time to find a spreader setting which gave what I consider to be stable enough operation for every day shooting.
After a bit of trial and error, I settled on each of the spreader arms being extended by 21 mm, giving a leg angle of 74º, at which point the system finally felt as I believe it should. Sadly this didn’t completely solve the leg lifting, especially with a diagonal pan with tilt downwards. The wind up was still a problem but decidedly improved over the 77º leg angle.
It was at this point I decided to abandon the review temporarily and instead plough into the System Stress tests on all four of the systems, to try and get some perspective on the Libec’s apparent wind up woes in comparison to the other sticks on test.
[Note: the System Stress Tests are forthcoming in yet another DVi article to be linked here.]
To cut to the chase, what became evident was that both the Sachtler and the Libec tripods, when used full height with the mid level spreaders in their retracted state are, and I won’t beat about the bush, awful! Tho’ the Sachtler, despite having substantially worse “Rotational Windup” figures, was nowhere near as twitchy in use as the Libec.
To quantify that, the Sachtler and Libec only managed scores of 6.3 (ouch!) and 9.4 respectively in the “Rotational Windup” test, as opposed to the Manfrotto and Vinten at 12.9 and 15.45 (higher is better). In Sachtler’s defence, it must be remembered it is a 2:1:1 design, which quite simply was never going to come near a 2:2:1 system worth it’s salt. However, all is not completely lost with the Libec.
Extend the Libec’s mid level spreader fully and repeat the exercise and it turns in a much improved score of 14.5, with a dot trace of 5.5, though even this isn’t cosmic considering that the Manfrotto at full retract can manage 12.9. The Libec leg angle is still a pretty scary 70º at full spreader range, especially when compared to the Manfrotto and Vinten at 60º and 55º respectively, under the same full spreader conditions.
I really do think Libec ought to reconsider the whole spreader issue and go instead for something that gives, say a 74º to 62º leg angle spread. Agreed, it’s going to lose some maximum height, but there’s no point going that high if the entire unit becomes hopelessly unstable, which in my opinion is the case at the moment. Even the Sachtler Speedlock only gives 75º and 62º.
What this means in real terms is:
| Spreader Extension (Full Height Tripod) |
Leg Angle | Height to top of receiver metric vs. standard |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Fully Retracted | 77º | 1483 mm | 58.38 in. |
| Extended (appx. 21mm per arm) | 74º | 1466 mm | 57.71 in. |
| Fully Extended | 70º | 1425 mm | 56.10 in. |
| Spreader Disconnected | 64º – 65º | 1375 mm | 54.13 in. |
| Spreader Disconnected | 62º | 1340 mm | 52.75 in. |
At 62º, with the head fitted and my XL1s mounted on top, the camera is still at a perfectly workable height for someone of my height – 6 foot plus change. Interestingly at 62º the totally unscientific “grab the receiver with both hands and twist” test does indeed show a dramatic improvement in the tripods performance.
At this point it’s probably worthwhile doing a direct comparison between the Libec RT-30B and the Vinten Vision Blue sticks to see where the major differences lie, seeing as how the two systems are fighting for the same market patch of turf. Just to add a bit of gratuitous sex and violence, I’ll throw in the Manfrotto data as well. I’ve left the Sachtler out of the mix, as it’s a 2:1:1 design so not a comparable configuration. Let’s look at the figures:
| Libec | Manfrotto | Vinten | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Top section tube spacing centre to centre and tube diameter (od) |
80 mm | 90 mm | 90mm |
| 14 x 16mm | 16 mm | 16 mm | |
| Mid section tube spacing and tube diameter |
40 mm | 53 mm | 45 mm |
| 14 x 16 mm | 16 mm | 16 mm | |
| Bottom tube diameter and cross section |
22 mm | 25 mm | 26.4 mm x 16.4 mm |
| Circular | Circular | Ovoid | |
| Leg Length | 1. 51 metres | 1.58 metres | 1.58 metres |
| Leg Angle- Retracted Spreader | 77º | 74º | 70º |
| Leg Angle – Full Spread | 70º | 60º | 55º |
| Weight (1) | 2.925 kg | 3.25 kg | 3.750 kg |
| Stress Test Scores: | |||
| Rotational Windup (2)** | 9.4 / 14.5 | 12.9 / 17.55 | 15.45 / 18.6 |
| Receiver Warp (2)** | 15.5 / 15.5 | 16.25 / 16.00 | 15.95 / 16.00 |
| Note (1) — Vastly different from the published figures. Tripod with spreader, no head, no boots. Note (2) — Higher figures are better. ** These figures are with the spreader fully retracted and fully extended. |
|||
I need to comment on those figures for the Libec twin tubes, by the way. In order to keep the dimensions and thus weight of the tripod as low as possible, Libec have opted to use elliptical tubes in both the top and middle stages. Unfortunately, this has meant that the four tubes have the 14 mm face taking the strain of any wind up, not the 16 mm face. This, in addition to the narrower tube spacing on the top two sections and the extraordinarily steep leg angle, has all conspired to erode the tripods rigidity.
Given the above, I think it fair to say the Libec really isn’t in the same league as the Vinten by a good margin and even the Manfrotto sticks give it a fair old hammering, which is quite surprising considering that the Manfrotto is $40 odd bucks cheaper than the Libec at B&H.
Let’s check out that RH-25 head. Just to make sure I was comparing apples with apples on this issue, I decided to level the playing field for the Libec head and instead of testing it with the Libec sticks, parked it on the Vision Blue sticks for a direct side by side using the best sticks of the bunch. What a difference! The head handles surprisingly well. The pans are smooth, as are the tilts, figure of 8’s are nearly as good as the Vision Blue, and there’s not much difference between the two. The slot load is actually better than on the Vinten, with a better chamfer and at least the slide plate lock stays unlocked between loads.
All the controls do what they’re supposed to with ease and no drama. The only real fly in the ointment is that two stage drag system. Not having an “off” is an annoyance, not having continuously variable drag is a pain, but on a decent set of sticks neither are as big a pain as they are on the Libec sticks as they stand.
Reviewers Note: Subsequent to writing the above, I have revisited the Libec system on a number of occasions, in an attempt to find out just what it takes to get this system to handle as I believe it should. Result? Well, the bottom line is that with the spreader in full retract, nothing but kid gloves and don’t even breathe on it. Don’t use the second drag level, and do everything slooooooow. In this configuration I’m struggling to find anything good to say about it, to be honest.
With the spreader arms out by 21mm to give a leg angle of 74º, it’s useable but not stellar. With the spreader fully extended, it’s not bad and can turn in some good results, though slowly does it, but it’s still nowhere near as solid a set-up as the Vision Blue, or even, surprisingly, the Manfrotto. In short, it’s an extremely capable head, let down by a set of sticks that have been compromised way past their build statistics by poor spreader design, in an effort, presumably, to get more height. Shame.
Summing Up
What can I say? Well, how about this: I think that with the addition of a purpose built set of 21mm spreader arm extenders OR a complete redesign of the spreader, this could be one heck of a system, for the price. True, the maximum working height wouldn’t be Himalayan, but you can’t have everything with such a lightweight build in the sticks department. If the Rotational Windup scores could be jacked up to within a bull’s roar of the Manfrotto, which I think such a set of extenders/ a redesign would do, you’d have a very good head on a very stable and rigid set of sticks with a decent case and all the other bells and whistles. It does have continuously variable counterbalance, which is a huge plus, but doesn’t have the drag systems to match, but with better handling sticks this would be less of a downer.
For a street price of $760, $40 more than the Manfrotto but $360 less than the Vinten Vision Blue, I leave it up to you. Without spreader extenders, a redesign, with stepped pan and tilt drag, it’s a country mile away from my “must have” list but that’s MY list, not necessarily anyone else’s.
Facts and Figures
You can find everything you need or want to know in the central F&F section here:
[Note: the Facts and Figures section is forthcoming in yet another DVi article to be linked here.]
Questions? This, and my other reviews, assumes the reader has a reasonable working knowledge of modern camera support equipment. As I am aware that in some cases that will not be true, there will undoubtedly be questions arising from something I have not explained as clearly as I could have. The beauty of hosting these reviews on DVinfo is that the writer and many other experienced shooters can be found, asked questions of and interacted with live, by simply diving into the appropriate Forums.
For a direct line to me, dive in here: DV Info Net Forum: Support Your Local Camera, or Send me an e–mail, just click on my name in any post there and fire away. You do need to be a member to interact by the way, but heck, it’s free!
