Pretty basic question: how much of a difference does aluminum vs. carbon fiber make?

Does one last longer than the other? Is the only difference the aluminum is lighter, and more subject to shake due to vibrations, but easier to carry? And conversely the carbon fiber is more stable, but a bit heavier?

i believe the carbon fiber is suppose to be lighter than aluminum but just as rigid therefore making it more attractive to users because of its lighter weight

ah, thanks for the info. So is that the only difference, the weight? Would that make a difference for stability in case a truck drives by, shaking the tripod? Does one hold up better under prolonged wear and tear?

CF is quite a bit lighter, quite a bit more expenses but just as stable. It is more prone to damage though, they can snap for sure (more so with the slimmer tubes), and they can also splinter if you scrape them on rocks etc.
All in all though, well worth having if you've got to lug the gear, they've pretty much taken over a big chunk of the market.
Steve

if you are going to subject your tripod to prolonged wear and tear which i am taking to mean it will be used in less than ideal conditions then you might want to consider finding a decent set of used aluminum sticks which are readily available on ebay and other sites

Don't get me wrong Mark, CF is tough stuff and particularly the pro tripod gear will stand a lot of punishment and wear/tear. It's only really when you accidents (like in transit, a car driving over it etc. things which DO happen now and again) that there's a problem.
Steve

After nearly 20 years of using CF and aluminum tripods I don't have any problems with either one. I like the CF better because it's lighter. Any tripod, CF or Aluminum, will either get broken or bent when run over by a car or destroyed by the airlines. Buy the one that works but all things being equal I'll save a few pounds wherever I can.

I was testing some Gitzo carbon tripods yesterday and I couldn't believe how light they are! Sure, they cost an arm and a leg, but if they are lighter, chances are that I will use it more often because it's not a big deal carrying it around. I think this is a strong argument for carbon fiber. I'm gonna get me one Monday first thing in the morning when the store opens again.

The major difference is that when carbon fiber hits its failure point, it shatters or splinters apart. There is no give to carbon fiber. Aluminum, on the other hand, will deform or bend once its elastic limit is reached, and often can be bent back to close to the original shape if not too badly deformed to begin with.

Metal is also more tolerant of minor damage, like nicks or scrapes. Small amounts of damage don't appreciably weaken an aluminum tripod. Nick a carbon fiber tripod, however, and you've just created a stress point that will get damaged further every time you flex or stress the tripod. Carbon fiber has poorer cold-weather strength, becoming more brittle when cold.

That said, a well-engineered carbon-fiber tripod will work as well (if not better) than the equivalent aluminum tripod for --most-- applications. The trick is finding a company that's designed the tripod correctly to take advantage of carbon-fiber's unique characteristics. Just duplicating a metal tripod's design in CF won't work -- the two materials behave much differently from each other.

Martin

Martin,

From your knowledge which tripods are actually built properly to be a carbon tripod???

I am looking for one to use under a gitzo 1380 fluid head and it will have to support 12 to 15 pounds of camera.

the qualifier is it is going to be back packed for filming wildlife!!!

Martin,

From your knowledge which tripods are actually built properly to be a carbon tripod???

I am looking for one to use under a gitzo 1380 fluid head and it will have to support 12 to 15 pounds of camera.

the qualifier is it is going to be back packed for filming wildlife!!!

Unfortunately, my knowledge about carbon fiber comes from a long stint as a materials technician, making parts for airborne systems, and NOT from direct experience with tripods. When it comes to tripods, I tend to stick with metal ones because I can easily modify them. You just can't drill holes in carbon fiber composites. They require special abrasive bits that grind their way through, plus once you've made a hole, you've broken the continuous fibers that give fiber-reinforced composites their remarkable characteristics, making a weak spot.

I would assume an established manufacturer such as Manfrotto would have the kinks worked out of the design by now. Most Brand X tripods tend to be metal, or are so cheaply made from regular plastic you'd never buy one. I've never bought a tripod without having actually handled it directly.

Martin

Think you'll find these are the only ones ever made (that I'm aware of) that actually use CF as it should be used.

http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=113753

Not exactly back pack - able tho', lest it's an extremely sturdy back!


CS

Martin,

From your knowledge which tripods are actually built properly to be a carbon tripod???

I am looking for one to use under a gitzo 1380 fluid head and it will have to support 12 to 15 pounds of camera.

the qualifier is it is going to be back packed for filming wildlife!!!
People have the same Gitzo tripod they've been lugging around for 20 years.

The ones made now are even better.

As I said in another thread I have a Gitzo series 3 under a Gitzo 1380. It is rock solid. There was no shake for me even when the Series 3 legs were extended to 7 feet.

Aluminum might bend back into shape, but I doubt the extension legs would still slide smoothly.

Here is one tripod Gitzo recommends for the 1380 head. It is rated to hold 39.7 lbs.:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/475950-REG/Gitzo_GT3530LSV_GT3530LSV_2_Stage_Carbon_Fiber.html

The only thing similar is the Miller legs, but I think the Gitzo is better.

The legs above weight 4 lbs. Some people don't like having to adjust one leg at a time in the field. If this is an issue, and you want quality with ultra quick setup, look at the Carbon Fiber legs that come with the Sachtler FSB-6 head.

The Gitzo legs are small and light enough that you don't have to leave them lying about so that a truck can run over them.

I bought my Series 3 XLS legs after using the Gitzo traveler legs (Series 1) under an XH-A1. So I now have two sets of Gitzo legs and two of the Gitzo fluid heads (the same plate works on both heads).

Here's my current order of choice for support if traveling:
1. Gitzo CF
2. Sachtler CF
3. CineSaddle

I have two sets of Cartoni legs, with 100mm and 75mm bowl. Neither is a solid as the Gitzo. Both work well. The 100mm is great for the jib. The 75mm flex a bit but are good for an extra setup.

If you have to carry them, I don't think you'll be unhappy with Gitzo CF Series 3 (or even Series 4). If you change your mind, sell them for 30% off and consider it a rental.

I say go for the Gitzo, and don't look back. I have a 7 foot tripod that will slide into the newspaper pocket of wheeled carry-on. If you are concerned about the legs banging you can put on the leg wraps and use a small padded case.

I've been hiking and backpacking around with a set of Manfrotto Carbon Fiber legs (Carbone 442 — now discontinued) for at least 5 years now. The legs have been banged around plenty, been used in blizzards as well as extreme heat and still work like new. In fact, they're a whole lot easier to handle in hot weather than aluminum. They still look good, too, although a lot of the Manfrotto decal has worn off. The legs only weigh 3.8 pounds (not including the head) which is really nice on a trek. If your field work is really out in the field, I can't recommend the appropriate Carbon Fiber support for your camera enough.

Best,
Peter
www.parkfilms.com

Think you'll find these are the only ones ever made (that I'm aware of) that actually use CF as it should be used.

http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=113753

Not exactly back pack - able tho', lest it's an extremely sturdy back!


CS
Do you mean that Gitzo is using Carbon Fiber improperly?
http://www.gitzo.com/Jahia/site/gitzo/cache/off/pid/15944

Here is the Vinten Fibertec 3498-3 ENG/EFP Carbon Fiber 2-stage legs:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/276287-REG/Vinten_34983_3498_3_ENG_EFP_2_Stage_Fibertec.html

They weigh 3 lbs more than the Gitzo, though they will hold up to 99 lbs. Since the bowl is 100mm an adapter is needed.

Maybe it's just me, but I like my tripods to be nice and heavy. Unless you are hiking or backpacking with it, the added weight is only going to make it more stable. I have a cf tripod for my still camera, and I've always regretted purchasing it.

Maybe it's just me, but I like my tripods to be nice and heavy. Unless you are hiking or backpacking with it, the added weight is only going to make it more stable. I have a cf tripod for my still camera, and I've always regretted purchasing it.

I think Wade is right on the mark; heavier is better unless portability is the primary concern. A lot of comparisons between aluminum and CF are apples and oranges because it isn't clear whether stability or light weight is more important.

Best,
Peter
www.parkfilms.com

I agree with Wade. For me, heavier is better (within reason -- I have a wonderful Davis and Sanford Mark II with the FM-25 head that you could mount an elephant on, and it weighs about as much), though I suspect it's from my days as a still photographer where one-to-six MINUTE exposures were not uncommon at all. The Davis and Sanford was a real lifesaver during a 14 hour marathon documentary shoot. By the end of the day, the tripod was holding ME up as well.

Martin

Nope, didn't mean that at all.

If you took note of Martins post a short way back, when he talks about different materials behaveing in different ways, that's what I was reffering to.

I have no doubt that a suitably designed and constructed CF tube can out run a similar metal tube without breaking a sweat.

It is, however, still a tube, with a tubes inherant design limitations. By it's very design it will flex in any direction when a lateral force is applied to it, for example panning with head drag applied.

The FiberTecs use a box girder design that to all intents and purposes is immune to lateral (rotational) flex of the tripod. To move it requires flexing a 50 mm CF box girder sideways - I cannot induce such flex using every ounce of strength and I weigh in at 240 lbs and mean with it.

There is no way on the planet a tube smaller than a scaffold pole could totally resist such flex with the usual weights and drag found in everyday videography.

Does that mean the Gitso's you pointed out are rubbish? Of course not. I actually like the look of them a lot.

I suppose my point is that the FiberTecs show no visible artifacts whatsoever when shooting HD with full 20X zoom under any conditions. I don't believe the same could be said of those Gitso's under the same circumstances.

However, if anyone's prepared to stump up with a set, I'll run 'em through my chamber of horrors and find out once and for all.


CS

The Fibertec looks very nice and I like the 99 lbs. load limit.

Regarding flex, rotational or otherwise, I am amazed at how the Gitzo series 3 I recently got does not seem to have any. They just don't move.

The light weight does require some care to make sure they stay on the ground, but I am amazed at how solid they are. I just used them with the 1380 head and an XH-A1 to shoot a dance performance. Panning back and forth, slow or fast, and in the video I don't say any evidence of flex.

With the 100mm bowl Cartoni tripod I have, with mid spreader, there is a bit of flex, and in the 75mm bowl Cartoni there is a lot.

The Gitzo legs are not the most convenient to setup, but they do excel in the situations they are suited. They let you use a full size tripod in situations where a full size tripod is too heavy and awakward.

The Fibertec looks very nice and I like the 99 lbs. load limit.

Regarding flex, rotational or otherwise, I am amazed at how the Gitzo series 3 I recently got does not seem to have any. They just don't move.

The light weight does require some care to make sure they stay on the ground, but I am amazed at how solid they are. I just used them with the 1380 head and an XH-A1 to shoot a dance performance. Panning back and forth, slow or fast, and in the video I don't say any evidence of flex.

With the 100mm bowl Cartoni tripod I have, with mid spreader, there is a bit of flex, and in the 75mm bowl Cartoni there is a lot.

The Gitzo legs are not the most convenient to setup, but they do excel in the situations they are suited. They let you use a full size tripod in situations where a full size tripod is too heavy and awakward.

Same here. I just bought a Miller Solo 75mm alum. sticks, and this tripod is "twisting" even at 4' tall, when I apply drug to the pan. My Gitzo 1410 tripod I sold (but still have one more) was a aluminum and at 7 1/2' hight was STABLE never "twisted" at all. It's amazing. If I can turn back the time, i never sell that beauty. The Miller is nice, about half of the weight but who cares. I never put on my back for hiking. Problem is it's "twisting" when pan drug is applied. For me it's almost useless.

Laszlo