----- Original Message -----
From: "dosk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 7:29 PM
Subject: Re: Tripods, cable extensions...?
> Don't fully understand the following message. Why would a 63" or
66" tripod
> be "kind of short"? My stand-up eye level is just about at 62",
and I don't
> intend to carry around a step stool, so why would I want something
larger
> (and potentially heavier) to carry around with me, to use with my
light
> weight ZX-M SLR? Am I missing something here?
Yes you are. Many people are a little taller and need a tripod that
doesn't require them to bend down. Also tripods are often listed
with maximum height using the column extension. G1228 for example
extends to 60-7/8", but only 52-1/8" without using the center
column. IOW, it may be a little short even for you.
> Seems to me that a medium sized, 63" tripod, rated to carry 10-11
lbs, would
> be just about ideal for what I have now, and also for the
forseeable future
> too...??
63" without center post extension would fine (maybe a couple of
inches too long), but Gitzo only has a handful of such models.
> > 63" is quite short for a fully extended tripod - are you
including the
> head
> > in this measurement? (For the imperially challenged 63" =
~155cm). On the
> > Gitzo page you'll see that the G1228 extends to 158cm, but
weighs
> > 1.5kg, which for the metrically challenged is about 3.25lbs. It
has 4
> > leg sections, which means it is not likely to be very stable
fully
> > extended. A more stable one for you would be the G1227, which
weighs
> > the same, has only 3 leg sections but is higher at 163cm/66" -
also
> > rather short for most purposes.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
