Add a comment or send Thom feedback on this article.

Even in 1973 I was practicing what I preach in this article, albeit then I was using film cameras and very heavy tripods. Here I'm doing my best Austin Powers Can You Dig It imitation while shooting a Pac-8 Baseball Championship game for ABC Sports. These days I still sometimes look like a shag-o-delic Beatle, but yes, I've lost the plaid bell bottoms...ladies, you can stop your swooning ;~)

One of the things that comes up at least once at every workshop I teach is that someone is shooting without enough support. I don't mean my teaching and cheerleading is failing the student. I mean that they just aren't providing a secure platform from which to shoot.

Thom's Maxim #1: You're wasting money on expensive AF-S and other Nikkor optics if you fail to give your camera and lens a stable platform.

Yes, I understand that sometimes you have to handhold your camera to get a shot, and that some types of photography require you to be mobile and flexible. But better handholding technique is a discussion for another article. Today, we're talking about getting the kinds of shots I do, where we're not in a hurry and can use a tripod.

"So, let's pop our cameras onto a tripod and shoot. Hey, why do I see your camera drooping on that tilt-down shot? And did I notice the end of your lens vibrate a bit when you pressed the shutter release? Hmm. Well, you're not going to like hearing this, but you shouldn't have purchased that 17-35mm AF-S lens. You'd be better served by getting the less expensive 18-35mm Nikkor and spending the money you saved on a better support system." (Why does it feel like I've said that a lot, lately?)

Even when students come to class with a good tripod and head, they aren't always using it as securely as they should be. The bottom line is simple: if the camera is moving when you shoot, you'll never resolve what the lens is capable of. Other factors enter into the picture, too. If you mount your camera on a decent tripod but hang a heavy lens off the front (like the 80-200mm AF-S), you can actually get the center of gravity far enough out from the leg support that the front of the lens still moves a bit during exposure. And on many Nikon bodies, there's tangible "mirror slap" vibration that shows up with telephoto lenses when the shutter speed is in the 1/2 to 1/15 range (I usually suggest either avoiding the 1 second to 1/30 range with lenses over 100mm unless you have a solid platform and use either mirror lockup (F4 and F5) or anti-mirror vibration (D1 series and D100).

Thom's Maxim #2: You can spend US$1700 to buy a good tripod and head, or you can spend US$1000 and do the same thing. (Corollary: eventually you'll do one or the other.)

Here's the usual sequence that most photographers go through in getting to a stable platform:

• First they try handholding. Eventually, they realize that their results aren't as sharp as those of others.
• So the next step is to work on improving technique. Elbows get tucked, the camera is braced against stable objects, they stop holding their breath, etc. But that doesn't solve every problem or work in every situation. And it certainly doesn't always work for very long lenses.
• Now we find our photographer at the store buying a tripod. It's one of those low-cost, Velbon-type pods with braces between the legs (that's gotta make it stable, right?) that weighs a couple of pounds and has nice looking aluminum legs (US$75). This solution seems to help with the middle focal lengths, at least. But eventually the bottom section of one of the legs gets a bit bent and doesn't collapse back into the other sections easily. And with long or heavy lenses, the head "creeps" when the camera is pointed downward. The whole thing shakes in the wind, and you can't get down to ground level for shots. In fact, the photographer finds that they're spending way to much time fighting the tripod rather than taking pictures.
• Since it seemed the light legs had to be part of the problem, the next step is buy a heftier pod (US$125 min; US$200 spent so far). That usually turns out to be one of the classic Bogen legs (3021 is popular; these days also the 3001) with the two handle pan/tilt head. This solves one of the problems: the bottom leg section doesn't get bent with use. And used correctly, it solves the basic stability problem, as the 4-pound weight and sturdy legs at least give the whole thing a solid base. But now the problem seems to be that our photographer is constantly fiddling with the head (pan/tilt heads were designed for video cameras, not still cameras). Getting the camera level becomes a chore. Getting a scene locked down doesn't always work the first time, either (that head sag, again).
• So we start the procession of the heads (US$50, US$75, US$125, US$200, plus eventually some proprietary quick plates at US$25 each; US$700 spent so far). The first attempt at a new head will usually be a "better" variant of what they had, or perhaps a very small, cheap ball head. Neither will fix the problems our user had, and the primary problem will still be getting the camera level quickly, so the next head is usually the "pistol grip" type, because it seems to be "faster." Problem still not corrected (and verticals are now a bit of a problem), so we start the ball head parade. The first "decent" ball head will be one of the Manfrotto (Giotto) heads, perhaps with a built-in plate system of some sort. That starts to work better, but the photographer still finds that the camera moves a bit when they turn the knob to lock the ball. And some of the plate systems have just enough slop in them that the compromise the stability of the entire system (another problem is that few of them "grip" the camera bottom in ways so that they can't be turned; they eventually work loose and end up marring the camera bottom's finish). So we try another, larger ball. Still, our prototypical photographer doesn't "go all the way" just yet because it seems ludicrous to spend US$350 on a head that mounts onto a set of US$125 legs, right?
• The legs are starting to make their shortcomings known. They don't let you get down to ground level (or, if you got the Bogen with the "trick" centerpost, the stability isn't great in some positions). And the whole concoction is starting to get a bit on the heavy side (depending on the legs and head, perhaps as much as 7 pounds). So a set of Gitzo carbon fiber legs is next on the list (US$550; US$1250 spent so far). Upon acquisition of decent legs, it immediately becomes clear that the head is the sole problem point, so...
• Our photographer breaks down and buys a Kirk Photo or an Arca Swiss ball head (US$350 plus US$100 or more for plates; total spent: US$1700 or more). A few folk take a short detour here and buy something like the Linhof Profli II ball head (US$250). And they find that that head fixes every problem except one: the darned thing won't stay firmly screwed onto the legs without using Locktite on it.

So, for more than the cost of one pro grade Nikkor (with filters and a new case to put it in) the photographer can finally see the quality of their lenses.

Or...you could just skip all the intermediary steps and buy the final solution first. Just to clear, here's what I recommend for the kind of nature shooting I do (you don't have to take my word for it; go to Really Right Stuff's site and send for their catalog. It'll give you a lot more background on some of the issues that keep you from getting a stable platform for your camera):

1. A Gitzo carbon fiber tripod (US$400-$800). Gitzo's come in a lot of flavors, so take your time figuring out which one you want. The primary choices are: number of leg sections, length of the leg sections, and centerpost options. The usual choices end up: the G1128 if you're interested in the lowest possible weight (41 ounces); the G1227 if you're interested in a tripod that'll reach over 5' at the lowest price (56 ounces); or the G1228 (which I use) if you want the same but need to pack it in carry-on sized luggage (the G1227 collapes to a little over 25", the G1228 to less than 21").
2. A Kirk Photo BH-1 or Arca Swiss Monoball B-1 ball head (if you plan on ever using long lenses [300mm or over] you'll have to get the larger Kirk or Arca Swiss) (US$350).
3. Kirk Photo or Really Right Stuff Arca-style quick release plates for each camera body you own, and for each lens that has a tripod collar (US$50 minimum, as much as US$400 for two bodies and three lenses, assuming you get the L brackets for the bodies).

So, you're in for a minimum of US$800, but more likely somewhere around US$1000. Thus, I've saved you a minimum of US$700 if you just opt for this approach from the beginning.

If you need a less expensive solution and know you won't be shooting with lenses over two pounds (basically under 300mm), there's another solution I can recommend that gets you almost everything the other does:

1. Hakuba HG-6230C or HG-6240C carbon fiber tripod (US$275-290). There are two versions of the Hakuba, which differ mostly in slightly different leg lengths. Either seems to be a decent knockoff of the Gitzo.
2. Acratech ball head (US$275). A strange looking head, but it is light (1 pound) and works quite well as long as you don't mount more than about four pounds on it. Consider getting the rubber knobs (an extra cost option), as the metal knobs are rough on the hand when you do a lot of fiddling. Alternatively, the Kirk BH-3 head is a little heavier (20 ounces), but more traditional in design.
3. Plates, as above.

This option gets you in the door for US$600+ and weights in at about 4.5 pounds, even less if you use the short centerpost (or none) on the legs. Just don't expect to mount your 300mm f/2.8 on it and be happy.

And speaking of the long, heavy telephotos: if you use the 400mm, 500mm, 600mm, or the 300mm telephotos with extenders, get a Wimberley Sidekick (US$250). This clever device has to be used to be appreciated. Essentially, it's the perfect way to get the weight of the camera and lens balanced and stabilized on your pod. If you use long lenses all the time, consider getting the full Wimberley head instead (and perhaps even heavier legs). A 600mm f/4 on a Wimberley head moves effortlessly enough to track flying birds, yet gets enough support to render sharp photos.

And with two sturdy tripods (ball head not necessary) you can do laundry. The late Galen Rowell (and wife Barbara relaxing near tent) doing a bit of mid-day house chores near Alpamaya, Peru.

My Support Kit

• Gitzo 1228 Mountaineer (bought when they first came out many years ago). I also have a Gitzo Weekender (I think it was the 026) with center post removed as suggested by the late Galen Rowell, which produced a very light, backpacking pod.
• Kirk Photo Ball Head (the BH-1, the big one). The little pod gets an Acratech ball head (about a pound).
• Really Right Stuff plates for all bodies and tripod collars of lenses I use, including my Coolpix!
• Bogen monopod decked out as described in the Really Right Stuff catalog.

A Good Tripod and Head Should:

• Set up in seconds, without fiddling.
• Hold its position no matter what the angle of the camera.
• Be completely field cleanable.
• Go from ground level to full height without compromise.
• Lock all positions securely enough that you're comfortable walking away from the tripod even on windy days.
• Be able to follow action and still provide support.
• Resist all attempts to bend and break (Galen used to demonstrate his Gitzo 1228 by standing on it)
• Allow the camera to go from horizontal to vertical orientation instantly.
• Be dragged over rocks, through mud, sit in the ocean, or any other environment you want to shoot in, and show nothing more than a few scratches for the effort
• Be light enough to always carry with you.
• Be heavy enough to hold your heaviest lens and body secure in the worst possible conditions and at the worst possible angle.

The solutions I suggest meet all those requirements. Does your current tripod and head do the same?