Benro recommendations for a D200 with 70-200 and 300
Righto, this is my first post, lets see how it all goes.
I have a D200 with a 70-200 VR with an eye for a 300 VR in a year or so. Anticipate me getting a 2.0 converter (I already use a 1.7 with my 70-200).
Lucky for me I live quite close to the Benro supplier here in the UK, and the guy says he can drop it off to me, even let me try them out before I commit to buy.
Of the Benro tripods available what would be the best recommendations for a tripod and a ballhead for my requirements that I've outlined above?
Many thanks, David L
David Lloyd, website www.davidlloyd.info
#1. "RE: Benro recommendations for a D200 with 70-200 and 30" | In response to Reply # 0jemaerca Registered since 28th May 2006Tue 13-Mar-07 02:46 PM
Some "recommended reading" if you are considering Benro ballheads:
Comments always welcome: My Smugmug Gallery
#2. "Benro recommendations" | In response to Reply # 0dspeed Registered since 11th Jan 2007Sat 17-Mar-07 06:59 PM
Hi - I picked up one of the 'old' 228 Benro's from B&H; not quite as advertised, but not a bad tripod for the $200 price. If you are close to the dealer you can see for yourself.
Which ballhead toorder is not as easy a decision. After a lot of reading, I ordered a Benro KJ-1 for ~$150 shipped w plate. It looks like the KJ is more refined than the KS noted in the reply above. I have resolved that I will just have to live with or fix any shortcomings for the (significant) price differential.
I'll let you know how it looks when I get it, and what I end up doing to make it perform. PM me
w your email addy.
#3. "RE: Benro recommendations for a D200 with 70-200 and 30" | In response to Reply # 0dm1dave Nikonian since 12th Sep 2006Sat 17-Mar-07 10:49 PM
I would look at either an M-227n6 or C-227n6 or the next larger size in the line-up 327 I think.
I have the M-227 it works well with my D80 & 80-400VR. The C & M n6 series are nearly identical but the C had some added features like the interchangeable feet, carrying strap and the added layers of carbon fiber. The M still has anti rotating legs and the dust sealed leg locks.
The head is the part that you interact with most so I went with Kirk BH3 because of its know performance and reliability. I think a poor performing ball head would be frustrating so it is best to use one that you can find reviews and user feedback on.
If you do go with a Benro head please post your impressions here to help other with their decisions.
#4. "RE: Benro recommendations for a D200 with 70-200 and 30" | In response to Reply # 0pcspecialist Registered since 17th Mar 2006Tue 20-Mar-07 03:07 AM
The tripod is an easy choice - C227n6 if you want interchangeable feet and carbon fiber center column. The M227n6 is also a good choice but you are stuck with the feet it comes with and an aluminum center column.
I am aware of its shortcomings and am still happy with my KS-2 though I wouldn't blame anyone for looking elsewhere for a ballhead.
#5. "RE: Benro recommendations for a D200 with 70-200 and 30" | In response to Reply # 4olc Basic MemberTue 20-Mar-07 05:30 PM
>The tripod is an easy choice - C227n6 if you want
>interchangeable feet and carbon fiber center column. The
>M227n6 is also a good choice but you are stuck with the feet
>it comes with and an aluminum center column.
You can replace the aluminum center post with a short CF one for about $30.
#6. "RE: Benro recommendations for a D200 with 70-200 and 30" | In response to Reply # 5jock_scott Registered since 10th Aug 2006Wed 21-Mar-07 09:11 PM
I also have 105mm macro lens, and thought the c-298 looked pretty good - it has 4 section legs, offset centre column with free inclination and rotation locking. Has anyone used one of these? I spoke to someone who had bought one and he reckoned it was great but he hadn't really used anything else. Its a bit more expensive than the c-228 but still looks good value
By the way - the UK Benro distributor location - is that near Cardiff?
#9. "RE: Benro recommendations for a D200 with 70-200 and 30" | In response to Reply # 4Sun 01-Apr-07 09:17 PM
There's no C227n6 on their site anymore. It looks like they've renamed their tripods. I think that the C227n may be the C257n now. Would that be right?
>The tripod is an easy choice - C227n6 if you want
>interchangeable feet and carbon fiber center column...
David Lloyd, website www.davidlloyd.info
#7. "Benro head" | In response to Reply # 0
One other thing to consider is that the Benro KS-1 head has a relatively thin and flexible panoramic base. When mounted on a tripod you cannot use the three mounting screws on the bottom of the tripod mount to secure the head. I just tried this with my KS-1 and a Manfrotto 3221 and even a minimum pressure from these three screws distorts the base and the panoramic motion is obstructed.
I don't know how the bigger Benros compare in terms of the rigidity of their panoramic bases.
Not sure if this is a real issue, but with use the head might become loose and need retightening to the tripod. It worked OK without the three screws though and is very manageable with the D200 and Tamron 28-75 mounted - I can reposition without full lock with relative ease in pretty much any direction. And then let go and - no creep. This is good!
The bottom of the D200 flexes more than any other component in the above setup so the way to combat this would be to use a lens tripod mount. The bottom of the D200 flexes much like the bottom of the D70 and D80 flexes, just the D200 has less flex than these other two. There is also a lot less play in this body when repositioning compared to the plastic D80/D70s, where I would have to overcompensate for the body flex - this one is pretty much spot on, so the metal body makes a difference
However, I feel the KS-1 will be a little underpowered for your intended long lens setup. It will lock OK and be stable enough if you do not tilt the camera too much but will not be a ble to hold the camera/lens at a big angle securely IMO and will probably creep. Have not tried it though...
#12. "RE: Benro head" | In response to Reply # 7southmine Registered since 05th Mar 2007Mon 09-Apr-07 11:51 PM
It seems this isn't a problem unique to the Benro.https://www.photoproshop.com/images/markins/mounting_a_new_head.pdf
#13. "This is comforting :)" | In response to Reply # 12kocho Basic MemberTue 10-Apr-07 03:24 PM
"One other thing to consider is that the Benro
>KS-1 head has a relatively thin and flexible panoramic base.
>When mounted on a tripod you cannot use the three mounting
>screws on the bottom of the tripod mount to secure the head.
>I just tried this with my KS-1 and a Manfrotto 3221 and even
>a minimum pressure from these three screws distorts the base
>and the panoramic motion is obstructed".
>It seems this isn't a problem unique to the
Interesting find. Thanks for digging-up this info on the Markins head.
#16. "RE: Benro head & C297 Benro" | In response to Reply # 7
Hi, I have a C297 Benro and love it so far for 4 months of heavy duty use. I have a D200 with up to a 300mm f2.8 and I'm amazed that this rig will support the 300 with a full size wimberley. My local shop has gotten a full line of Induro tripods in now and they look just like Benro but are all black. Same in all other aspects. I had a KB-3 Benro head and I was impressed with the quality and smoothness I read all the web horror stories about the heads but after a good dissection I did not see the wear on the cup that was described. I was using the KB-3 with a sidekick then went and got the full wimberley. The legs are holding up well. I did notice that once when I was tightening the leg locks I went too far and it spun all around like I stripped something but it was OK. When you lock the legs it only takes a quarter turn, no more. The versitality of the 297 for macro coupled with an Acratech Ultimate head is a beautiful thing. I can put my macro lens anywhere I want. Up down sideways. For tricky shots of low plants on uneven ground the tripod is great. Caution to watch if you spread the legs all the way open as you will crack the compass built in. The new Induro's don't seem to do this. The 297 is rated up to 17 lbs. I tried the next size up Induro C314 (I think) that is rated
at 22 lb load and I swear the shake in the 300mm is the same for both tripods. I was amazed. My test was to hit the lens and watch how long it took to settle down. I'm getting great shots with this tripod and the 300mm so it's a keeper. This was taken with the C297 and Wimberley head with remote release but my hand pressed down on lens center and eye mashed up on viewfinder.
Capt Tedd Greenwald
"The Opposite of Art is War"
Attachment#1 (jpg file)
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#8. "RE: Benro recommendations for a D200 with 70-200 and 30" | In response to Reply # 0
Thank you for all your replies. It looks like I can't go too far wrong with a Benro tripod. I'm still tossing up between a Benro ballhead or a more expensive alternative.
I do like the look of the Markins M10. (Can anyone let me know whether a Markins ballhead will sit on a Benro tripod?)
The UK didtributor for Benro is in West London, not too far from me.
David Lloyd, website www.davidlloyd.info
#10. "RE: Benro recommendations for a D200 with 70-200 and 30" | In response to Reply # 8dspeed Registered since 11th Jan 2007Mon 02-Apr-07 11:32 PM
Got my Benro KJ-1 ballhead today. After reading some negative reviews, I looked a little further and found some more recent and positive reviews. So I took a chance and ordered one from Hong Kong via eBAY.
I have no experience with a Markins, but I *like* this unit. Exterior fit and finish are very nice (I have not (yet) disassembled the unit). It performs (sweet spot/smoothness) like the high end units are described to with my D200 / 17-55.
The KJ-1 is designed for a single central screw mount only. I am toying with the idea of eliminating the central column, but plan to do some testing prior to taking that step. Any pointers to quantative testing of tripod vibration would be appreciated.
#11. "RE: Benro recommendations for a D200 with 70-200 and 30" | In response to Reply # 10nrothschild Registered since 25th Jul 2004Tue 03-Apr-07 12:52 PM
> Any pointers to quantative testing of tripod
> vibration would be appreciated.
Here is what I do:
1. Set it up and tap on the front end of the lens, and on the camera body. Watch through the viewfinder and estimate the time it takes to settle down. If more than 1 second, it is less than ideal. You need this time to determine how long to delay firing the shutter during mirror lockup (MLU).
2. Set up a target with fine detail. Could be a test chart, teddy bear, whatever. Work out your lighting such that you are shooting at F/8 or wider (to avoid diffraction fuzz) and about 1/8s shutter speed.
3. Take an image using the self timer (set to at least 10s, but depending on the results of #1) or single shot mode with a remote.
4. Take an image using MLU with remote. You must use a remote.
5. (optional) If possible try using MLU with a shutter speed at least 1/2*FL without changing aperture. This would require you to vary your light source, of course. The only reason for this is to get the best baseline possible for what should be a perfectly sharp image at a high shutter speed.
6. (optional) Try firing the shutter with your hand on the camera, rolling your finger to fire the shutter. IOW, carefully. I can actually outperform self timer/single shot mode with this technique if there is a lot of mirror slap.
7. (optional) Try long lens technique. It is discussed in a FAQ here, and Moose Peterson has a web page describing his method.
The important two images are the self timer/single shot-remote and MLU images. I find that MLU always gives me sharp images. With a lousy or overloaded tripod, it might be possible to screw up even an MLU shot, but it's hard if you are careful. The self timer image will give you the maximum amount of vibration that you can get without adding it yourself by handling the camera (yes, think about that )
You should also vary the shutter speeds but I find that 1/8s is pretty tough. Although some cameras, like the D200, have "exposure delay", this is only a 0.4s delay between mirror up and shutter fire. You will likely see from your tap test that that is insufficent in many cases and can actually fire the shutter at the height of vibrations.
my Nikonians gallery.
#14. "RE: Benro recommendations for a D200 with 70-200 and 30" | In response to Reply # 8
>Thank you for all your replies. It looks like I can't go too
>far wrong with a Benro tripod. I'm still tossing up between
>a Benro ballhead or a more expensive alternative.
>I do like the look of the Markins M10. (Can anyone let me
>know whether a Markins ballhead will sit on a Benro tripod?)
>The UK didtributor for Benro is in West London, not too far
hi david.. i live in uk too.. i had a chance to try benro tripods and the ball heads at focus on imaging exhibition this year.. benro tripods are really sturdy and the quality is very close to gitzo's.. c-297 or c-298 would be okay with 300 VR but i would still get the c-357 or c-358..
for the ball-heads, i wouldn't buy benro. yes they look okay and but they are not the same class as markins. or arca-swiss, RRS, acratech..etc.
KS-2 ball head costs 105 pounds..
if you don't want to pay about 250 pounds for the M10, i would buy manfrotto 468mgrc2.. which is really nice ball-head.
but if you can pay the premium you could have perfect M10.
#15. "RE: Benro recommendations for a D200 with 70-200 and 30" | In response to Reply # 8
I recently bought the Benro C298n6 and can confirm its a great tripod. It have it paired with a Markins M10 so i can also confirm that combination has no problems. All in all i'm very pleased with the combo which cost me less than the equivalent Gitzo tripod alone!