>Go to www.reallybigcameras.com Kerry is the US distributor. I >have done several transactions with him and he will do all he >can to answer your questions. > >He also has several listings on ebay. Do a search for Feisol.
I got the MS cashback, 25 %, on the 3471 and the 3301 monopod
>I have the Feisol 3471 and love it, super stable and solid.
I have the 3371 and love it. It's rock solid but light weight. I use it with a full Wimberley Gimbal and the 200-400 f/4 as well as the 500 f/4 on a D2x or a D700. I also use it with a Wimberlely Sidekick on a Markins M20 ballhead. Couldn't ask for a better tripod IMO and they are very reasonably priced.
I find a huge difference between the Sidekick and the full Wimberley Gimbal. It was when I moved to the full gimbal that I started taking shots I was really pleased with. I realize there is a huge price difference and the Sidekick is a fine tripod head, but I would highly recommend the full gimbal if you want to take your photography to another level (assuming it is within your means).
I was interested in your observations because I also have both, and use it with my 300/2.8 AFSII, and also a 500/4P on occasion.
I tested the two gimbals and found that they were so close that I didn't think there would be any differences in field use. These were very controlled tests, which may not be relevant to real world use, I don't know. Wimberly has an extensive discussion of this in a FAQ on their site. Their recommendations are very consistent with what I found, although they actually give a slight nod toward the Sidekick, for logical reasons. I found that the full Wimberly ever so slightly outperformed the Sidekick (but very slight), only with certain amounts of tension applied to the vertical pivot.
Have any of you seen those cool Feisol's on Ebay that are anodized in various colors? They also have newer center columns and head mounts. They're very interesting but no information about them anywhere.
Well, the Feisol 3371 is 61", the 3471 is 60.6" (http://reallybigcameras.com/Feisol/Tripods). The Markins M10 is 4" (my ball-head). I guess most are about the same height. A Nikon D300 is about 4.5" high. This adds up to about 70" in total. Judging from the pic, it looks like the viewfinder is at about eye-height, thus 4" lower than 6'.
I can't keep my Feisol 3471 with Markins M10 and Nikon D300 fully extended. Too high set-up for me. I am about 5"7.
Thus, I don't think the OP is a liar, nor did he manipulate the pics.
Lofling, I was joking about the height thing. You know, lots of people 'stretch' their height a little; all in good fun. I forgot my eyes aren't on top of my head and I didn't account for the ballhead.
>Lofling, >I was joking about the height thing. You know, lots of people >'stretch' their height a little; all in good fun. I forgot my >eyes aren't on top of my head and I didn't account for the >ballhead.
Ah, sorry Reilly!
You never know when you read things on a forum. Irony gets lots really easily, unfortunately.
By my calculations, you need about 58-60" to get to full eye level at 6' height, which suggests the legs may be an inch or two too high for Mike, just as it appears in the image, where by my eye he cannot quite reach the viewfinder without getting on his toes _________________________________ Neil Nikonians Team My Gallery
I just took delivery of the 3371 and a Full Wimberley. Neil, I was very much interested in your Sidekick vs FW testing, especially since I got the Wimberley on their trial program and I already have a Sidekick, which I might send back to them. I couldn't really see your test patterns with enough resolution on my screen. I'm wondering at what shutter speed would those variations disappear? I suspect that Jim was praising the full Wimberley due to its wonderfully smooth operation. I also am finding it much nicer to use when following a bird than the Sidekick.
About the tripod, is it normal to have to tighten the upper leg before you can tighten, or loosen the lower? I'm used to my gitzo 2530 where you can tighten and loosen the leg segments independently. (is that why Gitzos are more $?)
About the height thing, I'm almost 6' and with the Wimberley, full leg extension is a bit too high...I have to lower the legs by about 3 inches or so.
I suspect you aren't familiar with Pbase . Below the image is an "Original" link, with other sizes listed. Click that. I think the patterns will then be big enough
(I should put something in the description of each image, but there are so many...)
I did not test a shutter speed bracket on that or most of my other tests. Thje reason is that it is actually extraordinarily difficult to pull off because for a valid test, aperture and ISO have to remain the same, even though you are testing shutter speeds from 1/10s to maybe 1/100s and higher
(Think about that )
I do have a way of doing that, with a variable halogen light source. In the few tests I've done, I think I saw the start of vibration around 1/100s at 500mm with the 300/2.8, something like that. But that was with lower density sensors. I may have one test with a Series 2 class CF leg, but not an exotic lens.
From a practical matter, it may not really matter:
I am very comfortable with Long Lens Technique (LLT) down to at least 1/50s. I know that that is well within mirror slap range for the larger lenses. Since most of the subjects we shoot require some timing, I will almost always use LLT whenever I possibly can. At some point where I am forced to go to a remote and Mirror Up.
If I am shooting a very static subject- say the moon, as an example, I would use Mirror Up at almost any reasonable speed because it's just the right way to do it and if I'm taking the time to set up a remote and use it, I do it.
If I don't have time to use Mirror Up, I'm probably shooting Long Lens Technique when it's irrelevant, so no question there.
The only exception to the above would be if, say, I'm working 1/1000s on a tripod, with a remote, but for some reason I don't want to use Mup, then I guess I might have a decision. But knowing me, I would just use LLT
The Feisol does not have ALR. I guess that's part of the price you paid (pun intendd ) Some of the other tripod makers, either Velbon or Giottos, I think, for example, also have ALR, but nobody else quite puts together a package similar to the 3371. Neither of my Gitzos have ALR either so you have my sympathies, but once you get used to it, it isn't too bad.
What do you think about the Full Wimberly? Not too many people have both at once, at any given time. _________________________________ Neil
Some day I'm going to grow up and have ALR too! Nikonians Team My Gallery
Thanks Neil. I'm loving the Full Wimberley although I wish it weren't so big. I was shooting some high-flying eagles the other day, and I felt that I could track them more smoothly compared to the Sidekick. I have another month or so to decide to either send the Full back to Wimberley, send the Sidekick back for a $200 credit, or keep them both.
Hesitate to go public with this, but I'm turning 60 next month and I'm buying myself presents like they're going out of style. Tomorrow I take delivery of the 500mm f/4 VR. I've put my 200-400 up for sale on Nikonians, to take the bite out of that purchase. Anyway, I'm looking forward to trying out the new 500 with the new tripod and the new FW. Now, if only the economy would improve so I could retire and shoot everyday!