My first ‘proper’ tripod was the Manfrotto 190XPROB, seemingly a very popular model at the time. I debated over various models but in the end went with this one because it was relatively cheap, not too heavy, and the centre column that swings easily into horizontal position seemed a cool and potentially handy feature

First the good, the 190 range of tripods is Manfrotto’s more compact range, designed for better portability than their large tripods, so it doesn’t have the chunkiest legs, but being made of aluminium, the most common build material of cheaper tripods, it is still solid and certainly feels like it could take an unintentional bashing and survive. It folds down into a pretty compact size (57cm) and conversely it can still reach a fairly  impressive height with the legs fully extended and utilising the centre column (146cm according to Manfrotto), it can easily reach eye level for me  and I am about 5’8″. It is also reasonably light weight as cheaper tripods go (about 1.8Kg) and rated to support up to 5Kg. In addition that column that flips to horizontal position quickly certainly has it’s uses, particularly if you do macro work (which admittedly I don’t) and need more control over the position of your camera relative to your subject, or are working such that you need to sit next to your tripod but still be able to operate the camera

Now, while this tripod served me well for several years and was perfectly adequate, I did over time come to see it’s flaws. First, while it is solidly built, being of a slimmer design and being made from aluminium, it does not have amazing rigidity (aluminium tripods all have a small degree of flex in the legs when enough pressure is applied), so while perfectly adequate for lightweight camera setups (e.g a DSLR with a standard lens), once you start factoring in larger lenses like those commonly used for wildlife work, it starts to show it’s limits and a frustratingly noticable amount of ‘wobble’ starts to creep in, even with a camera/lens combination not in excess of it’s 5Kg rating. This is something I didn’t notice for a long time as I used to favour hand holding most of the time, but when I started shooting with my Sigma 150-500 lens more often, I couldn’t handhold it well enough at the long end to be viable and the tripod had to come into the equation, which was where it started to show it’s limits. A factor that makes this worse is that for anybody of my sort of height, in order to get the camera to eye level you need to use the centre column, which automatically reduces stability (I have come to hate centre columns in general), the only other alternative being to have to bend down to reach the eye piece, often not an issue but sometimes a bit of an exercise in back pain.

That horizontal position of that centre column has it’s own quirks as well, while in theory it makes the tripod more flexible, it also introduces plenty of extra points of instability. As soon as you more the camera away from the centre point of the tripod, you have moved it’s centre of gravity away from the most stable point above the 3 legs, so are immedately making the whole thing more unstable. While this is again a minor issue for lightweight setups, with a heavy lens it is asking for the whole lot to topple, so is something I never liked to use. The other seeming advantage of the column in horizontal position is that it allows you to fold the the tripod legs out to floor level for low level work (something obviously impossible with a column poking down), however this has it’s own problems in that the head is suddenly the wrong way round, so unless you can rig up an L shaped conversion to put it back upright, you’re left with a bit of an awkward setup. I got round this to a degree when I went to Donna Nook by having my ball head on the tripod and having the head hanging down from the column, thus suspending my camera from the trpod rather than having it sat on top, which served a purpose, but was far from a stable setup as I was basically reliant on gravity and myself to stabalise it. Really and truly, the low level capabilities of this tripod are workable, but ultimately lacking

In conclusion, the 190XPROB is a perfectly adequate, (relatively) low cost tripod suitable for anyone with a relatively small scale camera set up who feels they would get the use out of the rotating centre column (Manfrotto also do a cheaper 190XB and 190XDB which are the same size but with standard vertical centre columns) and it is certainly miles better than any cheap ‘all in one’ tripod legs and head getup. However anyone with any future designs on larger lenses or low level work should save themselves having to upgrade later on and look to something more future proof, such as the 055CX3 which I eventually upgraded to

I bought my Manfrotto 055CX3 as the answer to all my complaints about my old 190XPROB, and while it cost me twice as much, it really was worth it and I wish I had posessed the foresight to have bought it back when I was first in the market for a tripod

So what makes it so much better? Firstly, this is from the 055 range, which are a much chunkier build than the 190 series (the smallest leg section of the 055 tripods is about the same width as the middle section of the 190), so instantly makes them more stable as there is less flex in the legs. On top of this, it is of carbon fibre contruction, a material both more rigid and lighter than aluminium, so not only is this tripod chunkier and more rigid than my old 190XPROB (the official weight rating according to Manfrotto is 8Kg as opposed to 5Kg with the 190), it actually weighs a touch less, so is even easier to take out with me. Now some would argue that in terms of stability the heavier the better, but there is a balance to be found between stability and portability, and for my liking the 055CX3 has the perfect balance.

Another advantage of it being from the 055 range is that it is taller, with the legs fully extended it actually reaches just above my eye level, so I can confortably work at whatever height I need to without ever having to introduce a point of instability by raising the centre column. Speaking of centre columns, my hatred of them is catered for with this tripod as there is a small ‘low angle adapter’ housed in the bottom of it that allows you to take it out of the equation alltogether. Simply release the centre column clamp, remove the adapter, the column slides right out and the adapter clicks into it’s place, tighten the clamp back up and it’s as if there was never a centre column there, meaning the tripod legs can be folded out completely flat for ground level work without having to mess about with trick columns, making it much more flexible. Admittedly the adapter seems to only be contruscted from tough plastic rather than carbon fibre, but it is such a short thing and clamps so securely in place that I honestly can’t see that it can introduce any element of instability. The only other downside to it is that it is triangular in shape rather than circular, so the head piece doesn’t look like it fits quite as solidly on it, but I’ve tested it and couldn’t detect any flex or instability there so it seems to be a non-issue. As well as eliminating the centre column, the adapter is also handy because you can pick up additional ones cheaply (I bought an extra for about £10) and it like me you use more than one type of head piece, they’re much easier to change than unscrewing one head to fit a different one. Of course if you like keeping the option of the centre column available then you can simply keep the low angle adapter in the bottom of it and switch on the fly as needed.

All in all, the 055CX3 really does solve every complaint I had about my 190XPROB, it is more flexible for what I do with the centre column taken out of the equation, more stable, and I honestly wish i’d bought it years ago. Tripods seem to be something that many amateur photographers skimp on (myself included) early on as they seem one of the least important things, so to spend considerable money is hard to justify when you also have lenses etc. on the wish list. However, if you have any future designs on adding heavy telephoto lenses to your kit bag or doing low level work, then I really can’t recommend the 055CX3 enough, at around £250 (at time of writing) it’s hard to justify admittedly, but at about half the price of a typical professional grade tripod, it really is the best value for money IMO if you want good stability, portability and flexibility for now and the future.

If the price really is a problem then there is always the 055XB, essentially the non carbon fibre equivalent, which will have the same advantages of flexibility with the low angle adapter and certainly greater stability than the 190 series due to the chunkier design, but weighs in at about half a kilo heavier and will still suffer the problems of aluminium contruction having more flex in the legs than carbon fibre.

Don’t let the name fool you, this ‘junior’ head is one exceptionally capable bit of kit!

In the past I always favoured a ball head for my landscape and otherwise ‘not big lens’ work, as they are compact and easy to adjust. The one big flaw with ball heads, is that they have an irritating habit of ‘settling’ after you set them up, i.e. you painstakingly line up the exact angle you want and lock the ball in place, only for the weight to settle once you take your hands off the camera and the pitch drops, often enough to ruin your composition. over time you learn to compensate by aiming a fraction higher than you want and let the head settle where you want it, and most ball heads these days also have a friction control knob to allow more precise adjustment, but it’s still a bit of a pain. I have always jut lived with this as I didn’t fancy the sheer bulk of a pan and tilt head with levers sticking out in all direction, and never really looked into geared heads as I always figured they’d be painfully slow to use, however one day I happened to be on a seminar where I saw the Manfrotto 410 head in use and I was immediately sold on the idea and ordered mine the next day!

My biggest misconception of all geared heads had been that with such a precise and slow adjustment method, it would be a royal pain to recompose a shot, however the 410 and it’s bigger brother the 405 circumvent this issue with a simple release mechanism at the base of each adjustment knob. With a simple twist, you can disengage the gears which allows you to freely move the head in that plane before releasing the mechanism to lock it back in. Admittedly this is still a little more long winded than than the single locking mechanism of a ball head, but it it a perfectly workable solution that is no slower than a pan and tilt head.

Now the biggest advantage of the geared head is that once you’ve aimed in roughly the right direction by releaseing the gears and adjusting, you can then precisely adjust the composition by turning the gear knobs to twist in the desired direction. This action is smooth, precise, and negates that problem with the camera weight settling after adjustment as you’re doing it with the weight already settled. The gear knobs have a good solid feel to them so there is no fear of anything moving without your say so, but at the same time they aren’t so stiff as to be difficult to adjust, they seem to be tensioned just about right. One other thing I like about the geared system is that when I’m out shooting, once I’ve set up my camera on my tripod initially, I tend to just sling the whole getup over my shoulder when I’m moving about, which always used to carry with it a slight hint of paranoia as to whether I’d tightened my old ball head enough to prevent my camera swinging about, something I no longer have to worry about as the head is locked in place by default. The whole head piece is rock solid and gives no cause to doubt it’s ability to stand up to use adn abuse in the field

This head uses the larger RC4 size plate attachment, more sizable than the RC2 plates used on a lot of smaller heads. It’s a more stable attachment as a result, although a little bulkier as a result, it’s as wide as the base of my camera, just small enough to not have any overhang. the one thing that does irritate me about it though is that unlike the RC2 heads which have a built in screw and attached ring to turn it with, this one has standard, interchangable size screws, and as a result, you have to screw it in to the camera with a screwdriver or coin. Personally I always used to prefer only attaching the plate from my old tripod head when I needed it, as having a plate on the base of the camera makes using the vertical grip a little awkward, but now I find adding/removing it is enough of a pain that I can’t be bothered to keep messing around with it, so I’ve learned to put up with just leaving it on there now. truth be told my camera probably spends as much time on the tripod as in my hands these days so it’s nothing I can’t live with, and the only other head I now use is my long lens bracket, the attachment plates for which all live on my long lens tripod collars, so there’s no messing about swapping them around. Also worth nothing is that the larger RC4 plates have a built in 360° spirit level, so if you want your shot to be lined up perfectly level, this makes it easy to do

Now there’s no denying that this head isn’t as as light and compact as a ball head, however it’s not as enormous as you might think and not all that much heavier (it’s still lighter than my long lens bracket so as far as I’m concerned still counts as a relatively light weight head). Yes it’s a little bulkier, but not excessively so, certainly not enough to make me think twice about taking it vs my old ball head which is still sat on the shelf athering dust. Just to mention again that odd ‘junior’ title, the head is rated to safely support up to 5Kg, whereas it’s bigger brother the 405 (which by all accounts is more noticably chunky and heavy) is rated to carry up to 7.5Kg. Now I don’t knew about anyone else, but when I’m taking the kind of photos that calls for a head like this, or a ball head, I’m using one of my smaller lenses, so even with my camera with a battery grip, lens and flashgun, I’m well under 5Kg. I can’t honestly see any reason why you’d need the larger 405 head unless you were planning on using telephoto lenses with it too, but as far as I’m concerned that’s where gimbal heads come in.

All in all, I highly recommend this head piece for anyone who wants more control over their compsition for landscapes etc. It’s solid and precise, yet still convenient enough that I’ve not yet found any reason to go back to my old ball head. If you really do desperately want to keep things compact then a ball head is still the best option, but if you’re prepared to sacrifice a little convenience for much greater control, then in my opionin the 410 is the way to go. Admittedly budget will be a stcking point for some people, as while not excessive, it is more expensive then an good quality ball head, but as I find myself doing more landscapes these days than I did in the past, I’ve found it to make enough of a difference to have been well worth it

There are countless ball heads available, some have funky designs like a grip release for the ball, i.e. you grip the handle to release the ball lock, adjust and simply release the handle to lock back in position, so no messing about with screws, but most conform to the same basic design of a solid metal ball in a clamp with a screw to release and lock the clamp, often with a seperate panning control for horizontal rotation while the ball is locked in place. While the funkier designs can offer quicker on the fly adjustments, the traditional design generally offers the most flexibility, as you can also leave the ball unlocked to allow full range of camera movement for tracking subjects while still benefitting from the weight bearing properties of a tripod.

Now pricing is a major part in the choosing a tripod head and was one of my deciding factors, you can easily spend upwards of £300 on a top of the range ball head, but for many of us humble amateurs that is simply not justifiable, so Manfrotto’s range of high quality, more reasonably priced heads is ideal for an enthusiast such as myself. There are still a wealth of options to choose from and my own budget and criteria led me to the 498RC2

the 498 range is Manfrotto’s mid size, mid budget range of heads, that come in 3 flavours, each with a seperate horizontal panning control and friction control knob. The 3 versions comprise one without a quick release plate system, one with the RC2 plate system and one with the RC4 system. Personally I can’t see why anyone would want a tripod head without some sort of quick release system (unless of course you have a collection of standalone plate systems to attach) and I plumped for the slightly smaller RC2 plate system because I found from past experience that the RC4 plates, while undeniably more robust and their connection more sturdy, just seemed little oversized for most cameras and lenses. The RC2 system is also easier to attach/remove from the camera/lens as it attaches via a screw with a handle built in underneath the plate (important for me as I only use my ball head with my smaller lenses so it has to attach to the camera and needs to be removed again afterwards else it gets in the way for portrait shooting), whereas the RC4 system is a standard screw so you need something like a screwdriver or a coin to attach/remove it.

Anyway, on the the head itself. The two screw levers that control the panning movement and the main head movement turn smoothly and are easy to grip, cleverly you can also pull the levers outwards (i.e. away from the head) and turn them freely to adjust the angle if they end up pointing in an unhelpful direction when tightened. Fully loosened the ball moves smoothly and easily with a camera attached and when locked it feels solid and isn’t going anywhere. The friction control I have mixed feelings about, in reality it seems to work like just an additional ball lock screw, albeit smaller and easier to fine tune. It takes less than a full turn to go from free movement to locked solid, with the friction increased, the ball does move slower, but I wouldn’t necessarily say more smoothly, at low friction it works, at higher friction levels the movment becomes jumpy and less useful. Whether it is really doing anything different to the main ball locking lever I can’t tell, I have no basis for comparison against more expensive ball heads so can’t comment if this is normal or a flawed design in this case. Either way I find the friction control can be helpful if used lightly, more of a hinderance if over tightened, but it certainly doesn’t cause any problems if ignored.

The head movement is smooth when free and the overall contruction feels good and solid. It’s not a light piece of kit, but then I wouldn’t want it to be, the heft gives me confidence that it’s contruction is sound and that it will remain solid when locked in position. The ball has portrait grooves on both sides so your camera can be tilted either way for portrait shots, so you can tilt the camera whichever way you prefer without having to rotate it 180, albeit this is a moot point if you have your camera mounted by a lens collar.

Overall, a solid bit of kit, not one I use often these days as I normally only use my tripod to support long lenses and I use my Manfrotto 393 Long Lens Bracket for that, but for the odd occasions I want to mount my camera with a smaller lens for landscapes etc. it is very handy, I’m sure it doesn’t compare to top of the range models, but for the relatively rare occasions I need it, it is a very capable bit of kit.

NB: The official Manfrotto description of this head is the 393 Monopod Long Lens Bracket and that is how it is listed with retailers, I think Manfrotto missed a marketing trick here as every time I’ve ever seen it in use it has always been on a tripod and I believe this is it’s best and most common use among people who know about it

As good as OS/VR/IS is these days, hand holding at super telephoto zoon lengths is always tricky at the best of times to get sharp photos, not to mention takes little time to knacker your arms. I had previously only ever used a ball head on my tripod, mainly due to their small footprint making them easier to transport, however after discovering first hand the limitations of such a head for supporting a large lens that needs to be able to pan and track smoothly and accuracy, I started doing some research and was quickly sold on the gimbal head idea, and with the price of the pro standard Wimberley and it’s kind out of my financial reach, the price point of the Manfrotto 393 (about 1/4 the price!) seemed the perfect option.

The whole thing really feels rock solid, no flex at all in the bracket that I can see. The included foot plate fixes to your lens securely with one or more of the included screws and has a safety feature in that once it slides into the bracket mounting, it cannot slide back out again accidentally thanks to a sprung peg that prevents the plate from leaving the mount without being depressed. The plate allows the lens to be easily positioned so that the center of balance of the lens/camera combination sits nicely over the middle of the frame ans is balanced, and a combination of this balance and the adjustable friction enables the lens to be moved smoothly in all directions and happily stay put wherever you let go of it without needing to be locked down. This makes tracking fast moving subjects without killing your arms a breeze (not to mention making simply aiming elsewhere a smooth transition), and giving you the peace of mind that your lens isn’t going to attempt to fall over as soon as you let go

I have heard comments on the weight of the unit being a negative, and indeed it is a bit more of a cumbersome design than the much lauded Wimberley, but when you consider the weight difference is actually only about 170 grams, it’s really not a difference I feel is worthy of much complaint.

My only real criticism is one often echoed by other users in that you cannot lock the head position in place to safely carry the tripod with camera still attached without tightening up the friction adjustments, which is something you’re unlikely to want to do after carefully adjusting them to the level you want for panning. That said it is easy to stop the vertical movement by just wraping a bit of velcro or something similar around the bracket to stop it swinging, making it perfectly possible to carry the whole getup if you just balance it carefully to prevent the camera spinning on the horizontal axis freely

In short, it does exactly what I needed it for and I am confident that, unlike with my lenses, I won’t feel any whimsical incentive to upgrade to a more expensive alternative any time soon, regardless of how worthy they may be of all their accolades

I previously owed a beanbag for wildlife photography, they make great tools for granting stability when a tripod is unavailable or unsuitable, e.g. when working from a car or when you want to use a fence or wall as a bracing point.

There are several options out there and the V shaped beanbag is a common design for photography as it can securely sit on a fence, or be used to ‘sandwich’ a long lens for maximum stability, however all other options I’ve ever seen suffer the same basic flaw, they’re not waterproof! Now, waterproofing for a beanbag may not sound like such a big issue to most people, but when you consider that one of the most effective and cost efficient fillings for a phtoographic beanbag is dry rice, suddenly it becomes more of an issue when you consider the possibility of your beanbag swelling and bursting! One solution is of course to use an alternative filling like bird seed which won’t swell when wet, however I’d still not feel too happy about getting my beanbag soaked, not to mention one of the advantages of them is that you can take them abroad empty to save weight and fill them up with something locally, where you may not have much choice of filling

Stealth Gear provided the solution to this dilema when they released a bean bag made from the same durable waterproof material as their clothing range. It utilises the same V shaped design that has been popular for years and has a zippered opening so you can fill it with whatever you decide will work best. There is also a pocket on the opposite side big enough to take a lens cap or similar size item, not that I’ve ever had cause to use it but nothing wrong with it being there in case you ever do need it.

Another handy feature of this beanbag which is not shared by many others to my knowledge, is the inclusion of a shoulder strap, attachable in one of two configurations and with 2 lengths, which makes carrying what would otherwise be an extremely bulky and unweildy item perfectly plausible, albeit still pretty heavy depending what you fill it with

Overall, as with everything Stealth Gear that I’ve ever used, it really is the best example of the product I’ve seen