Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-12-2010, 05:37 PM   #1
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Alameda, CA
Posts: 3,206
Benro C-1691M8 with B-0 Head or the like

I'm looking for a light-weighed tripod + head for travel. Budget is about $400. The heaviest the tripod has to support is K-7 + DA* 60-250mm + (maybe) D-BG4 grip.

I wonder if the Benro C-1691M8 with B-0 head can do the job, or will I need the Benro C-2691M8 with B-1 head?

This is strictly for travel. For heavier-duty work, I already have a large Hakuba carbon fiber tripod + Kirk ball head.

Thanks ahead for your input.

07-12-2010, 11:42 PM   #2
Veteran Member
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
I donít know the answer to your question, other than to suggest to look at the spec (I think ~8kg from memory), and probably half it to get a real world indication.

I recently purchased that model, the C-1691 tripod, but the heaviest gear Iíve put on it is a K-x with a DA40, not exactly heavy. Needless to say itís rock solid with that amount of gear. Other than that I can say Iím extremely happy with the quality of the C-1691, itís very light, looks and feels like a high quality product, and is easy to use.
07-13-2010, 12:29 AM   #3
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Alameda, CA
Posts: 3,206
Original Poster
Thanks, twitch, for your input.

Another question for you: how solid/useful is the monopod? If it is not useful, I'd rather buy the lighter and shorter (when folded) C-169M8 instead.
07-13-2010, 07:23 AM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Owego, NY
Posts: 976
QuoteOriginally posted by SOldBear Quote
Thanks, twitch, for your input.

Another question for you: how solid/useful is the monopod? If it is not useful, I'd rather buy the lighter and shorter (when folded) C-169M8 instead.
I forget which ballhead I have (need to check tonight), but I put a Bigma + K20D + grip on top of an older 1-series weight class Benro CF tripod on a regular basis. I may have the somewhat larger -1 ballhead though.

(I think mine is an older C-168, need to check.)

07-13-2010, 03:37 PM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 830
If you are using it strictly for travel and you are going to out of the way locations or extreme climates, you owe it to yourself to spend more.

The cheap heads will all work ok if it's warm, dry and sunny. But if you spend thousands of $ on a trip somewhere and find your cheap head/tripod fails in the middle of the Arctic Circle, you will be very unhappy.

The way I look at it is saving few bucks is a very poor risk/reward tradeoff if my gear fails if I've already spend a couple thousand $ getting to that location.

Save on the legs if you really want -- good carbon fiber legs are plentiful and legs don't tend to break down. But get yourself a Markins Q3 Emile ballhead. When I want to travel light, I personally have a small Gitzo carbon fiber 4 section tripod (can't remember model number) and a Markins Q3. A wonderful combination.
07-13-2010, 08:40 PM   #6
Veteran Member
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
QuoteOriginally posted by SOldBear Quote
Thanks, twitch, for your input.

Another question for you: how solid/useful is the monopod? If it is not useful, I'd rather buy the lighter and shorter (when folded) C-169M8 instead.
I’ve only very recently bought the C-1691 and haven’t used the monopod much. I have set it up though, it’s pretty easy, I have to stoop a little though to bring my eye to the view finder even when the monopod is fully extended, I’m 5’9 for reference. That may be a problem in prolonged use standing up, but for shorter periods and obviously for sitting down and using the monopod, it would be no problem. Given it’s a travel tripod though I view the monopod feature as a bonus. Obviously a dedicated one would be better, but not something I’d take as well as a tripod on a trip.

The weight saving of a 1691 vs a 169 is only ~80g, length I think is not too much, but be aware that the 169 does not have the max height that the 1691 does as a tripod. I'm comfortably able to set up the camera at eye level in tripod mode even without the centre column being fully extended. From memory I think the 169 is a good 10cm or so shorter fully extended.

Ultimately it was for that reason I bought the 1691, not for the monopod feature.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
benro, head, travel, tripod
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Benro A-258 n6 tripod with Manfrotto head trev99 Sold Items 0 02-22-2010 10:11 AM
Benro Tripods dafiryde Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 2 03-20-2009 08:38 PM
For Sale - Sold: Benro c158-n6(or c128-n6) carbon fiber tripod with KS-1 head mmzymxf Sold Items 1 05-19-2008 09:59 AM
Benro C228 tripod & Manfrotto 488RC2 head MikeH Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 0 10-17-2007 08:17 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:47 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top