Thanks for all the replies. Especially the comments on specific products and experience.
bdery and Entropy. In light of both your comments I wonder then if a version of the Trekpod is a good solution. They've no shock absorption and already come with a ball head. How essential is shock absorption to a hiking pole?
Originally posted by Ubuntu I use an
Ultrapod II strapped to one of the Trekking poles I am already carrying. I'm not a fan of the ball mount it uses, but it works and adds very little weight.
Mine is Minolta branded, so I only paid about ten bucks for it at someone's clearance sale.
This is a very interesting idea. I already have an Ultrapod II. I'm with you on the ball mount. I really would prefer a quick release plate. Thanks for the suggestion.
Originally posted by RioRico I've used a telescoping 2-section Trek pod for over two decades. The same one! No shock absorption, no carbon fibres, just the basic breakdown stick. Removable ball head and rubber foot; stashable in checked luggage. I am taller than the stick, so I add a short extension pipe to bring the cam up to my eye level. All simple and solid enough.
Two decades! That's a pretty good endorsement for its durability. I'd like to be able take it on carry one luggage and I noticed the two pole model use the "
Magmount Star" and the three pole uses the "
Magmount Pro". The "Pro" version is significantly lighter (.127 kg vs .073 kg) and I wonder if it is less robust and therefore more prone to breaking.
Originally posted by WJW I've used
this brand for about 12 years. I have a Sherlock and Sherlock Travel and don't use them much for hiking these days (knee surgery again) but still I find them handy for a walk in the woods. I actually use the Sherlock as a cane when completely collapsed and a small ball head attached. The Travel stays in my car.
Thanks for the suggestion WJW. These don't, afaik, have any shock absorption and may be a good solution.