NikonGear

Gear Talk => Other => Topic started by: Asle Feten on October 10, 2019, 16:46:52

Title: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Asle Feten on October 10, 2019, 16:46:52
I was fortunate to find a Burzynski ball head after several years searching. Then the question came up, which tripod for it?
For my Berlebach mini, it feels too big, the RRS BH40 is a better match.
For my very small Berlebach report, it is a good match for field usage with 300mm/2.8 or longer/heavier, for everything shorter or more lightweigh the 'module insert 3' saves me 700g and is almost as good. Both weight and size do matter in the field, that is the reason why I even have these small tripods.
When I actually was ordering a Burzynski head several years ago, but didn't get it, my plan was to use it on my bigger Berlebach report 2012. It is a good match, but at it highest setting and with focal length longer than 300mm I feel the tripod is the weak link. It does the job, but I feel it can be better. At least it is not the ball head that is the weak link anymore, so I am looking for suggestions on even better tripods. It has to be a good match with the Burzynski head and works with 600mm, what I think is my limit for the head (for landscapes), not much heavier than what I allready have (2,5kg without head), easy and fast to set up and down. I have small tripods, so I am looking for more normal size. But taller is also more heavy, and weigth is more important because it has to be transportable even by foot. I have a heavier heavy duty tripod for usage near home and car.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Birna Rørslett on October 10, 2019, 16:57:37
Look into a carbon-fibre version of a Sachtler tripod. All my Burzynski heads are used with one of those tripods.

By the way, congratulations with getting a Burzynski. They are rapidly becoming rare as hen's teeth.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Asle Feten on October 10, 2019, 17:03:35
Thanks. Sachtler CF 100L looks appealing.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: MILLIREHM on October 10, 2019, 19:19:45
Congrats as well!
There are two Versions of the Burzynsky head, the old one and a weight reduced newer one  (-500g? need to look it up again ) btw. I have got the old one and not seen the need to "upgrade". It is a good match with my Sachtler ENG 2CF, but I see its main niche in static subjects, with heavy Superteles handling/positioning is a bit delicate, a fluid head is a better option  then.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Mexecutioner on October 10, 2019, 19:20:17
I use mine on a Gitzo giant and I like it. I was lucky to have purchased the adapter for the head to sit in the larger opening of the 5 series compared to the 3. I also bought the bowl adapter so if I ever get a Sachtler (which i doubt) I can use it with it.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Asle Feten on October 10, 2019, 19:46:20
Congrats as well!
There are two Versions of the Burzynsky head, the old one and a weight reduced newer one  (-500g? need to look it up again ) btw. I have got the old one and not seen the need to "upgrade". It is a good match with my Sachtler ENG 2CF, but I see its main niche in static subjects, with heavy Superteles handling/positioning is a bit delicate, a fluid head is a better option  then.

I find the Burzynski head working for 600mm for almost static subjects, contrary to RRS BH-55 that is a little pain with 300mm. I am really impressed with the Burzynski, both the rigidity and the ease of usage, and very happy finding it.
Even if fluid heads are better, I have one for the heavy duty tripod, sometimes weight and size do matter, and then the Burzynski wins. The tripod I am looking for now is the hard one, the perfect (for my usage) compromise between size, weight and structural rigidity.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: MILLIREHM on October 10, 2019, 22:25:50
Burzynsky also makes/made? an Adapter for his head - suiting the 100 mm Sachtler-half-cubes.
and if you want a hard tripod, i second Birna, go for a Sachtler.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Birna Rørslett on October 10, 2019, 22:33:39
Actually, with the 100mm class Sachtlers, the Burzynski sits neatly into the top of the tripod. No extra half-bowl is required, just a suitable locking screw with a washer run into the head from below.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: MILLIREHM on October 10, 2019, 22:41:16
Actually, with the 100mm class Sachtlers, the Burzynski sits neatly into the top of the tripod. No extra half-bowl is required, just a suitable locking screw with a washer run into the head from below.
Did not give that a try so far, but good to know just in case
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Mexecutioner on October 11, 2019, 00:52:08
Not the most elegant, but yes, it will work.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Asle Feten on October 11, 2019, 16:51:50
For me, not adding unnecessary mass actually looks elegant… This is meant to be a portable tripod, so weight do matter.

Comparing ENG 2 CF and CF 100 L:
ENG 2 CF is 3 section so 12cm shorter transport length but 13cm higher. The 2 section CF 100 L should be faster to use. I like the easy to open and adjust without shifting grip, that doesn't work for the lower section on the 3 section tripod.
ENG 2 CF looks more bulky, the legs looks wider. I wonder how that affects portability.
ENG 2 CF is 0,2kg heavier, and have 5kg less payload. The payload is just a number, and much more than I ever will load it with. Torsion rigidity is what matter. I remember Erik Lund questioned the thin, single leg, lowest section on some Sachtler tripods in a former thread. CF 100 L is twin leg all the way.

When considering the price tags, I have to look for a second hand tripod, so maybe it will not be even my own decision in the very end… I have to be prepared, so I can hit the strike when the opportunity presents itself. It tooks me 6 years to find the ball head.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Birna Rørslett on October 11, 2019, 17:03:32
In practice, these two are about equal in their supporting capacity. The lower section of the ENG 2 CF adds a bit more versatility regarding how the tripod can be set up and arranged than the simpler structure of the CF 100L. Theory might predict the additional section to add to instability, but I have noticed nothing of the sort probably because the top of the ENG is wider and effectively prevents any torsional movement.

The 100 might be easier to transport due to the narrower outline, but again difference is small between them. It is, however, the cheapest of the two.

I ended up loaning my 100 to a friend on a (semi-)permanent basis and using the ENG CF as my usual tripod. It can be put in a suitcase if the Burzynski is removed so I have brought it with me on numerous travels abroad.

One of my Burzynski heads sits atop a cut-down DA 75L and is dedicated to plant photography.

The bigger model ENG 2 CF HD is a superb tripod yet heavier and even more bulky than "smaller" 2 CF. I combine it with a large fluid head (Video 20) for long lens usage.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Asle Feten on October 11, 2019, 17:46:52
In practice, these two are about equal in their supporting capacity. The lower section of the ENG 2 CF adds a bit more versatility regarding how the tripod can be set up and arranged than the simpler structure of the CF 100L. Theory might predict the additional section to add to instability, but I have noticed nothing of the sort probably because the top of the ENG is wider and effectively prevents any torsional movement.

The 100 might be easier to transport due to the narrower outline, but again difference is small between them. It is, however, the cheapest of the two.

I ended up loaning my 100 to a friend on a (semi-)permanent basis and using the ENG CF as my usual tripod. It can be put in a suitcase if the Burzynski is removed so I have brought it with me on numerous travels abroad.

Seems that both of them will do the job. It is a pity I will never see both of them in person for comparing them myself. That would make the decission much easier.
I have never traveled abroad with any bigger tripod than Berlebach mini.

The bigger model ENG 2 CF HD is a superb tripod yet heavier and even more bulky than "smaller" 2 CF. I combine it with a large fluid head (Video 20) for long lens usage.

I know that model, and have used it with a DV6SB-head, it is the very best tripod I have ever used, but nothing I would hike with. I have seen how elegant my Burzynski sit in the 100mm bowl of the CF HD. It looks much more elegant than sitting on top of my Berlebachs, or on top of a 75mm bowl like the DA75L. Good to hear that the 2 smaller Sachtler 100mm tripods is less bulky.

Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Birna Rørslett on October 11, 2019, 20:24:21
There isn't much difference regarding the size of the tripod top between ENG 2 CF and CF HD models. Thus, the Burzynski sits equally well into the bowl of either of them. You only need to find a sufficiently large screw and a washer to make this happen.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Bill De Jager on October 11, 2019, 23:33:17
There are some Burzynski ballheads here (https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1574486/0), but they are missing the curved, shaped ring that helps them to fit a video bowl.  I suppose the unit can still be used as a normal flat-bottomed head.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Birna Rørslett on October 12, 2019, 00:00:50
It will slide into the 100mm bowl of the Sachtlers. Some early Burzynski heads need to be trimmed at the lower edge in order to fit properly, however.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Bill De Jager on October 12, 2019, 02:42:44
Thanks, Birna.

Has anybody tried the 75-series carbon-fiber Sachtlers?  B&H link. (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1354184-REG/sachtler_4585_tripod_flowtech_75_carbon.html)  They have a very different kind of leg shape.  User reports I've seen have been very favorable regarding stiffness.

EDIT:  My thoughts here are that while the heavier Sachtler tripods are wonderful for stabilizing very long lenses they're also beasts to lug around.  Sometimes you need something that's more portable even though it doesn't provide the maximum possible stabilization.  The design of the 75-series tripods is intriguing and may possibly resist vibration better than the standard tube design.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: pluton on October 13, 2019, 19:08:45
Thanks, Birna.

Has anybody tried the 75-series carbon-fiber Sachtlers?  B&H link. (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1354184-REG/sachtler_4585_tripod_flowtech_75_carbon.html)  They have a very different kind of leg shape.  User reports I've seen have been very favorable regarding stiffness.

EDIT:  My thoughts here are that while the heavier Sachtler tripods are wonderful for stabilizing very long lenses they're also beasts to lug around.  Sometimes you need something that's more portable even though it doesn't provide the maximum possible stabilization.  The design of the 75-series tripods is intriguing and may possibly resist vibration better than the standard tube design.
I, too, am waiting for actual experiences with the new Sachtler leg system; so far, no one that I work with in my local TV/documentary community has gotten one.  The old ones just don't wear out or fall apart, even with daily heavy use.
The bigger tripods are a pain to lug around, but IF you intend to shoot long lenses AND use slower shutter speeds, you have no choice, IMO.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Birna Rørslett on October 13, 2019, 23:53:45
The "problem" with the Sachtlers is they last a very long time thus not really a need to replace with new ones ... My oldest at present is nearly 40 years and have seen *a lot* of use over the years. Tighten the screws once in a while (after some years) and it just goes on and on.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Bill De Jager on October 14, 2019, 04:39:21
Thanks for your thoughts, Keith and Birna. 

I'm rethinking my tripod system, and I'm planning to replace my 4-series aluminium Gitzo with something better but not humongous in size and weight.  I already have the top-of-the-line Sachtler for extremely long lenses or the rare event (for me) of low shutter speeds on a fairly long lens, but it's just too big and cumbersome for some situations.

A while back, in my quest for an AU-1 unit, I'd somehow ended up with two Nikkor 800mm lens heads of different version (the first two 800/8 "F" lenses on Roland's site). I decided to compare their optical performance so I could sell one off.  On the aluminium Gitzo, as rock-solid as it feels to the touch, 100% magnified live view nevertheless really danced around with both lenses.  This was with minimal wind and careful shot discipline.  Of course I should have brought better support, though at least I could tell with fast shutter speeds that the later lens was clearly better.

I found another favorable review of the Sachtler Flowtech 75. (https://www.guyedwardes.com/articles/view/sachtler-flowtech-75-tripod-review)  It's noteworthy that the author speaks well of the stability of the tripod in windy conditions, and touts it over the RRS-34L that he'd formerly used and which I've been eyeing.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Asle Feten on October 14, 2019, 19:27:31
Has anybody tried the 75-series carbon-fiber Sachtlers?  B&H link. (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1354184-REG/sachtler_4585_tripod_flowtech_75_carbon.html)  They have a very different kind of leg shape.  User reports I've seen have been very favorable regarding stiffness.

EDIT:  My thoughts here are that while the heavier Sachtler tripods are wonderful for stabilizing very long lenses they're also beasts to lug around. 

2.9kg for flowtech 75 and 2.4kg for CF 100 L. For me the traditional design is most appealing because of the lower weight. I also know the Burzynski sit perfect into the 100mm bowl. On top of 75mm bowl, it is not so elegant, and not so low profile. I am also skeptical to let the gravity do the  job with adjusting legs length. It isn't allways the legs is pointed the same direction as the gravity. I like the traditional Sachtler unlock, push or pull the legs and lock without shifting the grip, it work in all directions, independent of the gravity.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Birna Rørslett on October 14, 2019, 20:54:16
... it even works under water. If you ever need to put your tripod there :)
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Macro_Cosmos on November 09, 2019, 07:48:31
Speaking of the Burzinski head, here's a modern one made by Luland which is also discontinued, it's based on the Berlebach Module 3/P that Luland's eBay store sold as used (hence my deduction).

Module 3/P: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1042766-REG/berlebach_13105p_module_2_reversible_center.html

A massive ball is featured, the pricetag isn't nice either, $400 is pretty expensive.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Kim Pilegaard on November 09, 2019, 10:49:46
This bigger one from Berlebach is still available:

(https://www.berlebach.de/bilder/produktbilder/926_gross.jpg)

https://www.berlebach.de/?bereich=details&id=22&sprache=english (https://www.berlebach.de/?bereich=details&id=22&sprache=english)

I use it on a Gitzo Systematic series 5. The combo gives a very stable platform for long lenses etc.

Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Macro_Cosmos on November 09, 2019, 15:51:32
This bigger one from Berlebach is still available:

(https://www.berlebach.de/bilder/produktbilder/926_gross.jpg)

https://www.berlebach.de/?bereich=details&id=22&sprache=english (https://www.berlebach.de/?bereich=details&id=22&sprache=english)

I use it on a Gitzo Systematic series 5. The combo gives a very stable platform for long lenses etc.
That's nice to know! It's not too expensive either. I like how the Luland one offers a panning base but I dislike how neither offers an arca-swiss clamp. But then they are obviously designed for large format cameras, hence the huge platform. I do often shoot at steep angles, so the 33deg probably isn't ideal. I'll stick to my RRS BH-55.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Asle Feten on November 18, 2019, 16:42:34
I use the module 3 on my very small (only 56cm hight) and lightweight Berlebach Report. Under 2kg for a very rigid tripod with 55mm ballhead is hard to beat. It is rigid enough for using as a leveling base and mounting another ball head when in need of more movement.
The ergonomic of the Burzynski is better. Burzynski has panorama base without it's own lock, the movement is tilt only when almost locked and it has an even larger ball, all of which make it easier to adjust the framing. The module 3 has no problem holding 600mm telephoto, but the framing is hard as with most other ball heads.
Actually I like module 3 better than RRS BH-55, mostly because of it's very clean design, one screw does everything.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Asle Feten on November 23, 2022, 18:19:27
3 years has allready gone since I got my tripod.

I did never got any Sachtler CF 100L or ENG 2 CF. I ended up with a 'cheap', second hand Vinten Pozi-loc 3773-3. This tripod has about the same specification as Sachtler CF 100L. I have no idea how it compare to the Sachtler in rigidity or longevity, but I know I have happy with my purchase. It works just as expected.

The Burzynsky head has been permanent mounted into the 100mm bowl, with a long bolt and hex nut. It is 3,5kg complete with tripod, head and AS-style clamp, just the same weight as my old Berlebach report 2012 tripod with RRS BH55 ball head, but better in every aspect.

600mm/4 is no problem for the tripod, but the ergonomic of the ball head is on it's limit with such heavy lens and narrow field of view. The Burzynski head is even working very well with almost no load, like with my Fujifilm X100S, very contrary to the BH55 ball head that need some more load for working well. So this is a real allround tripod, and has been used much more than I had thought.
 
I have been so happy with this tripod, so after about an year, I found another second hand, even cheaper, Vinten Pozi-loc 3776-3. This tripod is 3 section (like Sachtler ENG 2 CF), and has been fitted with the Sachtler DV6SB fluid head for telephoto usage. This is of course a much heavier combination than the first tripod.

Thanks for all inputs.
Title: Re: Which tripod for Burzynski protec
Post by: Bill De Jager on November 23, 2022, 19:59:16
I ended up buying the Sachtler Flowtech 75 a couple of years ago.  It was actually on (U.S.) Black Friday sale briefly so I grabbed it quickly before the price changed or it sold out. 

I've since used it a few times.  It's rock solid, confidence inspiring, and easy to use, though heavier than more traditional tripod legs.  Unfortunately the price has gone up quite a bit since then.