Which tripod for Burzynski protec

[Birna Rørslett]

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.

[Bill De Jager]

Thanks, Birna.

Has anybody tried the 75-series carbon-fiber Sachtlers?  B&H link.  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.

[pluton]

Thanks, Birna.

Has anybody tried the 75-series carbon-fiber Sachtlers?  B&H link.  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.

[Birna Rørslett]

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.

[Bill De Jager]

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.  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.

[Asle F]

Has anybody tried the 75-series carbon-fiber Sachtlers?  B&H link.  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.

[Birna Rørslett]

... it even works under water. If you ever need to put your tripod there

[Macro_Cosmos]

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.

[Kim Pilegaard]

This bigger one from Berlebach is still available:



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.

[Macro_Cosmos]

This bigger one from Berlebach is still available:



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.

[Asle F]

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.

[Asle F]

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.

[Bill De Jager]

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.