07-31-2010, 02:19 AM
[quote name='miro' timestamp='1280496538' post='1422']
The only problem that I have so far is that I still figure out how I have to attach tripod on my hiking backpack. The general hiking rule is to put all heavy thinks as close to your back and nothing heavy should be outside of your backpack.
While all photo backpacks offer attachment from the back side.
[/quote]
Hi Miro,
I agree that this is a long-standing problem, but convenient access to the tripod seems to outweigh pack balance in the view of the manufacturers and many photographers. [Think about it--would you want to miss a great shot because you couldn't get at your tripod? Or spend an extra minute packing-unpacking each time you shoot?] Some packs allow side mounting of the tripod, but this creates a side-to-side weight imbalance that bothers my knees after some time on the trail. And I personally refuse to cross-mount my tripod on the bottom of the pack, as the head and feet catch branches like crazy in addition to making it harder to remove the pack.
I humbly suggest backpacking with an ultralight tripod. I am using a Manfrotto 190MF3, but Really Right Stuff now offers the Versa tripod weighing only 3.2 pounds (plus ~1 pound head weight). That should minimize any backward rotation. Yes, the maximum height of a lightweight tripod is less than a full-sized model. Yes, having more than one tripod costs a lot. We currently use three tripods, plus a mini-pod for ground work, plus a monopod. C'est la guerre. :-)
If anyone is interested, there is one gently-used Dana ArcFlex Stillwater backpack for sale on Ebay, bidding to end in six days. The beavertail shovit is great for carrying a tripod... ;-)
Scott
The only problem that I have so far is that I still figure out how I have to attach tripod on my hiking backpack. The general hiking rule is to put all heavy thinks as close to your back and nothing heavy should be outside of your backpack.
While all photo backpacks offer attachment from the back side.
[/quote]
Hi Miro,
I agree that this is a long-standing problem, but convenient access to the tripod seems to outweigh pack balance in the view of the manufacturers and many photographers. [Think about it--would you want to miss a great shot because you couldn't get at your tripod? Or spend an extra minute packing-unpacking each time you shoot?] Some packs allow side mounting of the tripod, but this creates a side-to-side weight imbalance that bothers my knees after some time on the trail. And I personally refuse to cross-mount my tripod on the bottom of the pack, as the head and feet catch branches like crazy in addition to making it harder to remove the pack.
I humbly suggest backpacking with an ultralight tripod. I am using a Manfrotto 190MF3, but Really Right Stuff now offers the Versa tripod weighing only 3.2 pounds (plus ~1 pound head weight). That should minimize any backward rotation. Yes, the maximum height of a lightweight tripod is less than a full-sized model. Yes, having more than one tripod costs a lot. We currently use three tripods, plus a mini-pod for ground work, plus a monopod. C'est la guerre. :-)
If anyone is interested, there is one gently-used Dana ArcFlex Stillwater backpack for sale on Ebay, bidding to end in six days. The beavertail shovit is great for carrying a tripod... ;-)
Scott