What zoom to buy?

[Norm53]

I put up a bird feed at the edge of a woods about 80 feet from my lunch table behind a french door. My Canon EOS Rebel T3i with EF 75-300 mm 1:4-5.6 will not bring into focus the birds, large and small.

What lens do I need to buy that will do the job? Cost is no object.

Thanks, Norm

[Waddizzle]

---

@Norm53 wrote:

I changed "decision" to "recommendation". There's one in every crowd.

Norm

---

Ernie is right about the gimbal mount being better suited for moving a big lens around.  I also agree that the gimbal is not the most multi-purpose and versatile tripod head to use.

But, you have stated that you initially plan to setup a stationary camera, which is focued on a feeder.  A stationary setup can be done with either a gimbal, a ball, or a pan/tilt.  While balls are most flexible for shooting stills, I suspect that a good pan/tilt may serve you better. 

Ernie mentioned that he has a Manfrotto 501 pan/tilt, which uses a Manfrotto QR plate.  While the plate is not Arca-Swiss, it has been adopted by some vendors as "standard" for video applications.   I have had my eye on the Induro PHQ1, which uses an Arca-Swiss QR plate and the double action, mounting bracket knob that I previously mentioned.  What I like about the Induro head is the fact that the QR bracket rotate 90 degrees. 

Typically, one would mount a QR plate perpendicular to the lens on a camer body, but inline with the camera lens when you mount it on a telephoto lens' tripod foot.  Because the QR bracket can rotate, you can mount the camera/lens in the same orientation on the head.  Without a rotating mounting bracket, you will either have to rotate how you mount the QR plate on your gear, or you will have adjust to the camera being oriented differently on the head when you switch to a big telephoto and back..

Someone one mentiioned that you do not have to buy a head and tripod from the same vendor.  Tripods and heads are designed to be interchangeable once you reach a certain level of performance.  I would not worry about a head not fitting on another vendor's tripod legs. Most heads come with 1/4 to 3/16 screw adaptors, anyway.

When you select a set of legs, look for whether or not it comes with a tripod bag, and what is the quality of the bag.  Can the tripod still fit inside of the bag with a head attached to it?  Fitting into the bag is one clear advantage in favor of purchasing a tripod/head kit.

Ernie likes Manfrotto, which has a long history of excellence, but not all of their legs come with bags.  I have been pleased with Induro/Benro because of what I felt was a better price/performance ratio. What I like best about Manfrotto is the availability of spare parts.  Manfrotto spare parts are hands down the easiest to obtain, with some 3rd party vendors even trying to get in on the act.  Don't be too quick to shrug off a set of high performace Manfrotto legs.

I purchased a tripod kit based on the Induro 8M AT-214 aluminum tripod, with a BHM2 ball head, and have been very pleased with it.  It came with Induro's padded/quilted bag, along with a set of hand tools and alternate feet.  That is my light setup.  Induro seems to be discontinuing all of their aluminum models and going strictly carbon fiber, leaving the Benro name to release aluminum models.

My heavier setup uses the Induro Alloy 8M 100mm bowl video tripod.  I use a Gitzo pnuematic ball as a leveling base in the 100mm bowl  [because it is far easier and quicker than piddling with the leveling half-ball adaptor], and the Induro PHD3 pan/tilt on top of the ball.  I've been considering changing to the Induro PHQ1 on my lighter setup, and giving my Induro ball to my son.  He'd love it on his Vanguard geared column tripod.  HIs current Vanguard ball has no friction adjustment.

[Waddizzle]

I see nothing wrong with using Corel.  If you're familiar with it, then keep right on using it.  Personally, I do not do a whole lot of post-processing on my shots, except for when I'm doing something special: i.e.; removing an unwanted object in the field of view; using masking layers to achieve a special effect; etc.

[ebiggs1]

"Gentlemen, I'm overwhelmed with tech info. At this point, I need a recommendation on which tripod and which gimbal or ball head (or both) that attaches to the lens (not the camera) to buy."

I did !  

"Buy the lens.  Buy the tripod.  Buy a gimbal head.  That's all.  Don't go further until you learn more. No dock (beyond you at this point). No Ac converter (the camera goes to sleep). No trigger (almost worthless)."

The brands you decide to get is not that important.  Get the one(s) you like or can afford.  At this point you need to get your feet wet and do or don't.  Get in there and start learning.  You need to actually use this gear so you know what is for you and not.  What wroks and what does not for you.  I gave you a precise starting point so go buy that gear.  Today!

The reason you get people with different schemes is that is waht they like.  It is what they have seen work for them.

The gimbal head should be attached to the lens.  Never to the camera body.  Weight is not the single issue.  Balance is also to be considered.  IMHO, is you are going to be disappointed by the distance.  But that is just me.

[Norm53]

Ernie is right about the gimbal mount being better suited for moving a big lens around.  I also agree that the gimbal is not the most multi-purpose and versatile tripod head to use.

But, you have stated that you initially plan to setup a stationary camera, which is focued on a feeder.  A stationary setup can be done with either a gimbal, a ball, or a pan/tilt.  While balls are most flexible for shooting stills, I suspect that a good pan/tilt may serve you better. 

There are 2 feeders, main and hummingbird. Considering the weight of the 600 + T3i (or 7D Mk ii), and considering that I must adjust the head vertically and horizontally quickly from top to ground and across the ground (panning) of the main feeder and switch to the closer hummingbird feeder, would the pan/tilt be the better head than the gimbal or ball? Without the benefit of your experience, it would seem that adjusting the screws of the pan/tilt would take too much time.

When you select a set of legs, look for whether or not it comes with a tripod bag, and what is the quality of the bag.  Can the tripod still fit inside of the bag with a head attached to it?  Fitting into the bag is one clear advantage in favor of purchasing a tripod/head kit.

Since most of the bags offered seem to be a tight fit with the tripod with attached head, I'm thinking that a duffel bag with side handle might be a sensible solution to the fit problem.

Ernie likes Manfrotto, which has a long history of excellence, but not all of their legs come with bags.  I have been pleased with Induro/Benro because of what I felt was a better price/performance ratio. What I like best about Manfrotto is the availability of spare parts.  Manfrotto spare parts are hands down the easiest to obtain, with some 3rd party vendors even trying to get in on the act.  Don't be too quick to shrug off a set of high performace Manfrotto legs.

For the reason you cite, I prefer to stay with Manfrotto tripod. As you say, any respectable Arc-Swiss head made by another mfg. will fit the Manfrotto tripod.

Norm

[Norm53]

OK, Ernie, I will buy the Manfrotto MT055CXPRO3 Carbon Fiber Tripod as you suggest. However, are you absolutely sure that the gimbal head will give me the quickest and steadiest response to vertical and horizontal lens movement at the main feeders, the horizontal movement along the ground below the main feeders, and the shift to the hummingbird feeder half way between?

Norm

[Waddizzle]

Duffels tend to be dirt accumulators.  Most quality tripod bags are somewhat water resistant, and are made of nylon, or other materials that do not collect dirt and dust.  I'd advise sticking with a tripod bag. 

Manfrotto does sell bags separately, so if your selection does not come with a bag, then you can always purchase a roomy bag.  Just be aware of the fact that too much room is not a good thing.  Your gear will bounce around inside of the bag.  My Induro bags have velcro tie-down straps at each end inside of them to hold the tripod in place.

I have never used a gimbal, and have never really done any serious birding.  I tried it couple of times over the summer.  Of course, I didn't have the slightest idea of where to go, so I went to the waterfront.  Waiting to capture a good shot reminded me a whole of fishing.  Sitting there with a pole in my hand, waiting for a bite, only this time it was a camera. 

Using a ball to track birds was NOT GOOD, which is why I invested in a pan/tilt head.  Now I can pan and elevate at the same time, without the camera rolling side to side, away from horizontal.  A pan/tilt was less costly than a gimbal, and more flexible.  Plus, the pan/tilt easily fits in my bag, while still attached to the tripod.  I wasn't sure if a gimbal could do that. 

Howver, I do have that Induro gimbal on my wish list, though.  I really don't need it, though, either.  Most of my photos are landscapes, cityscapes, plates of food, and informal social settings like cookouts and holiday gatherings.

[Norm53]

A pan/tilt was less costly than a gimbal, and more flexible. 

What about speed of shifting of the pan/tilt head compared to the gimbal (or ball)?

Norm

[Waddizzle]

---

@Norm53 wrote:

A pan/tilt was less costly than a gimbal, and more flexible. 

What about speed of shifting of the pan/tilt head compared to the gimbal (or ball)?

Norm

---

I have never used a gimbal.  However, a properly balanced gimbal, should be quite nimble.  🙂

Chasing birds with a ball head on a tripod is NOT GOOD.  Using a pan/tilt is better, but not ideal.

If you envision yourself spending a lot of time capturing birds, then a balanced gimbal would far superior to even the best pan/tilt.  I think the Induro Gimbal is a very good one.  I think it would be a good match for the Manfrotto tripod. I keep stressing balanced because otherwise, you'd be worse off than using a pan/tilt.

Be sure to purchase a PADDED bag for your tripod.  I do not know whether or not the gimbal could fit inside of one of Manfrotto's bags.  I've noticed that some have a larger diameter at one end, so it is likely that it could fit while still mounted.  However, I think I would be initially inclined to detach the gimbal for transport, if I didn't have a very protective bag.

[Norm53]

Manfrotto 393 gimbal gets good reviews at amazon. I will go with that one unless someone here suggests something better.

I keep stressing balanced because otherwise, you'd be worse off than using a pan/tilt.

Do you mean that I need to keep the tripod level?

Norm

[Waddizzle]

It helps to have a stable tripod.  Someone with gimbal experience could explain it better.  In fact, someone already has. 

You want the center of gravity of your camera/lens to be centered over the tripod/gimbal base, but level with the horizontal axis of the head.  See the above photo of the same Induro gimbal.  Notice how the QR plate has been raissed from the previous image. 

The CofG of the camera lens has been raised to be on the rotation axis for tilt. notice also how the QR plate, which is mounted to the Lens per Ernie, has been positioned slightly forward.  This was done to align the CofG with the rotational axis of the panning axis.

This setup could probably moved around with just your pinky finger.