"The bottom line on tripods is this: you want one that is light, very stable, and relatively inexpensive. You can get a tripod that has any two of those qualities. There are none that have all three."
How true! 
BTW, Bob from Boston, I am using the newest DPP4 and liking it better. It isn't there yet but it is closer than ever. I have actually found a part of it I prefer over Adobe. 
The Sharpening routine. It is second to none.
@Ltc808 wrote:
Thanks for the comments guys. I'm actually planning to use the lens mainly for landscapes (I live in Hawaii so there's a lot I could shoot). Portraits are going to be shot less often. Is the difference between the 24-70 f/4 and 24-105 pretty noticeable for landscapes?
And for tripods I'd pick inexpensive and stability. I plan to hike with my equipment but I'll be able carry all the gear. So any good ones around $150 or below?
You can find a decent tripod for that price. But, that doesn't mean that it will fit what it is that you want to do, and the equipment that you want to haul and mount on it.. As far as weight goes, the one pound difference between carbon fiber and aluminum is meaningless to me. I strap the tripod onto the side of my backpack, and having one extra pound doesn't make much of a difference to me.
I also like having the extra weight in a tripod for the added stability. I laugh because what is the first thing that someone does with a carbon fiber tripod to make it more steady? They add weight bags to it. Yeah, bags are not well suited for carrying around in the field, but a tripod that weighs 4 lbs, instead of 3, makes more sense to me.
I just checked My favorite NYC superstore is offering a Benro tripod and head combo, which is rated to handle over 20 lbs, for just over your price point. I think that setup is a very good buy at the moment. It comes with a nice bag, tools, steel foot pegs, and a second short center column. The head has a pan adjustment and the ball has a friction adjustment.
I like Benro, and its' branded cousins, because they are very good setups, and are economically priced when they go on sale. I have one branded as Induro, and it is solid as an oak tree. It doesn't resonate in the breeze like a tuning fork.
-----------------------------------------------
As for choice of lens, I think the Rokinon is economically priced and is great for astrophotography. It may be a little too wide for some landscape shots, though. I think it can still work for some landscape shots.
I was experimenting with HDR shots the other morning, just before sunrise. This was shot with the cine version of the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8.
I think what you really want is two lenses, are trying to find one that can do it all. Unless you spend top dollars, lens designs will always have a compromise built into them somewhere. I'd say get the 14mm for stars, and find a separate lens for landscapes. Be sure to check out the lens compartor tool, so that you can judge how rectilinear the images are with a given lens. I think a nice straight, rectilinear lens will do better for landscape shots. While you want to have a WIDE lens for astrophotography, which is at the opposite end of the scale.
