VERY Cheap Tripod

Hi, this may sound really cheap, but I am looking for a tripod for under 200 dollars (preferrably around 150)

It needs to support up to 10 pounds or more.

it also needs to be at least 50-55 inches, at working highth

And, it MUST have a bubble level.


Thanks. I know 200 dollars is really cheap for a tripod, but I'm on a budget right now.
 
The cheapest tripod I'd trust to not only last a while but work well is a Manfrotto. You can find them on Amazon but a fluid head and cheap sticks will be closer to $250. There's always used too...
 
If you are not looking for a fluid head and are just going to have static shots, you can find sturdy tripods with all the features you're wanting for under $80. Go to shops, try them out, see which one you like. Then hit amazon or bh and you'll probably be able to find the same model for a cheaper price.
 
Never Skimp out on tripods, that's what I think. I wouldn't put $6.000 worth of gear on top of a $200 tripod...

I rarely criticize other posts but I think you may not have had enough experience with tripods. I am comfortable with putting $6000 or more on a tripod which has sturdy legs and a good base. You can get those for under 80 dollars if you look hard enough.

At the same time, you can get cheap tripods (charging 400 or more) which advertise all sorts of feature like levels, release plates, extendable legs to infinity and more but the fact is they are made of cheap material and they (and their locking mechanisms if they extend) can falter at any moment, sending your equipment crashing down.

In conclusion, it depends on the tripod and what you want from it. But saying that the price of the tripod should relate to amount of equipment you're putting on it will just lead to people buying expensive tripods regardless whether they need them or not.
 
I rarely criticize other posts but I think you may not have had enough experience with tripods. I am comfortable with putting $6000 or more on a tripod which has sturdy legs and a good base. You can get those for under 80 dollars if you look hard enough.

At the same time, you can get cheap tripods (charging 400 or more) which advertise all sorts of feature like levels, release plates, extendable legs to infinity and more but the fact is they are made of cheap material and they (and their locking mechanisms if they extend) can falter at any moment, sending your equipment crashing down.

In conclusion, it depends on the tripod and what you want from it. But saying that the price of the tripod should relate to amount of equipment you're putting on it will just lead to people buying expensive tripods regardless whether they need them or not.

To be honest, a tripod is one of the most essential things for filmmaking. It's not something I want to compromise on. It needs sturdy legs, a bowl for levelling your head, quick release plate, bubble level, Sturdy ground or midlevel spreader and it needs to have perfect fluid motion in pan and tilt.

I doubt you can get all of that in a 80 dollar tripod!
 
To be honest, a tripod is one of the most essential things for filmmaking. It's not something I want to compromise on. It needs sturdy legs, a bowl for levelling your head, quick release plate, bubble level, Sturdy ground or midlevel spreader and it needs to have perfect fluid motion in pan and tilt.

I doubt you can get all of that in a 80 dollar tripod!

I really don't like to argue, as anyone can see from my posts over three years. I only contradicted your post because i do not want newbs to get false info.

You quoted me. I said, you can get a stable tripod on which you can put equipment of 6000 grand or more for under $80.

Then i said you can get other tripods who could not support that weight but offer features like a quick release plate, bubble etc etc.

In your response, you combined both specifications and said you doubt a tripod like that exists.

In your selective criteria, it is hard to find a tripod like that and I agree.

Without manipulating posts, I am correct. You can find three sturdy legs which will support more weight than newer tripods. And you can get those for under $80.
 
I really don't like to argue, as anyone can see from my posts over three years. I only contradicted your post because i do not want newbs to get false info.

You quoted me. I said, you can get a stable tripod on which you can put equipment of 6000 grand or more for under $80.

Then i said you can get other tripods who could not support that weight but offer features like a quick release plate, bubble etc etc.

In your response, you combined both specifications and said you doubt a tripod like that exists.

In your selective criteria, it is hard to find a tripod like that and I agree.

Without manipulating posts, I am correct. You can find three sturdy legs which will support more weight than newer tripods. And you can get those for under $80.


Okay, I agree on the point that you can find three sturdy legs which will hold your equipment safely. I do not dispute that! I think that the weak point of all these relatively cheap tripods is the head. Levers and catches breaking, Release plates slipping, head not perfectly fluid..
 
I'll agree with Phil. A good tripod will outlast many cameras and give you at least 10-15 years.

You'll want to upgrade or replace a now-broken cheap tripod 8-24 months from now.

Looking at it that way, what's a better value?
 
Thanks, I ended up going with the Ravilli AVTP you suggested .

Far EXCEDED my expectations! AND, it even came with a 4 foot tall mini tripod, as an extra!

Thanks!

Glad you like it! I was very pleasantly surprised when I got mine - "...sturdy legs, a bowl for levelling your head, quick release plate, bubble level, Sturdy...midlevel spreader and...perfect fluid motion in pan and tilt" -- all for $120. It really is great value for money.

Cheers,

Bill
 
Back
Top