I need a nicer tripod but I don't have to much to spend (<$100). Can you guys suggest a nice compact one?

I have a Canon XTi with a 70-200L that's just too much for my sunpak fieldmaster(junk).

Scott (Stime187) and I both have the Manfrotto 190XB Tripod ($125 at B&H), which is kind of middle of the road, weight and buildwise. It's aluminum, has three leg sections, a center section that can be raised, and the legs can be locked in several positions (i.e., low to the ground/almost flat to nearly vertical). It's pretty lightweight but sturdy, also.

I got it plus the Manfrotto 484RC2 Mini Ball Head for right around $200. I am probably going to upgrade the ballhead at some point, but overall it's a decent combo.

I did not follow this advice but if you have the $ it sounds good to me.

http://www.bythom.com/support.htm

Originally Posted by kensington

I did not follow this advice but if you have the $ it sounds good to me.

http://www.bythom.com/support.htm

that's a pretty good read and makes a lot of sense. I'm in the market for a new tripod system myself so I make have to take his advice.

Originally Posted by Markitos

Scott (Stime187) and I both have the Manfrotto 190XB Tripod ($125 at B&H), which is kind of middle of the road, weight and buildwise. It's aluminum, has three leg sections, a center section that can be raised, and the legs can be locked in several positions (i.e., low to the ground/almost flat to nearly vertical). It's pretty lightweight but sturdy, also.

I got it plus the Manfrotto 484RC2 Mini Ball Head for right around $200. I am probably going to upgrade the ballhead at some point, but overall it's a decent combo.

I think I can swing $200. Manfrotto has a $25 rebate (not with the 484 head) going on until June 30 and I don't really need it until May, so hopefully I can save up a little and get something that works. Is it okay to get the 486RC2 (quick-release) ballhead for $15 less after rebate?

I'm all for the reasoning behind bythom, but for an amatuer that is not planning to go that far, it's too much.

Originally Posted by kensington

I did not follow this advice but if you have the $ it sounds good to me.

http://www.bythom.com/support.htm

I agree with his approach on principle. IE buy what you need the first time instead of incremental upgrades. However I dont think many people need the caliber of equipment he's talking about.

Check out http://www.amvona.com though. They are supposed to be really good for the price. I know several people here have them and I'm going to order through them as soon as I decide what I want.

i have an amvona tripod. it's pretty good, very stable, but the metal is junk. if you get an amvona, make sure you get one that is all carbon fiber. i would bet it is better than mine. be sure to check out their ebay page before checking their website. i got my tripod and ball head for around $40-50. the ball head fits right on a manfrotto tripod so upgrading in the future should be fairly simple.

I've been curious about the Amvonas, but their CF tripods are so cheap I am concerned about long term reliability.

Another option would be this:
http://www.calumetphoto.com/item/CK7316/

I know someone who reviewed one of the Calumet pods that was either that or a similar one. Essentially it seems to be identical to the Bogen tripod and pan-tilt head which will run you nearly $200. Should be pretty rugged as well.

My $9.95 Wal-Mart special always worked well for me back when I had it (gave it away a while back). Why exactly do you need a better tripod? Not trying to bother you, just would like to hear more about your reasoning. I also have used a crazy heavy (but very sturdy) tripod before with good results. I'm sure something like that would be really cheap to pick up.

i've broken the head off of three walmart specials. i've also found they won't go low enough for me.

Every cheap tripod I've used broke as well.

Originally Posted by Stime187

My $9.95 Wal-Mart special always worked well for me back when I had it (gave it away a while back). Why exactly do you need a better tripod? Not trying to bother you, just would like to hear more about your reasoning. I also have used a crazy heavy (but very sturdy) tripod before with good results. I'm sure something like that would be really cheap to pick up.

Well try mounting a 400mm f4 lens on a walmart tripod and see if you still trust it.

Apparently is alot about stability. You dont want something very heavy atop a tall very light structure. And then just having a head that can support the weight without moving in any position.

But for short lenses shot in a more or less level position I'm sure the walmart specials work fine.

Yeah, I got a new tripod when I was putting my old Sigma 100-300mm f4 on this dinky thing that wouldn't keep the lens in position, lacked range of motion in the head, and I wasn't always sure that the tripod would stay upright with that lens on.

I ended up getting a Manfrotto 055XPROB tripod with the 486RC2 head. The 055XPROB is a hefty tripod, and I may regret it if I have to hike a lot with it, but I really feel much better about putting larger lenses on it and it's much more rugged than my old one. It also allows me so many more shooting opportunities, doing things my old tripod just couldn't do. In fact, just yesterday I had the camera set up to where it was about 2-3" off the ground, on a tripod, getting some angles I couldn't have gotten as easily before.

As others have said, it really depends on why you need a new tripod. If it's just because yours doesn't look as nice as other peoples, that's not much of a reason. If it's limiting you in some way, then that's more of a reason.
Reed