has anyone been disappointed with the gitzo mountaineer tripod using it with lf cameras? i am contemplating the above purchase for possible use with a arca swiss 6x9front/4x5 back. presently i am using a gitzo 320 w/ a linhof ball head and the arrangement is satisfactory. however, with the mountaineer, i would be gaining lightness/compactness-- your thoughts please.

-- raymond a. bleesz (bleesz@vail.net), August 03, 1998

Answers

Response to question re: gitzo mountaineer tripod

I have been very satisfied with mine; I even use it with a 380mm f5.6 lens on my Supergraphic when I am not close to the van. It makes LF backpacking almost pleasant.

I hesitated to get one for over a year, since it cost more than my 4x5 camera and two lenses, but it has been worth every penny.

-- John Lehman (ffjal@aurora.alaska.edu), August 05, 1998.

Response to question re: gitzo mountaineer tripod

I have the 1349 Gitzo and I would not trade for anything. I have used it with bot ha 4x5 and a 8x10. The 8x10 was a Wisner Traditional Field. ( Weighted a ton).. Great tripod..

-- JErald Rosenfeld (rosenfeld@ameritech.net), October 11, 1998.

Response to question re: gitzo mountaineer tripod

I am using the 1227 (but not extending the column.) with an Arca Swiss B1 head. It will support my Canham DLC but I am leery about using lenses longer than 210. I also use the hook at the bottom of the column to hold a weight bag or a camera bag on a short bungee to increase mass. So far (six weeks) so good. I am also using it with 35mm Nikons including the 80-200 f/2.8 and the 300mm f/4 AF lenses. The 1227+B1 combo weighs as much as my 320 alone, and I like the collapsed length. very easy to carry around. Vibration damping is excellent. I looked at the 1228 but I did not like the 4 section legs. For your camera, based on my experience, I would get the 1348 or the 1349, primarily because of the larger area covered by the spread when using the legs at full extention at the standard leg stop angle.

-- Ellis (evphoto@insync.net), October 12, 1998.