Medium Format Ultralight Hiking Kit

[dchew]

In your article "Field Techniques for Technical Cameras – Lenses and Accessories" you suggested to consider, "use tripod/leveling base without any head; very light weight."

My research suggested that for real weight savings over a traditional tripod setup the tripod and leveling base must be integrated.

Almost pulled the trigger on RRS TFCT- Anvil-30 ARC, https://rrssoar.com/tfct-anvil-30-arc/ (No affiliation, no personal experience.)

Maximum Height: 68.9"/ 175cm
Weight: 3.51 lb. / 1594 gram

This is what I was referring to in the article. I have the previous version. I think this has several improvements:

TA-2U Leveling Base | TA-2U-LB

DetailsUniversal leveling base with platform or clamp

www.reallyrightstuff.com

 

[ThdeDude]

This is what I was referring to in the article. I have the previous version. I think this has several improvements:

TA-2U Leveling Base | TA-2U-LB

DetailsUniversal leveling base with platform or clamp

www.reallyrightstuff.com

I like that the TA-2U-LB has a tripod screw for mounting either camera or tripod head. In contrast, Anvil-30 ARC Ballhead, https://rrssoar.com/anvil-30/, (also used in TFCT- Anvil-30 ARC) is only available with a Arca-Swiss type fast release.

Would you whether there is any stability advantage of the TA-2U-LB over the (lighter) ARCA SWISS Monoball p0 with 1/4" screw?

 

[dchew]

I like that the TA-2U-LB has a tripod screw for mounting either camera or tripod head. In contrast, Anvil-30 ARC Ballhead, https://rrssoar.com/anvil-30/, (also used in TFCT- Anvil-30 ARC) is only available with a Arca-Swiss type fast release.

Would you whether there is any stability advantage of the TA-2U-LB over the (lighter) ARCA SWISS Monoball p0 with 1/4" screw?

On paper the P0 is the better choice. No limits to movements and lighter. The leveling base is much lower profile which should translate to more stability. However, I don’t know if that is really true. I’ve read a lot of positive reviews from those who use the P0/P0h. I had one for a while but couldn’t get over the skinny post. It was back when I had the IQ180. There were times I had some questionable results in the wind, and did one comparison with my well-worn cube. The problem with wind tests is they are just so uncontrolled and random. I’ll just say my results were not the best so I gave up without trying to investigate or quantify further. That should not be taken as a knock against the P0, just one person’s random experience.
Dave

 

[ThdeDude]

... had some questionable results in the wind, and did one comparison with my well-worn cube ... I gave up .... That should not be taken as a knock against the P0, just one person’s random experience.

The cube is nearly three times the weight of the PO! Different weight class altogether.

For a "Medium Format Ultralight Hiking Kit", the cube is way too heavy.

 

[nameBrandon]

The cube is nearly three times the weight of the PO! Different weight class altogether.

For a "Medium Format Ultralight Hiking Kit", the cube is way too heavy.

IMO, the Cube should come with its own Sherpa to carry it for you.

 

[dchew]

The cube is nearly three times the weight of the PO! Different weight class altogether.

For a "Medium Format Ultralight Hiking Kit", the cube is way too heavy.

I completely agree. I didn't mean to compare the two in the way it came off in my post. Apologize for not making that clear. I've never taken The Cube overnight. Currently, I take the L60 either with or without the old RRS leveling base. Not the best solution because it is limited to 10 degrees without the base, 25 degrees with the base (the old base I have is +-15 degrees). I constantly debate what to get:

• Try the P0h again: Plenty of adjustment range
• P0: Lightest of all these options but no fine tune adjustment (not geared).
• The L75: 15 degrees. The added weight over the L60 gets an additional 5 degrees.
• L75 + new leveling base: 15 + 20 degrees. That would be enough.
• L60 + new leveling base: 10 + 20 degrees, probably enough.
• New leveling base only: 20 degrees, no fine tune adjustment.

I still have the P0h, it is just in pieces from a failed attempt to modify it several years ago.

Combined with tripod leg adjustments, anything with a range of 20-30 degrees can be managed for much of what I do, but the big limiting factor of all the above is shooting straight down; can't do it with anything except the P0h. The big problem with a leveling base is that nothing is geared, so no fine tune adjustments. The L60 alone is not really practical with only +- 10 degrees. The L75 alone @ +-15 isn't all that great either, but might be enough.

I've been stuck in this indecisive spot for a few years. Adding together the L60/L70 plus a leveling base isn't really all that light anyway. 322 + 420 grams = 742 grams.

Dave

 

[algrove]

bare=L60 460 grams, L75 630 grams, cube 1100 grams. Dave what would you choose for your 100S kit?

 

[dchew]

bare=L60 460 grams, L75 630 grams, cube 1100 grams. Dave what would you choose for your 100S kit?

I wish there was an easy answer. For the 100s I think either option is plenty solid. I wouldn't choose The Cube for anything in the context of backpacking. Also, don't forget the D4.

It just comes down to what movements you want. You left off the P0 / P0h, which would be the first choice if the stability is good and you like the ergonomics. If not, then I suppose the L60. I have a big preference for geared heads that have independent axis adjustment. If you are ok with ball heads, then there are a host of other solutions like what @anyone selected, or a bh40.

All this is in the context of an RRS tripod or similar between 3-4.5 lbs. That is a lot more than what is above in this thread. So we are talking 5 lbs between tripod + head. For now, I'm going to use what I have for the 100s: RRS 24L w/ L60+leveling base. I still need a creative way to mount the camera so it is facing down. Some sort of L-bracket that can mount in the A/S style clamp on one side and the camera bottom dovetail on the other.

Dave

 

[ThdeDude]

I completely agree. I didn't mean to compare the two in the way it came off in my post. Apologize for not making that clear.

No need to apologize.

In the context of the discussion it's clear that you did not suggest or recommend the cube for an ultralight camera kit. You used the comparison just to indicate that you noticed that in windy condition the PO is compromised as to stability.

 

[ThdeDude]

I still have the P0h, it is just in pieces from a failed attempt to modify it several years ago.

Now I am curious. What did you try to modify ("couldn’t get over the skinny post") and why (more stability)?

 

[algrove]

Now that I look more carefully the leveling base, it could attach to my RRS tripod and exclude the need for an L60 or L75 if no extreme tilts required. Heck I use my cube mainly for leveling now which is overkill for my simple needs.

 

[dchew]

Now I am curious. What did you try to modify ("couldn’t get over the skinny post") and why (more stability)?

One of my not-so-proud moments on GetDPI... Back before Arca Swiss offered the L60, they had the P0h. I wanted to make a "mini-cube," so I started disassembling the P0h, thinking I would separate the ball part and then mount a new flat base to the leveling part. Just when I was about to begin making the base, A/S announced the L60. Let's just say I've received a mild amount of ribbing over the years for that effort.

I would imbed a copy of the thread link, but I promised Rod Klukas I would let the thread die a quiet death.

Dave

 

[ThdeDude]

... wanted to make a "mini-cube," so I started disassembling the P0h, thinking I would separate the ball part and then mount a new flat base to the leveling part.

Yes, see how this could have worked.

 

[Smoothjazz]

I do love the range of the Arca cube, but the weight is a serious penalty when hiking at altitude. I am thinking of trying the L75 Arca head on my Gitzo leveling base.
This would save about 1 pound, and probably have a tilt range of about 40 degrees.

 

[ThdeDude]

I’ve read a lot of positive reviews from those who use the P0/P0h. I had one for a while but couldn’t get over the skinny post

Any thoughts or experiences: ARCA SWISS Monoball p0 vs. Acratech GPss

Have both and use them interchangeably. No informed opinion yet on one being better than the other. Both are nearly the same weight.

Assume Acratech GPss is better with water and sand.

 

[Bill_Evans]

Any thoughts or experiences: ARCA SWISS Monoball p0 vs. Acratech GPss

I don't have any experience with Acratech, but the defining feature of the p0 & p0 hybrid, to me, is the upside down ball head construction which puts the panning at the top. Maybe I'm biased since I shoot a lot of architecture and landscapes but the p0 is like having a leveling base and ball head combined. An the p0 is pretty light. Hiked with one quite a bit in the past.

 

[ThdeDude]

... the defining feature of the p0 & p0 hybrid, to me, is the upside down ball head construction which puts the panning at the top. ... having a leveling base and ball head combined.

Somehow it's possible to mount the Acratech the other way round and have the same feature! So this isn't a distinguished feature of the PO.

 

[Bill_Evans]

Somehow it's possible to mount the Acratech the other way round and have the same feature! So this isn't a distinguished feature of the PO.

Always nice to have great choices.

 

[ThdeDude]

.... disassembling the P0h, thinking I would separate the ball part and then mount a new flat base to the leveling part. ...

dchew,
Really don't need or use the pan top of my ARCA SWISS p0, and I wonder how easy it would be to remove the pan top.
Since you disassembled your P0h at least partly, can you give me any pointers or suggestions?
Thanks,
MN

 

[rdeloe]

Somehow it's possible to mount the Acratech the other way round and have the same feature! So this isn't a distinguished feature of the PO.

I have an Acratech GP-SS. That's exactly how I mount it (upside down). I find it easier to use this way, and then I get a levelling base built in.