Ilona Lemieux wrote:
>
>...ok, this may seem like picking nits, but the mechanics of the leg spread
>really suprised me precisely because all of the comments on the
>benbo(including yours) and the blurbs seem to suggest that the legs really
>can "have any footprint you please". This is simply not so, and here´s why:
>
I've just dragged it out of the cupboard to try it. If you slacken off the
U-bolt just a bit you can feel that the two outer legs are restricted - sort
of like the hind legs of a giraffe. Slacken it off a bit more though and the
two outer legs swivel from the top in an arc, individually, so with the
combination of swivel and swing you can put the feet just about anywhere.
>
>The middle leg has two ramps cast on either side of its top end. The other
>two outer legs rotate about these ramps. Now its true that they can swivel
>as much as they please, and the angle is infinitely variable in relation to
>the middle leg, but the angle in relation to its symmetrical brother can
>never exceed the angle between those cast ramps. I dont know what that
>angle is, but just because it approaches(or even reaches) 120 deg on the
>ground, it gets progressively narrower as you leave the deck.
>
But the angles aren't affected by height from the deck - you just extend the
sliding leg section of each leg, except, of course, as with any tripod,
you'd have to narrow the angles to achieve more height once the legs are
fully extended.
>What this means in day-to-day use is that in most conditions, i.e.,when you
>have a somewhat flattish ground, and you shoot at, say chest level, the
>benbo has a significantly narrower footprint on its two symmetrical legs
>than a conventional pod. And the only way to spread those two is to lower
>the whole thing. Unfortunately, this is not a matter of "getting the hang
>of it", there is simply no way around that. I think this would suprise
>most people to learn, as the thing is hyped as being so infinitely
>adjustable(and looks it in the pics) So I think what you have here is a
>tripod that offers an advantage only when conditions are REALLY wierd,
>otherwise a disadvantge. And even the advantages it has are not, I think,
>really significant when one considers that many conventional pods are now
>available with individually splayable(to straight out) legs . . .
>
I have five other tripods, including my first one from the early '60s, with
which I'm very familiar. For example, when I set out to take some firework
pictures in the street for ADITL3 (not a weird or demanding tripod
situation) I just grabbed the Benbo 'cos there was no reason not to now that
I'm used to it. I could just as easily have taken my very conventional
Photax or Schiansky as they were just as handy.
Your earlier post referred to the difficulty in closing it up after use and
I've looked at this. It's caused by the proximity of all three bosses (where
the length adjustment knobs are) to each other, and the solution is to lower
the centre leg just enough to clear the other two.
Regards,
Keith Berry (Birmingham, England)
keith_r.k.berry@xxxxxxxxxx
http://homepages.which.net/~k.berry
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|