4 ms·

> I'd also like to note that a lot of people spend more on the body of their camera than the glass (and accept using a 28-200 kit lens and complain image qualit

> I'd also like to note that a lot of people spend more on the body of their camera than the glass (and accept using a 28-200 kit lens and complain image quality). It really should be the other way around - good glass is (nearly) forever. I agree. I see people doing that and I just can't help wonder what they're thinking. A lot of people will get a bigger increase in image quality by using a $50 tripod instead of shooting freehand, rather than by buying the latest and greatest body.

shagie 5y ago
... I've got 3 tripods. They're even older than a good chunk of my glass. A pair of Manfrotto legs. One with a 3047 head, one with... I'd have to look it up, its another pan tilt head. Then there's also a carbon fiber with a rather light ball head (that's the one I take when I have to walk a distance). Everything is hex plate. I'd consider the arca-swiss heads, but when I was getting a good tripod I couldn't find a pan tilt head that I liked that was reasonable in the set of heads. The Arca-Swiss C1 didn't come out until later... and... well... yea. While the $50 tripod is ok... the tripod often has issues like its only waist height without extending the (cracked) center column which increases its instability. They often don't have good QR systems and that leads to people not using it. A reasonable tripod head is about $150. An acceptable aluminum tripod can be found for another $100... and those are worlds better than the $50 tripod. It wasn't something I learned until I broke my 3rd plastic tripod (or couldn't find more QR plates) in two years. I still have the 3001 & 3047 tripod that I got after that in... '00? or '01? Again, this is a "invest in something good and it will last a lifetime" rather than "get the cheap equipment that will fail in a year or you will become dissatisfied with."
- watersb 5y ago
  For small telescopes, you can spend more on the mount than on the glass when starting out. A good mount really pays off for long exposures!

shagie 5y ago

... I've got 3 tripods. They're even older than a good chunk of my glass. A pair of Manfrotto legs. One with a 3047 head, one with... I'd have to look it up, its another pan tilt head. Then there's also a carbon fiber with a rather light ball head (that's the one I take when I have to walk a distance). Everything is hex plate. I'd consider the arca-swiss heads, but when I was getting a good tripod I couldn't find a pan tilt head that I liked that was reasonable in the set of heads. The Arca-Swiss C1 didn't come out until later... and... well... yea. While the $50 tripod is ok... the tripod often has issues like its only waist height without extending the (cracked) center column which increases its instability. They often don't have good QR systems and that leads to people not using it. A reasonable tripod head is about $150. An acceptable aluminum tripod can be found for another $100... and those are worlds better than the $50 tripod. It wasn't something I learned until I broke my 3rd plastic tripod (or couldn't find more QR plates) in two years. I still have the 3001 & 3047 tripod that I got after that in... '00? or '01? Again, this is a "invest in something good and it will last a lifetime" rather than "get the cheap equipment that will fail in a year or you will become dissatisfied with."

watersb 5y ago
For small telescopes, you can spend more on the mount than on the glass when starting out. A good mount really pays off for long exposures!