Self Leveling Tripod?

Coldkennels said:
Speak for yourself. 95% of the photography I've done in the last year - even factoring in phone usage - has been film and separate light meter. That ratio goes up even higher if you look at the last decade.

Almost all "improvements" I've seen in my lifetime can be boiled down to one thing: making something faster and easier to do. And while that seems like a net positive, the reality of it is that these "improvements" have also led to less critical engagement, lower skill levels, and more importantly, the increasing disposability of a lot of what we engage with - whether that's physical disposability (consumer electronics becoming disposable goods with less "right to repair", "fast fashion" leading to low-cost clothing ending up in landfill within three months of purchase, et. al.) or psychological/intellectual disposability (the lower value placed on art/culture and the ever-increasing "churn" of "content").

We don't need self-levelling tripods. And while the tripod I've owned since the 90s will likely be fully usable into *my* 90s many years from now, I sincerely doubt this over-engineered nonsense will be.
Click to expand...
I appreciate your sharing you methods and opinions. In reality you are in the distinct minority. There are many reasons for that. Are you the only man in the platoon who is in step?

I have seen this happen in other fields. A fellow I knew was denigrated for saying that MP3 and WAV audio files could not all be distinguished one from another. The denigrator, a self-proclaimed :Golden Ears", said he could easily separate them. So the fellow I knew sent files to be appraised. "Golden Ears" sent back a list detailing which was which, and rather smugly. The fellow who sent "Golden Ears" the audio files then informed him they were all MP3 files. Golden Ears stopped talking to the other fellow.

There was an audio magazine which postulated that no solid state amp could equal a tube amp. The challenge was taken up by a sharp engineer who proved them very wrong. The Carver Challenge The point, progress is not a movement backwards. You may not consider it progress but, again, are you the only man in the platoon who is marching in step?

I do not edit photos but from what I have read it is easier and faster to edit a digital image to indistinguishable from film faster than you can develop a roll of film. And neither analog nor digital are perfect. So the best choice would be which gives the best image. And this is the snakepit as everyone has an opinion. There are still folks like you who prefer analog. At the camera club meeting there were despairing tones over film prices and availability. Also an 8x10 pinhole camera was shown to oohs and ahhs. To me all of this is sort of cultish with the analog gurus, followers, paraphernalia and mysticism. I am all for proletarian digital.
 
Last edited:
Rayt said:
I prefer to level with the levelling head with spirit. Seems unnecessary to do it with the tripod legs but a lot of things are unnecessary and we still use them.
Click to expand...
The only reason I know to to level with the legs is when I shot a 360 degree panorama and needed all the frames to line up. Then, you really do need it.
 
www.tylermount.com

Tyler Camera Systems, Camera Mounts

Tyler Camera Systems, Camera Mounts and JetPacks
www.tylermount.com

We had one of these. Ours cost ~$25K, some 40 years ago. Flew in a P3A Orion.

Do I need a self-leveling tripod for my Cameras? I shoot stills. If I was shooting architecture, using the PC lens- I could see it.
I do not, but I can see a need for it.

I have a Nikon Bubble Level that fits in the camera's accessory shoe and can use it with my Goldcrest Tripod that I bought in 1970 when I was 13. I've used it with 1000mm lenses. I shoot stills. Paid $10 for the Nikon Bubble, in the box. It was with the original Nikon Panorama head for the Rangefinders. I can see using a self-leveling tripod would be easier.

I really like that tripod. $28, a lot when I was 13. Still sturdy as it was over 50 years ago.
Has spikes on the bottom, used it a lot in High School when taking pictures of Football games for the school paper and yearbook. No One Bothered Me.
Used it with the 1000mm Meade:
cardinal1a.jpg
 
Last edited:
Sonnar Brian said:
www.tylermount.com

Tyler Camera Systems, Camera Mounts

Tyler Camera Systems, Camera Mounts and JetPacks
www.tylermount.com

We had one of these. Ours cost ~$25K, some 40 years ago. Flew in a P3A Orion.

Do I need a self-leveling tripod for my Cameras? I shoot stills. If I was shooting architecture, using the PC lens- I could see it.
I do not, but I can see a need for it.

I have a Nikon Bubble Level that fits in the camera's accessory shoe and can use it with my Goldcrest Tripod that I bought in 1970 when I was 13. I've used it with 1000mm lenses. I shoot stills. Paid $10 for the Nikon Bubble, in the box. It was with the original Nikon Panorama head for the Rangefinders. I can see using a self-leveling tripod would be easier.

I really like that tripod. $28, a lot when I was 13. Still sturdy as it was over 50 years ago.
Has spikes on the bottom, used it a lot in High School when taking pictures of Football games for the school paper and yearbook. No One Bothered Me.
Used it with the 1000mm Meade:
View attachment 4820607
Click to expand...
Do I have to buy the P3A to use the tripod?
 
Ours was a Free Hand-Me-Down. It was the very first P3 delivered to the Navy. The Sensor we made used 7 flight racks and you could not turn the coffee pot on when it was running, it used all the power the generators could deliver.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom