Pack a tripod? - II
The big tripod has been a great help - it enabled me to take shots of the "blue hour" in Fuji Velvia (50 ASA) that are absolutely sharp and have a maximum of saturation.
The mini tripod was a great help when shooting within a building during the day.
However, there are circumstances when a tripod just won't do. For example, in South Africa, I mostly used a monopod, which was much quicker assembled and took up much less space, enabling me to even shoot from the front seat of a jeep using a 400 mm lens and normal (not highly sensitive) slide film.
How do you feel? Is it worthwhile for you to pack a huge and heavy piece of equipment?
I always take a tripod - I think it is essential in lots of cases to take great photos. I own two, a lightweight which I take when I'm on foot, and a good heavyweight in the boot of the car.
Richard @ travelsnapz.com
I carry a tripod and a mono for the big lenses, and I always pack a digital for the quickies. . . those shots that would get away otherwise; it's amazing what you can do to clean up a shot with photoshop or PSP.
I think it is definately worth taking a tripod (& a monopod if you have one). But don't buy a cheap tripod. I made that mistake but now, having just invested in the Manfrotto 441, I understand what a tripod should be like. I also purchased the 128RC head and the smoothness of the head movement and positive placement are an absolute dream. So don't waste your money on a cheap tripod, save up and invest in a quality product.