Would you carry a tripod on a bike tour?

Have a 4 ounce CF tripod that stands about 50" tall. I used it on one or two trips and then never again.

What I continued to use is a version of this –

–
It's about 4" tall when "deployed". I pulled the round things off the legs to expose the ragged and sharp metal ends. They grip and stick on most any surface. It allows you to get a "squared up" image almost anywhere.

The GorillaPod is the yuppie version.

Are you looking for HDR imaging or self-portraits? Knowing intended use would help answer the question.

YMMV

I have a MUCH lighter tripod that I would use. I think it weights about 1 lb.

I figured (and I've been mostly correct) that either I want a tripod or I don't, and when I do, I want a real one. I tried out the Gorilla pod styles and found that I never quite got the shot I wanted. When I had a full, upright tripod, I actually used it and was glad to have it. Maybe tiny tripods just aren't my style.

I bought one of the lightest non-Carbon Fiber tripods I could find, and it's light enough that I almost always take it on overnights. I have yet to carry it for long-distance trips.

I think I'm leaning towards leaving it behind. It weighs as much as 1/4 of my stuff, and I will need to carry a lot of water for some sections of my trip, so being frivolous with weight is at my own peril.

I think I'm touching on the ultimate question for the ultralight backpacker/serious photographer. I'm curious as to the attitude of serious landscape photographers when they load up 10lbs of photo gear for a multi-day trip. Is it always worth it? Does the feeling of bliss from using your best gear persist past the first days?

My take on it is that ultralight makes a lot of sense when you're carrying all the weight on your back but it's a lot less of an issue when your trusty steed is helping you out. Yes it's more effort getting up the hills but so what, cut down on daily mileage a little bit and enjoy yourself along the way.

I have done quite a few bike tours without a tripod. They have been rewarding and satisfying.

"I think I'm touching on the ultimate question for the ultralight backpacker/serious photographer. I'm curious as to the attitude of serious landscape photographers when they load up 10lbs of photo gear for a multi-day trip. Is it always worth it? Does the feeling of bliss from using your best gear persist past the first days?"

First of all, landscapes are probably less than 20% of what I shoot. On a typical trip, I will start with 10 pounds of base weight, 10 pounds of consumables, and 10 pounds of camera gear, and that includes a 17-ounce tripod. I don't take a serious tripod because I don't shoot that many landscapes. I mostly go after wildlife shots.

"Is it always worth it?" No, not always. However, when I get a perfect shot of some endangered species on Day Two, that motivates me.

On my last trip to Alaska, I took about six pounds of tripods.

–B.G.–

Bob, you're pulling at my non-UL heartstrings. I'm tempted to pack it…. if only to make some star-trail pictures….

Slowing down and enjoying myself is an interesting point for exactly the opposite reason you're intending, Robert. I have done two tours this fall. The first, I had about 12-14lbs of gear and the second I had about 30lbs of gear. I enjoyed the first a helluva lot more.

I find that, if the bike is fast and nimble when I'm not carrying 10L of water and 2 days of food, I love my tour and I love riding. When it's all weighted down, the 10-15lb difference feels like a kick in the teeth.

I suppose I'll leave it behind and stack rocks/bags to take tripod shots. I have a remote, so I won't wiggle it when I take a picture.

Cheers to everyone (and keep the opinions coming!)

Yes, but it would be very light and serve two purposes. I'm a landscape painter, and always in search of the lightest tripod I can get my pochade on that will be sturdy enough to hold the box and easel supports. I used to take all my heavy stuff, cameras, two tripods and all my lenses, painting oils, pochade boxes of pastels, paper, canvases…….but now I just use what I barely need to get by, and the trips, either by bike, car or backpack are so much nicer, less to worry about and fiddle with.
I did get the "yuppie" gorilla tripod for my Canon elph, gave up the huge cameras and tripods, and sized down my painting supplies by only taking my lightest telescoping tripod and going watercolor (tiny tubes of paint or just primary colors with my pastels) and several different types of pencils and watercolor pens. Art supplies can be incredibly heavy so getting the tripods and supplies down to lightweight has been tough but rewarding. If you do so, one learns to improvise (piles of rocks and other ways to prop the camera, or even ask a fellow tourist to take a photo of you for you) works!
If I know I am visiting a place where painting and photography is what I will mainly be doing, I will prepack some supplies and gear and mail or UPS or Fed Ex it to my hotel the PO or a friend, use it when I am there, then send it home so I don't have to carry it with me. Finished plein air paintings get mailed home as soon as they are dry or the day they are finished.

A tripod and remote release is the cheapest, easiest way to improve the sharpness of your photographs. But a decent tripod isn't very light. Compromise rears it's ugly head.

If you are taking shots from the road and you have a kickstand on the bike, I would find a solid clamp on head and use the bike to stabilize the camera. It is lightest most compact way I can think of short of using a real tripod.

If you can get a 1/4" or 3/8" stud mounted on the handlebars or frame you could screw a ball head onto it when you need the support; otherwise, it would need to be some sort of clamp or strap.

I agree with Dale. If no one makes a ball head mount for a stem, handlebar, or seatpost, someone should. I think I feel a weekend project coming on.

Are you hoping to take tripod photos of yourself and the bike?

The seat post idea is great. If you could adapt a monopod with a ball head to fit the seat tube, you could have some of both. In fact, you could strap or shock cord the center section of a tripod or a monopod to the outside of the seat tube. Some rubber tape or section of inner tube would keep it from slipping.

It's all about priorities. People who haul lots of camera gear have made quality image making a priority. I've always said there are two kinds of photographs: high quality purpose-driven images for art, journalism or commercial use and then "shots of record" that are note cards on people, places and events in our lives. The term snapshot is good, and implies simple gear and images made with little or no setup or manipulation.

So, if your priority is to make shots of record, then you should minimalize your gear, keeping it simple, light and ALWAYS AT HAND. I think this is where phones excel. Hi-res point and shoots are probably next. The core concept to this sort of photography is that it is quantity over quality. If you commit to this light, handy gear, then you should be prolific too.

If you want to turn out the high quality stuff, it is a commitment to the financial, time, bulk and weight resources that are needed to pull it off. That gear needs more protection from water, dust, bumps and theft. Just getting it out can be a time priority: everything else is going to stop while the image is made— the setup, the lens, lighting gear, waiting for the light and action and so on.

I remember a guy looking at my 4×5 setup and saying, "Wow, I never wanted to make a picture that much." I think that says it all: how bad you want to take the picture? Are you going on a photo trip on a bike, or a bike trip recorded by photographs? There is your decision maker.

They also make tripod bikes – call 'em three wheelers. Either two wheels in back, one in front, or one wheel in back and two in front. The best ones are recumbents. Put a camera mount on the handlebar, and your good to go take photos.

(This post is meant to be a bit humorous, but if you're open to non-normal bikes, would actually work pretty well. Except you'd be riding cross country on a trike!)

As Dale stated:

"So, if your priority is to make shots of record, then you should minimalize your gear, keeping it simple, light and ALWAYS AT HAND. I think this is where phones excel. Hi-res point and shoots are probably next. The core concept to this sort of photography is that it is quantity over quality. If you commit to this light, handy gear, then you should be prolific too."

The only problem with phones is they use too much battery power (IMHO) to do much photo shooting. And the quality of the photos requires too much editing later for me. I solved the problem by getting a Canon elph, it is always in my pocket ready to go, is lightweight and the batteries and SD cards are easy to carry in the pack. Recently I went three weeks in Utah canyon country and took 500 photos on one battery and one SD card. That is long enough for anyone to use before having to replace or charge up. And it works on a hiking pole camera mount just great.;-) Now if I could just get more time to do my paintings……

Have a great trip Max! If you get online let us know how you are doing.

You really have to set priorities. Are you just taking snapshots, or are you making photographs? There is a difference.

–B.G.–

Hi guys. I get another 3-5 days to think about this because my flight got cancelled because of the guy in LA.

I would say that I'm an advanced hobbyist. I take picture taking seriously, and I try to get great, high-quality shots to improve myself as a photographer and really memorialize the trip. I find that if I sacrifice a little bit of quality in my initial picture and turn my shutter speed up to 1/80-100 in fading light, I can post-process the RAW data and adjust the exposure up to where the picture looks great. It isn't ideal by any means but it's usually a small adjustment that I can't see much artifacting/distortion from. That's been my replacement for the tripod when I'm hiking and backpacking.

When I do use the tripod, I can take my time and use shutter speeds around 1/20 and 1/40 without trouble, and the pictures come out stunning before post-processing, and this I prefer. But, without it, I can cope.

So, bringing the tripod is a luxury and probably a necessity if I was trying to publish, but for this trip, I can make do without it.

That isn't to say photography isn't a focus, though. I take thousands of pictures on trips longer than a week or two. I love photography, and I get some seriously awesome shots every once in a while. This is from the 2012 tour, back when I was shooting with a Nikon D5100 and a 40mm lens, no tripod:

I was thinking of something like the Manfrotto super clamp. You could take the ball head from your existing tripod. It could be used on railings, fences, or traffic sign posts as well as your bike.

Adorama has this knockoff for $17. There are all kinds of gadgets like this in the photo world. With a fully loaded bike, it should be at least as stable as a light tripod— my guess is much more so.

http://m.adorama.com/newui/search.aspx?sku=LTPC&MerchantOverride=ADORAMA&MerchantData=201311021846596524z

I actually prescribe to the "ultralight" bicycle touring manifesto, where kickstands and fenders are considered absurd luxuries for people who list "tightening bolts" in their hobbies.

The clamp idea with a ball head, however, could afford a lot of flexibility without a sacrifice in weight… that may be the compromise here!

You could add the kickstand and call it a multi use tripod :) easy to stash and it will hold your bike upright!