i dont feel like spending 200$ on a tripod right now, so i have this old one of my dads, and after my last session shooting a bunch of 10-30s exposures i realised i really needed to do something. the legs were at full extension which would add to the problem, but it wasnt very windy, and i was using the timer on my camera. i'm thinking of slinging a bag from the tripod full of rocks or something, the thing i have to worry about then is the rocks getting blown by the wind harmonics or something and start swinging, which would make the picture worse than without using it. any suggestions?

You can try hanging the rock from the tripod while also having it coupled to the ground to prevent swinging.

ya i thought about that, its just kinda hard to tie a rock to the ground?? i figgure if i just get a big enough sac then i can get it to the height where some of the rocks will touch the ground, while others will be putting tension on the string going to the tripod. that might work

Depending on how bad your current tripod is, you might do better to just purchase a new one. I recently bought an ok one for $30 and Wolf's camera.

the problem is with my d70 and 80-200 2.8 it weighs 3-4 pounds so it needs to be quite solid, and i've played with cheap ones in stores and they are not any better, maybe a bit faster to set up, yet feel quite shaky.

Maybe you could use a stake or tent peg driven into the ground instead of rocks? As long as stake is tied to the tripod tightly I think the effect would be the same? Of course this won't work if you are on concrete or something. BTW I have had the same problem with my new tripod (which was the cheapest one I could find) but only on exceptionally windy days, or if I don't use the timer (I got a remote for Xmas so that second problem should be eliminated)

a stake seems rather imobile, however a remote would be amazing. i've only been able to use bulb for pendulum type shots because i have to hold the shutter down, and its too noticable any other place. i like the rock idea, then you really do have a bag full of bricks:P but hey, if it works it works

Sandbags.

Yep, a lot of times the weight is not fun to lug around but sandbags are standard. I've also found that ankle weights work really well and already have velcro to make them convienient to position. They're also cheap and I'm not really going to use them for anything else.

A metal tent peg isn't too difficult to pull up when you are ready to move on. It would weigh less than sandbags but I have never tried it, it was just caedes comment about coupling to the ground that made me think of it.

thats true, and it would be easier to constantly get a peg to the right height, rather than a bag full of weight. i'll have to try it sometime

I mentioned the rocks because of the availability of them on this rock we call Earth. A plastic onion sack would work quite well. Fill the sack with said rocks, gravel, sand, snow. Take a bungee tarp strap and tie around the sack and adjust the height of the other end of the strap to get the majority of the weight on the tripod while still touching the ground to stop any swinging. You might also think about purchasing a collapsible water jug and hanging that from the tripod for weight. Sounds a little like Red Green but I think the results will be pleasing and lighweight.

A piece of surgical tubing would work as a bungee cord. Don't forget the almighty duct tape too;-)

BTW most cameras have a 2 sec 10 sec timer these days, use that with a tripod and you don't need a remote for a good steady pic...

its not me shaking the camera thats the issue, its either the mirror vibrations which are doubtful at 20s, or just tripod shake in the wind. i always used the 2s timer, and it often worked better for exposures this length where i could hold the centre column of the tripod down with my hand. usually when exerting that amount of pressure you can be quite stable, so that has worked pretty well, although you mess it up horrble that way occasionally aswell

I used to have that problem. The movement came from loose components in the head of the tripod. Mine are adjustable. I dismantled it cleaned everything, then lubricated all moving components with silicone grease then reassembled it. It works great now. It might work for you too.

If you are having mirror slap/vibration problems with long exposures, use the Mirror Uplock function, if you have it. Often, it can be used with the self-timer and makes quite a difference when using long glass for long exposures.

I second Tracy's suggestion to use sandbags.

Also, if you are using an 80-200, mount the body/lens to the tripod head using the tripod mount on the lens. That way, it's more evenly balanced and less prone to vibration.

i've been using the tripod mount, and its alot nicer, and i love being able to rotate it because my head is only a 2-way pan. i'm thinking about mounting a second little tripod to the body mount, and steadying it using that because the existing head i have isnt great, so i figgure the more contact points the less harmonic kind of vibrations are possible. i'll try that out tommorow

"Also, if you are using an 80-200, mount the body/lens to the tripod head using the tripod mount on the lens. That way, it's more evenly balanced and less prone to vibration. "
Might you be doing that in your avatar?

i think he definitely is, i dont think the camera would be strong enough to support the 400 2.8 on a tripod mounted to the camera. i saw one of those in the store, its even bigger than it looks in will's avatar if thats possible. i can hardly imagine taking a handheld picture with it, not that i actually got to lift it, but big glass is usually pretty heavy-

haha

How much is that doggy in the window?

probably more than your car is worth :P

" probably more than your car is worth :P"
I think this should be nominated for post of the year.
Anyways, I'm looking forward to seeing this little comptraption you come up with. Maybe you should even post a tutorial on how to make it (this way everyone gets to see pictures of it. But anyways, you might want to take trisbert's advice and try takening it apart and cleaning it up alittle.

Carl, the 400 2.8 looks smaller since I didn't have the hood attached at the time, so that’s only the lens. I use it and my 300 2.8 with a monopod. The 300 is hand-holdable, but it quickly gets uncomfortable. The 400 is too heavy to hand-hold.

Even worse is my favorite lens, the 200 1.8. Its 6.6 lbs (3kg), while the 300mm is only 5.5 lbs (2.5kg) and the 400 is 13.5 lbs (6kg). To make matters worse, one can almost never use a monopod with the 200 1.8.

The 400 2.8's go for around $9,000 new, used; they can be had for around $5,500.

Your idea to use a second tripod is intriguing! A monopod might work, attached to the camera body to help steady the tripod/lens assembly. It would act like an extra leg holding the camera body. (Also, monopods are significantly less expensive than another tripod, only about $45 for a cheap one.)

i guess this goes with the theory 'more is better' obviously 4 legs has to be better than 3!