Low Level Tripod for Macro

[FungiJohn]

Originally Posted by Jim Ford

Tripod threads always used to be of Whitworth form, either 1/4" with 20 tpi or 3/8 at 16 tpi - both 55 degree inclusive thread angle. Wikipedia has this to say about tripod threads:

"The historic standard threading for the bolt that attaches the camera to the tripod is 1/4"-20tpi (threads per inch) British Standard Whitworth (Whitworth or BSW) for smaller cameras or 3/8"-16tpi BSW for larger cameras and pan/tilt heads. Bolts using 1/4"-20 UNC and 3/8"-16 UNC screw threads are generally close enough to work when BSW bolts are unavailable"

The American UNC (Unified Coarse) threads are the same pitch, but 60 degree inclusive thread angle.

I'm not sure if the tripod standard has moved away from Whitworth to UNC, but in a non-demanding application such as a tripod, the 5 degree difference in thread angles is insignificant, and Whitworth threads should still be commonly available - and would be my first choice.

Jim

Thanks for this Jim

I guess most people will have some of these in the biscuit tin hidden away at the back of their garage

John

[Jim Ford]

Originally Posted by FungiJohn

Thanks for this Jim

I guess most people will have some of these in the biscuit tin hidden away at the back of their garage

John

The British Empire was held together with Whitworth nuts and bolts!
;^)

Jim

[jaybie]

Neat idea John - it certainly works. Interesting placing of the fixing holes for the head, I wonder how critical it is to keep it balanced with different camera combinations.

Made me think "how low can I go" with my combination.

JohnB

[FungiJohn]

Originally Posted by jaybie

Neat idea John - it certainly works. Interesting placing of the fixing holes for the head, I wonder how critical it is to keep it balanced with different camera combinations.

Made me think "how low can I go" with my combination.

JohnB

Hello John and thanks

Having three legs certainly helps with the physics, and providing the weight is evenly disributed within the 'triangle' I would say any 'normal DSLR' combination would work.

The overall size of the triangle could be made slightly smaller for a combination of this camera and lens but the 'maths' around the stability start to diminish if made too small. The 3 legs become 2 become 1. if you get my meaning

John

[jaybie]

It all makes sense John.

Have you tried it with a wide angle lens? There are some interesting compositions I've seen using WA's at low level. I wondered if it might encroach though.

BTW doesn't the ruler get in the way when going from landscape to portrait

JohnB

[FungiJohn]

Originally Posted by jaybie

It all makes sense John.

Have you tried it with a wide angle lens? There are some interesting compositions I've seen using WA's at low level. I wondered if it might encroach though.

BTW doesn't the ruler get in the way when going from landscape to portrait

JohnB

Yes, the WA mage is on my agenda too

The ruler is a mere measure of my photographic expertise. I always carry one on a foray

Actually, the wind kept blowing it over and I had to rely on the ol blutack

[Lancashire Lad]

Another possibility?

The potential for low level photography by simply reversing the centre column on a tripod, and then using the camera “upside down” has its obvious drawbacks in respect of easy access to the camera controls.

I don’t know why I hadn’t thought of this before, but I’ve just realised that a very obvious workaround could be had by making a simple flat bracket, sized at about 20cm x 3cm x 1cm, from a piece of aluminium or whatever else might be available. (In fact, now that I have thought of it, I’m frankly amazed that tripod manufacturers haven’t already got such a “reverse mount adapter plate ” on the market).

The exact length needed would depend on the location of the camera’s tripod mounting thread, but it would need to be long enough to securely mount the camera, whilst extending about 5cm to the side of the camera.

By drilling two suitably sized holes in the bar (one of which needs to be threaded ¼ inch Whitworth), the bar could then be attached to the bottom of the camera (using a ¼ inch Whitworth setscrew), and the other end could then be attached to the tripod mount plate – but upside down.

Now, when the centre column is reversed, the bracket mounted camera is held just to the side of the tripod mount plate, but the right way up, allowing the base of the camera to be practically on the ground.

(Actually - If I remember correctly, a flat bracket used to be commercially available for use with bracket mounted flash guns. If still available, it might be possible to utilise such a bracket almost as purchased, by simply reversing the camera mount screw).

I think this type of reversing bracket would be convenient for use with a pan-tilt head assembly, as pan-tilt adjustment handles, which in normal operational mode are usually angled slightly downwards, will, when the column is reversed, be angled slightly upwards. Thus allowing full control without fouling on the ground.

I may eventually get around to making such a bracket, but whenever I need “ground” level shots, I usually just remove the camera from the tripod and sit it on the ground – a little fiddly to get correct framing, but use of angle finder helps.

I can see a potential for users who might feel that this is an alternative solution to John’s excellent “Fungalow”. Perhaps more suited for those who want ground level support with full pan-tilt control, but also want their full size tripod on hand for normal use.

Regards,
Mike.

[FungiJohn]

Good luck with it Mike.

I had thought of something along the same lines but really wanted to do away with the 'total bulk' and thought that the tripod legs would just get in the way.

I also wanted the 'FungaLow' to suppliment the tripod and not replace it.

Results so far are very good and I've mentioned the use in my recent Gallery uploads.

Here is an example of the Dung Loving Psilocybe - Psilocybe coprophila:



Next weekend I'll try it with a slightly larger 'tilt and pan' head

John