I have very infrequent need for a tripod, but a few times a year need one for a few shots. Like I said, very infrequently. I’ve had some cheap junk, so cheap that the only way to level the camera was to adjust the tripod legs. That didn’t pan out of course, and that I have thrown them away.I started researching, but it’s hard to weed through not knowing what to look for or what to expect.Using a D750 and nothing too heavy for a lens.Is it possible to get a tripod/head for $100-$150 that is not total junk?Any assistance/comments would be really appreciated.

Used will give you the biggest bang for buck. For example, a used Manfrotto/Bogen, or other well known brands. And for a lot of these, you can still get parts (found that out when I needed a new foot for my Manfrotto 055 (early 90s vintage) and my local shop had them in stock.You won't get the lightest or the newest, but if you rarely need it...Bring your camera and heaviest lens when you try it. If you're happy with the price, ease of setup and stability, then it's likely ok.Since you said infrequent, I'm considering weight to matter as much as the above factors.

Thanks for the reply. Yeah, like I said, my need is infrequent. A few times a year it would be handy for product shots, or to set it up in my back yard. Newness is not important, weight is not important. I just don’t want to get something I have to throw away again.I forgot to mention one thing: I would like to be able to set up the tripod to hold the camera pointing down at a table top to take images of printed pictures. Does that take a special kind of head?As you can tell, I’m clueless even knowing what questions to ask, let alone what to look for or what are good brands. Thanks for the reference to Manfrotto.

Ball heads have a slotted area in the base so when you point them down the neck goes in that slot for 90 degrees straight down.  You can also adjust the legs slightly if needed.  Some of the Manfrotto's have a center column that you can pull clear out and attach horizontally too.   3 way pan heads won't point straight down if I remember right.

Tripod: Light, stable, cheap - pick any two.You should look for a used metal Bogen, probably with a 3-way pan head (typical).Pan heads have their issues, particularly in portrait orientation (camera tends to loosen in the mount), but they are better for pointing down than a ball head.   A ball head has a couple of slots cut in them so you can tilt the camera down in one or two particular directions.   It's very inconvenient as it is difficult to make fine adjustments once in that notch.   Anyway, you're more likely to find a used Bogen with a used Manfrotto 3-way pan head on it than a ball head.A metal tripod will be heavy, but you won't find a light cheap stable tripod.   A metal tripod also will be a pain in cold weather on your hands.Beware of more leg sections and center columns.   Both decrease stability.   I've got a small 4-section leg tripod where the smallest legs sections aren't much thicker than a pencil, and it bobs and weaves with any pressure because the legs are so thin.   You'll get a more stable tripod with 3 leg sections than 4 or 5.

There's a classic article floating around somewhere that $200 is the minimum that can be spent to get a decent tripod.A tripod that is not stable is a total waste of money. Don't go for cheap. $150 is money down the drain if the thing is not rock solid.I love my Gitzo Explorer G2220 which can be had used for around $200. If you can find one or a similar Bogen or Manfrotto tripod for around that price go for it. Don't get anything less capable than such a model.Avoid anything that has stabilizer arms between the legs. That's an indication that it's inherently unstable and the design is trying to make up for that shortcoming. Take a look atanyGitzo model to see how a tripod should be designed and work. Even their lowest priced models share the design philosophy of their most expensive.Even a heavily used (that is, ugly) high end tripod will still give years of service. A tripod doesn't have to be pretty. And parts are readily available for all the good brands.Rich

Thanks for the info folks.  Now have something to go on.Looks like I need to bump up to the $200 range.  Another case of you get what you pay for.

grepper wrote:Thanks for the info folks. Now have something to go on.Looks like I need to bump up to the $200 range. Another case of you get what you pay for.grepper,This is the Manfrotto 190 that has the center column that pulls out and goes sideways for shooting just like you're talking about shooting. Now, this page is from their site, and is for a new one. But, it gives you an idea of what to look for in a used model.https://www.manfrotto.us/collections/supports/190-series?gclid=Cj0KCQjw5qrXBRC3ARIsAJq3bwqd9czd35cFFlgHOisUKNGKlK6eGMLWpoj8GpGMx76wFhIMpS3gMGoaAjNtEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.dsAnd, as others have pointed out, you DO get what you pay for with a tripod and, even more so, the head. Thom Hogan has an excellent article on his site about buying a tripod. Now, considering your own particular uses and usage level, you probably don't need to go quite as high a level as he discusses, but some of the points are still well taken.Just for grins, I did a search on KEH.com, and here are the first 100 results:https://www.keh.com/shop/accessories/tripods-monopods.html?limit=100Good luck,Sam

grepper wrote:I have very infrequent need for a tripod, but a few times a year need one for a few shots. Like I said, very infrequently. I’ve had some cheap junk, so cheap that the only way to level the camera was to adjust the tripod legs. That didn’t pan out of course, and that I have thrown them away.I started researching, but it’s hard to weed through not knowing what to look for or what to expect.Using a D750 and nothing too heavy for a lens.Is it possible to get a tripod/head for $100-$150 that is not total junk?Any assistance/comments would be really appreciated.Not if I was mounting a camera as heavy as a D750 with lenses.Dolica proline have nice tripod legs and carbon fiber. The ball heads are junk though. So I recommend replacing the ballhead with a better one. You’re going to spend at least $100-$150 on just that replacement ballhead depending on the weight you plan to support. Sirui and photoclam make some good ballhead where you’re not paying markup for a popular brand name.I think you’ll be closer to $200 instead of $150 for a very good support setup.

I see a bunch of used Manfrotto 190's with a 496RC2 head.  Any thoughts on that head?Being clueless about buying something is frustrating and not fair.  Nobody told me I'd have to learn something or have to actually think!

grepper wrote:I see a bunch of used Manfrotto 190's with a 496RC2 head. Any thoughts on that head?Being clueless about buying something is frustrating and not fair. Nobody told me I'd have to learn something or have to actually think!What’s the heaviest lens you expect to use with the camera for the tripod work? How frequent do you think you’ll be on portrait orientation and landscape orientation with that lens?

The heaviest lens I have right now is a Tamron 28-300, but have been considering a 150-600mm or at least something with a bit more reach like a 400-500mm tele.  Mostly in landscape orientation, but occasionally portrait.

grepper wrote:The heaviest lens I have right now is a Tamron 28-300, but have been considering a 150-600mm or at least something with a bit more reach like a 400-500mm tele. Mostly in landscape orientation, but occasionally portrait.I think you'll be fine with the 28-300 and D750 with that ball head. I'm more hesitant about that clamp and plate used with the foot of the tripod collar of a zoom like the 150-600. I'd suggesting to search on google/youtube to see if you can find anyone using the combination of the 496RC2 with such a telephoto. Or if there's a compatible wide plate for mounting to lens collars.

Thanks for the info.Hmm. I understand cameras well, but apparently I have a lot to learn just to get a tripod. I had no idea I'd need a wide plate for a tripod collar mount. The Manfrotto 190 looks good. Now I just need to figure out a head to stick on it.I don't need something with a 66lb capacity, but I don't want to get something so wimpy have to replace it if I get a slightly bigger lens. There are so many heads available and really knowing nothing about them is a pain. I checked out a Sirui ball head as suggested in a previous reply.  It had a 17.5lb capacity for about $100.  It looked nice.  I guess.Looks like a bit of a learning curve.

grepper wrote:Thanks for the info.Hmm. I understand cameras well, but apparently I have a lot to learn just to get a tripod. I had no idea I'd need a wide plate for a tripod collar mount. The Manfrotto 190 looks good. Now I just need to figure out a head to stick on it.I don't need something with a 66lb capacity, but I don't want to get something so wimpy have to replace it if I get a slightly bigger lens. There are so many heads available and really knowing nothing about them is a pain. I checked out a Sirui ball head as suggested in a previous reply. It had a 17.5lb capacity for about $100. It looked nice. I guess.Looks like a bit of a learning curve.For example, the foot on the collar of the tamron 150-600 has two sockets to better secure a mounting plate to it. The plate in the 496RC2 only has one screw, which means it isn't an optimal design for the lens collar foot and you might have to deal with your setup twisting at the screw, resulting in sag from when you first position the lens for framing. This has a higher tendency to happen in portrait orientation as the lens places torque in the same direction as how it threads/unthreads from the foot.

grepper wrote:I see a bunch of used Manfrotto 190's with a 496RC2 head. Any thoughts on that head?Being clueless about buying something is frustrating and not fair. Nobody told me I'd have to learn something or have to actually think!I use that combo and I like it. I have not tried other so can't say how good or bad it is compared to others. Sometimes I use it with the Sigma 150-600 (Nikon D7200) and is quite easy. For night I use it with the Sigma 18-35 and it's quite easy too. Tripod is a bit heavy but fairly steady. The 496RC2 head is easy to operate

That's good to hear Mr.adk38. Thanks. That tripod/head combination seems to be very common used and for around $150.Ms.Sara Valentine, sounds like you have experience with both the lens and the head.  What would you recommend for a head?

grepper wrote:That's good to hear Mr.adk38. Thanks. That tripod/head combination seems to be very common used and for around $150.Ms.Sara Valentine, sounds like you have experience with both the lens and the head. What would you recommend for a head?I don't have any experience with the lens or head (other than looking at Manfrotto a few years ago for a tripod); I went with an arca-style compatible ballhead instead. I simply looked up the lens, and saw there was some more product info about the collar at B&H. I was curious if I could see a photo of the bottom of the foot to see how many sockets it might have. B&H didn't have such a photo at that orientation.I often see people adding lens plates to the bottom of the feet for these kinds of long/heavy telephotos so that it can be clamped in and out of a ballhead or other support.

grepper wrote:I see a bunch of used Manfrotto 190's with a 496RC2 head. Any thoughts on that head?Being clueless about buying something is frustrating and not fair. Nobody told me I'd have to learn something or have to actually think!Grepper,My thoughts are that there are better heads out there than the Manfrotto 496RC2. Think of it as a kit lens for a camera, but it's a kit ball head for a tripod.Also, it's TOTALLY up to you, but I'd consider an Arca-Swiss compatible head and plate over a Manfrotto system. Arca are the de facto standard, and Manfrotto is the also-ran. Yes, there ARE some there brands of heads out there that are compatible with Manfrotto, but I think that's simply because they've been around so long and have sold so many heads. However, they're a drop in the bucket compared to how many heads out there that are compatible with Arca-Swiss.I bought an Induro ball head a while back, listed in my sig file below, that was pretty decent. It was priced pretty low, and I'd just spent over $400 on the Gitzo tripod, so saving a bit on the head was a necessity. Later, I bought a Really Right Stuff BH-55 ball head used off of KEH.If you look around, you can find a link to comparisons between different ball heads and how well they stay put where you set them once you go to tighten them down. Some perform this task better than others, and it can be quite frustrating to get the framing and composition right only to have the camera shift when you tighten up the ball head.Personally, I think that even with buying used, you should consider going for something around $250-300. That SHOULD get you a solid set of legs AND a decent ball head that's not going to shift around on you very much. This is PARTICULARLY important, IMHO, considering you have stated you are going to be shooting straight down for taking photos of paintings and such. That's one area where many otherwise solid ball heads are lacking: getting the camera too far off the center and having the ball head slip due to the weight.Good luck,Sam

grepper wrote:The heaviest lens I have right now is a Tamron 28-300, but have been considering a 150-600mm or at least something with a bit more reach like a 400-500mm tele. Mostly in landscape orientation, but occasionally portrait.Grepper,This is another reason to consider an Arca-compatible head, as the G2 versions of Tamron's lenses have the grooves already cut into the tripod feet for their long lenses. That means you don't have to buy another plate for them, saving some money in the long run.And for the longer, heavier lenses like the 150-600/200-500/80-400/etc., I would DEFINITELY go with a different ball head than that Manfrotto for weight.Sam