New tripod. Two Vets or Field Optics Research?

[clrems77]

Looking for a new tripod and am stuck between the Two vets Recon and the Field Optics Research. Both are carbon and utilize the arca swiss heads which I like. Will be used for range and hunting purposes. Any experience, comments or suggestions are greatly appreciated!

 

[Diver160651]

Field optics sells a lot of models I assume you are talking about the pro32 vs Recon. Both are heavy if I remember right close to 6lbs. Both use wide tradition apex systems like the Fiesol 3372 that's in that same $575 price range but without head and MCH lighter at around 3.7 lbs (no foam or head), but then you can add the Anvil and have a fully articulating system at a lighter weight.

I've personally owned a shit ton of tripods but only seen versions on the Two Vets and Field optics at the range. The FO reminded me of a rebranded MeFOTO, Innorel or Neewer, the two vets looked and felt nicer.

I am a "you get what you pay for" guy, so RRS with its compact apex and high strength to weight is worth every penny. The Lefoto Ranger series 323 is interesting as it is a rip off the RRS's small apex idea, not as stable as the footprint is a bit narrower but it's ok for the price point if you need a gateway drug. If the compact head is not your thing, going with the lightweight 3372 will be very stable, light, and a very nice alternative.

Gota run our UKD Team Field match (all tripod-based) is this weekend. We'll see lots of brands, some failures some success. Nothing tests these things like deploying under time pressure in weeds, powdery dirt, and steep slopes.

Here are some field-based tripod tips and tricks I posted for the spin up to this match. You might find some of it helpful, the tips apply to all tripods.
Tripod Tips & Field Match Tips for our UKD Team Match

 

[clrems77]

Field optics sells a lot of models I assume you are talking about the pro32 vs Recon. Both are heavy if I remember right close to 6lbs. Both use wide tradition apex systems like the Fiesol 3372 that's in that same $575 price range but without head and MCH lighter at around 3.7 lbs (no foam or head), but then you can add the Anvil and have a fully articulating system at a lighter weight.

I've personally owned a shit ton of tripods but only seen versions on the Two Vets and Field optics at the range. The FO reminded me of a rebranded MeFOTO, Innorel or Neewer, the two vets looked and felt nicer.

I am a "you get what you pay for" guy, so RRS with its compact apex and high strength to weight is worth every penny. The Lefoto Ranger series 323 is interesting as it is a rip off the RRS's small apex idea, not as stable as the footprint is a bit narrower but it's ok for the price point if you need a gateway drug. If the compact head is not your thing, going with the lightweight 3372 will be very stable, light, and a very nice alternative.

Gota run our UKD Team Field match (all tripod-based) is this weekend. We'll see lots of brands, some failures some success. Nothing tests these things like deploying under time pressure in weeds, powdery dirt, and steep slopes.

Here are some field-based tripod tips and tricks I posted for the spin up to this match. You might find some of it helpful, the tips apply to all tripods.
Tripod Tips & Field Match Tips for our UKD Team Match

Thank you very much sir. Would love the RRS, but its a bit out of my price rage! Ill take a look at the Feisol. I appreciate your resp[onse.

 

[Only Shooters]

I have about a year's experience the Field Optics Research 32 PRO. Do you have any specific questions? Feel free to PM me.

 

[carbonbased]

Field optics sells a lot of models I assume you are talking about the pro32 vs Recon. Both are heavy if I remember right close to 6lbs. Both use wide tradition apex systems like the Fiesol 3372 that's in that same $575 price range but without head and MCH lighter at around 3.7 lbs (no foam or head), but then you can add the Anvil and have a fully articulating system at a lighter weight.

I've personally owned a shit ton of tripods but only seen versions on the Two Vets and Field optics at the range. The FO reminded me of a rebranded MeFOTO, Innorel or Neewer, the two vets looked and felt nicer.

I am a "you get what you pay for" guy, so RRS with its compact apex and high strength to weight is worth every penny. The Lefoto Ranger series 323 is interesting as it is a rip off the RRS's small apex idea, not as stable as the footprint is a bit narrower but it's ok for the price point if you need a gateway drug. If the compact head is not your thing, going with the lightweight 3372 will be very stable, light, and a very nice alternative.

Gota run our UKD Team Field match (all tripod-based) is this weekend. We'll see lots of brands, some failures some success. Nothing tests these things like deploying under time pressure in weeds, powdery dirt, and steep slopes.

Here are some field-based tripod tips and tricks I posted for the spin up to this match. You might find some of it helpful, the tips apply to all tripods.
Tripod Tips & Field Match Tips for our UKD Team Match

You might have been looking at the imported and cheaper FOR tripods. The pro32 and pro39 are USA made (edit: not sure, see below a ways) and have some features RRS doesn’t have:

• Leg spread locks. This means you can move the tripod without the legs fold it in, and carry it locked so the leg doesn’t open. Locking legs should be more rigid.
• Integrated panning base on their Arca clamp ASFPL. Btw, this clamp has an integrated pic clamp like the RRS TA-LBSC. I think this comes into its own if you use a spotter on the same tripod as your shoot from. Don’t want a panner? FOR sells a non-panning model leveling head as well.
• You can’t get the same clamp for your RRS; if you stay with all RRS stuff you’re either going to going to lose the panning feature or the pic rail clamping ability.
• To get the pic rail clamp on the RRS, first you buy the TA-3 (I spoke to RRS about this, btw). Then you take off the top of the head, and buy the TA-UPF, which has the needed hole pattern spacing for the TA-LBSC, their dovetail/pic rail clamp. After all of that, you still don’t have an independent panning feature, and you must rely on the panning of the leveling head (Not as smooth as a independent panning base, and you lose the ability of having to separate tension settings).
• If you want an RRS panning base with that leveling head, you’re going to lose the pic rail clamp. To do this you purchase the same leveling head as above, only choose the version with the dovetail clamp included. Then you buy the PC-LR pan base (only found on the photo RRS site). Unfortunately, what you’ll find out is that pan base has a dovetail machined in the bottom of it, obviously not removable. You could stack that into the dovetail clamp on top of the leveling head, but that would look and work rather strangely.
• Removable legs on the pro 32. You can use the legs with spike feet as walking sticks (they offer handgrips to screw on to the legs) or you can remove all of them to make it easier to pack. You can buy leg extensions if you want a taller tripod, or there’s a way you can configure the tripod into a ground level only tripod. Note that the pro 39 does not have this feature.
• More built-in articulation. The FOR leveling head has 20° of articulation, versus the RRS TA-3 leveling head which has 15°.
• Don’t need a ball head for extreme angles. The high angle bracket HAB-270 is an interesting articulating clamp that allows you to not have to use a ball head for extreme angles.
• Included case. The FOR tripods 33 and 39 come with a nice case. The RRS does not.

Some notes:

• The closest competitor to the pro 32 is the RRS TVC-33. The RRS has roughly 37 mm legs. The FOR has 32 mm, and the pro 39 has, of course, 39 mm legs.
• The pro 32 weighs 5.5 pounds including the head. This is right in line with the 33 (perhaps a few ounces heavier, but If you duplicate the FOR head on the RRS, it’s going to be a wash).
• The 33 can go about a half inch lower than the pro 32.
• The RRS is a known factor. People know the leg locks work well. The FOR USA made (edit: not sure, see below a ways) tripods haven’t had many reviews. @koshkin has a review of the pro 32 on his dark Lord of optics YouTube channel. FOR also has a YouTube channel in which they talk about their new tripods.

I’m in the process of deciding on a second tripod, so that’s why I’ve done all this research. I want to buy a USA made tripod, and it’s really coming down to the pro 32 or the RRS 33.

I started out looking at another wooden Ries tripod, but I think I’d like a lighter and more compact pod this time around. My 12.5lbs Ries is staying with me forever, however.

I hope nobody thinks I’m running down RRS. I used to be a photographer, and I know their stuff is absolutely top-notch. But the FOR pro 32 and pro 39 tripods are the only ones that I’ve seen that might be an RRS equivalent, or close to it.

(I should note that @Diver160651 and I have been chatting via PMs about this, and he’s been very gracious and helpful.)

 

[Diver160651]

You might have been looking at the imported and cheaper FOR tripods. The pro32 and pro39 are USA made and have some features RRS doesn’t have:

• Leg spread locks. This means you can move the tripod without the legs fold it in, and carry it locked so the leg doesn’t open. Locking legs should be more rigid.
• Integrated panning base on their Arca clamp ASFPL. Btw, this clamp has an integrated pic clamp like the RRS TA-LBSC.
• You can’t get the same clamp for your RRS; you’re going to lose the panning feature if you stay with all RRS stuff. To get close, first you buy the TA-3. Then you take off the top of the head, and buy the TA-UPF, which has the needed hole pattern spacing for the TA-LBSC, their dovetail/pic rail clamp. After all of that, you still don’t have an independent panning feature, and you must rely on the panning of the leveling head (Not as smooth as a independent panning base, and you lose the ability of having to separate tension settings). If you want and RRS panning base with that leveling head, you’re going to lose the pic rail clamp. To do this you purchase the same leveling head as above, only choose the version with the dovetail clamp included. Then you buy the PC-LR pan base (only found on the photo RRS site). Unfortunately, what you’ll find out is that pan base has a dovetail machined in the bottom of it, obviously not removable. You could stack that into the dovetail clamp on top of the leveling head, but that would look and work rather poorly.
• Removable legs on the pro 32. You can use the legs with spike feet as walking sticks (they offer handgrips to screw on to the legs) or you can remove all of them to make it easier to pack. You can buy leg extensions if you want a taller tripod. Note that the pro 39 does not have this feature.
• More built-in articulation. The FOR leveling head has 20° of articulation, versus the RRS TA-3 leveling head which has 15°.
• Don’t need a ball head for extreme angles. The high angle bracket HAB-270 is an interesting articulating clamp that allows you to not have to use a ball head for extreme angles.

Some notes:

• The closest competitor to the pro 32 is the RRS TVC-33. The RRS has roughly 37 mm legs. The FOR has 32 mm, and the pro 39 has, of course, 39 mm legs.
• The pro 32 weighs 5.5 pounds including the head. This is right in line with the 33 (perhaps a few ounces heavier, but If you duplicate the FOR head on the RRS, it’s going to be a wash).
• The 33 can go about a half inch lower than the pro 32.
• The RRS is a known factor. People know the leg locks work well. The FOR USA made tripods haven’t had many reviews. @koshkin has a review of the pro 32 on his dark Lord of optics YouTube channel. FOR also has a YouTube channel in which they talk about their new tripods.

I’m in the process of deciding on a second tripod, so that’s why I’ve done all this research. I want to buy a USA made tripod, and it’s really coming down to the pro 32 or the RRS 33. The RRS is literally twice as expensive as the FOR pro 32.

I hope nobody thinks I’m running down RRS. I used to be a photographer, and I know their stuff is absolutely top-notch. But the FOR pro 32 and pro 39 tripods are the only ones that I’ve seen that might be an RRS equivalent, or close to it.

We'll i'm not going to try to talk you out of anything.

But I will say some of the features your listing as attributes are NOT something I'd want on any western hunt. Apex locks seem great but are very hard to move the tripod quickly and quietly in the brush. Even the RRS Apex locks should be a hair easier to deploy. Be it a hunt or a field match where you must move with all gear in hand being able to use the ground to help spread your legs is nice, same for bracking down and moving. You can move with a gun attached with closed legs but not so much fully open and standing in th efiels.



Having used just a leveling base, low is better, but you'll have to work very hard and slow to get the off-angle shooting done even high prone. Imagine the high prone below shooting at a target slightly uphill?

Even at 20 your not getting this done. BTW the 22i doesn't do this position well either.



Last one pack small --

Here is the deal, the RRS is better for shooting in the field no justification is going to make it not so. BUT if that's not your jam and never will be who cares, right? Also if you don't have the $$ you don't. I actually think the Ranger series by leofoto is a better tripod if money is the issue and you still want hunting and pack flexibility.

 

[carbonbased]

Having used just a leveling base, low is better, but you'll have to work very hard and slow to get the off-angle shooting done even high prone. Imagine the high prone below shooting at a target slightly uphill?

Even at 20 your not getting this done. BTW the 22i doesn't do this position well either.

I mentioned (in my word salad) this thing FOR makes for such challenges:

This is that high angle bracket thing. Of course, you could use this with your RRS as well, but I think it shows that FOR is innovating and not just copying like so many of the Chinese manufacturers. Btw, Koshkin demonstrates this device in that video of his.

I think you were really coming at this from a competition or high intensity sort of hunt. I shoot prairie dogs and I am attempting to get into coyote shooting, and both of these activities are pretty sedentary. In my world, the advantages I list may start coming into play. I have all the time in the world to lock up the legs as rigidly as possible, for example.

And speaking of the leg locks on the FOR, everything you did in that video can be done with the FOR. Both tripods have leg stops, both tripods allow you to pull them open with your foot. The difference with the FOR is once you have it open you have the ability to absolutely lock it open, so it cannot fold back in.

This is pretty nice in another way. I believe you can lock the legs closed as well (if I understood the FOR rep on the phone). This means you could pick up a folded FOR 32/39 tripod up by one leg and not worry about the whole thing unfolding (if you locked it after folding it down, that is). Spontaneous unfolding is a pet peeve of mine!

Anyway, you are a great resource for the sniper’s hide community, so I hope you don’t take this as anything but a reasoned approach at looking at RRS competitors. Especially if they make a USA made product.

I might’ve forgotten to mention this, but I’m not paid by anybody. I’m just a research-aholic!

And pardon any mistakes, I’m using text to speech.

 

[carbonbased]

Forgot to reply to this:

Last one pack small --

Here is the deal, the RRS is better for shooting in the field no justification is going to make it not so. BUT if that's not your jam and never will be who cares, right? Also if you don't have the $$ you don't. I actually think the Ranger series by leofoto is a better tripod if money is the issue and you still want hunting and pack flexibility.

On some types of hunts, being able to use your tripod legs as poles saves you weight (and pack size). Maybe, It’s a gimmick, maybe not.

For me, money is not a factor, but I do like analyzing pluses and minuses. Very, very occasionally, a cheaper product is better (or an equivalent).

There is zero chance I am buying a Leofoto tripod. They look like they rip off RRS every chance they get. They do, however, make titanium tripod spikes…much lighter than the beautiful RRS or shorter FOR spikes. Why is this not more of a thing?

It sounds like you’ve shot the pro 32 or pro 39 in the field, as you say the RRS is definitely better. Have you?

 

[BisSilent]

Don't waste your money....if your buying overseas just get the same tripod for almost 1/2 the price!!!

 

[carbonbased]

Don't waste your money....if your buying overseas just get the same tripod for almost 1/2 the price!!!View attachment 7553842

If you’re replying to my posts on the FOR pro32 and pro39, I don’t think you are getting it. Those two tripods are made in the United States of America. (edit: not sure, see further down).

FOR offers lots of other tripods that are made overseas. But not those two.

If you’re not replying to me, then move on, nothing to see here…

 

[Sierra1wardog]

I have about a year's experience the Field Optics Research 32 PRO. Do you have any specific questions? Feel free to PM me.

I’m interested in the 32 pro. Do you have the panning or non-panning head? I am thinking the non-panning would be more stable for shooting with less joints unless the panning clamp is very effective. Input much appreciate.

 

[Only Shooters]

Yes, you are exactly right I am a proponent of the NP (No Pan) version as it is more rigid. If I do need to pan I simply do that in the bowl top.

Full disclosure: I am a contractor for these guys so I may be a little biased. Also if you want to put an order in the future let me know as I know a dealer that will work with Hide members for a discount.

I use it often in the field. Here is a video I just posted up with the tripod in it.



I don’t use the Titan leg lock often. Really only if I am going to be in one spot for a long time or taking a lot of shots with high recoil. They do add a little extra rigidity to the platform when engaged. The leg locks were primarily designed so the stance of the tripod would not collapse under high or sustained recoil (50cal or Machine gunfire) and while they do help keep the legs closed during transport the do NOT lock them in the closed position.

Also worth mentioning regarding made in USA, they are designed, machined and assembled here, but the carbon fiber tube is from China. This is something we hope to change in the near future. We are currently looking for domestic suppliers. Of course, when we change over the price will naturally increase.

Hope this helps.

 

[carbonbased]

Dang. So everyone knows, I was just going by this:

My apologies.

 

[BisSilent]

Dang. So everyone knows, I

My apologies.

Dang. So everyone knows, I was just going by this:

View attachment 7553912


My apologies.

Marketing is a bitch!!!

 

[carbonbased]

Marketing is a bitch!!!

Many things are bitches, lol

 

[koshkin]

Since I was mentioned, I use the Pro32 with the ASFPL pan head and HAB to get better angle when I need it.

I chose the ASFPL with pan feature because it is really helpful when I use the tripod for photography. For shooting, I just lock it down and leave it alone.

I will freely admit that for photo/video stuff the FVH-320 video head is better, but if I do not have to drag a separate tripod with me I am a happy camper. I generally ended up buying a bunch of different ball and video heads from FOR when I was switching from Manfrotto to Arca-Swiss mounts and I have to admit that I am quite happy with what I got. Aside from the previously mentioned stuff, I also have the ULP video head, 35D ballhead and their GunPod.

ILya

 

[7mmSTW]

The leg lock system does not prevent normal use, they’re only locked if you lock them.

 

[Diver160651]

Yes, you are exactly right I am a proponent of the NP (No Pan) version as it is more rigid. If I do need to pan I simply do that in the bowl top.

Full disclosure: I am a contractor for these guys so I may be a little biased. Also if you want to put an order in the future let me know as I know a dealer that will work with Hide members for a discount.

I use it often in the field. Here is a video I just posted up with the tripod in it.



I don’t use the Titan leg lock often. Really only if I am going to be in one spot for a long time or taking a lot of shots with high recoil. They do add a little extra rigidity to the platform when engaged. The leg locks were primarily designed so the stance of the tripod would not collapse under high or sustained recoil (50cal or Machine gunfire) and while they do help keep the legs closed during transport the do NOT lock them in the closed position.

Also worth mentioning regarding made in USA, they are designed, machined and assembled here, but the carbon fiber tube is from China. This is something we hope to change in the near future. We are currently looking for domestic suppliers. Of course, when we change over the price will naturally increase.

Hope this helps.

Any reason you don't mount your tripod closer to the mag well for more stability? Other than shooting prone/high prone with a solid rear bag, it's defiantly less stable.

It seems cute that the legs "can be used" for poles, but man, that so crowbarring in a feature that makes for very poor poles. Something like carbon Z-poles weigh 5oz each. Here are just a few reasons it makes little sense.

1. When your hiking or skiing, swing weight is everything unless you're trying to build up your pump your forearms, cardo and sweat. It's absolutely not the best idea for outback especially if you have a night or more that needs to be spent out in the cold.​

2. You have no baskets to keep the poles from sinking into the mud or snow.​

3. You do not have the ergonomics of a grip with the pull strap. For those that have been using poles for way too long, it common knowledge that you do not grip the poles to support your weight, we use the straps to support all our weight and the grip angle with little effort control and flip the poles. This is super evident on the pack-out when you hauling way more meat weight than you should and contemplating leaving gear on the mountain and starting to question just how much gas you have left. You need the poles, but not something that is heavy that you need to grip pumping your forearms.​

4. It not uncommon to need our tripod ready much faster than one might think, extra steps take more time and often create more noise. If I am in an area that I think I might soon need my tripod, I have moved the tripod from the side of the pack to a semi deployed but often slung under my arm or in my hand. Just like you might with any tripd. If I have to deal with a precarious approach, sometimes I'll use that tripod with one leg longer than the others, but most often I'll still have one of my Z-poles in use.​

This might sound like I am shitting on the feature, I'm not; just the idea that this makes good sense to use them as poles and the effort that has been made to sell that feature.

My 2 cents

 

[carbonbased]

Any reason you don't mount your tripod closer to the mag well for more stability? Other than shooting prone/high prone with a solid rear bag, it's defiantly less stable.

It seems cute that the legs "can be used" for poles, but man, that so crowbarring in a feature that makes for very poor poles. Something like carbon Z-poles weigh 5oz each. Here are just a few reasons it makes little sense.

1. When your hiking or skiing, swing weight is everything unless you're trying to build up your pump your forearms, cardo and sweat. It's absolutely not the best idea for outback especially if you have a night or more that needs to be spent out in the cold.​

2. You have no baskets to keep the poles from sinking into the mud or snow.​

3. You do not have the ergonomics of a grip with the pull strap. For those that have been using poles for way too long, it common knowledge that you do not grip the poles to support your weight, we use the straps to support all our weight and the grip angle with little effort control and flip the poles. This is super evident on the pack-out when you hauling way more meat weight than you should and contemplating leaving gear on the mountain and starting to question just how much gas you have left. You need the poles, but not something that is heavy that you need to grip pumping your forearms.​

4. It not uncommon to need our tripod ready much faster than one might think, extra steps take more time and often create more noise. If I am in an area that I think I might soon need my tripod, I have moved the tripod from the side of the pack to a semi deployed but often slung under my arm or in my hand. Just like you might with any tripd. If I have to deal with a precarious approach, sometimes I'll use that tripod with one leg longer than the others, but most often I'll still have one of my Z-poles in use.​

This might sound like I am shitting on the feature, I'm not; just the idea that this makes good sense to use them as poles and the effort that has been made to sell that feature.

My 2 cents

I've cooled off considerably on the FOR due to the country of origin stuff.

However:

1. Swing weight - provisionally agree, but not sure this is a factor. FOR said the pro32 legs are ~10oz each, if I remember correctly. I'd have to hold them in hand to determine.
2. Baskets (and spike tips): http://www.fieldopticsresearch.com/...p/Large-Tripod-Spike-Basket-Kit-x36358579.htm
3. Grips:
   1. http://www.fieldopticsresearch.com/...rips-for-Tripods-Trekking-Poles-x32556474.htm
   2. http://www.fieldopticsresearch.com/shop/Tripods--Accessories/p/Kahuna-Knife-Grip-x37030411.htm
   3. http://www.fieldopticsresearch.com/shop/Tripods--Accessories/p/Kahuna-Survival-Grip-x37081606.htm
4. Quick accessibility:
   1. Agree: especially for mountain hunters who meet animals unexpectedly or hunt as you do with pod in hand on steep terrain
      1. Although, for really fast shots, you just cross your poles for a shooting stick
   2. Disagree: for "hike, set up and wait" hunters, like for coyote. Also some may use poles just for the hike in/out when their pack is at its heaviest, and stalk “pole-less”, especially in less extreme terrain.
5. Weight Savings: Utimately, I see the pole thing as most potentially attractive to the weight weenies, the backpackers who might use their poles for a tent as well. You could build quite a spacious tent with three strong poles, and if you hike with regular poles, you'd have a total of five poles. This could add up if multiple people on a trip use their own tents (women, dad+kid vs others, people that want to sleep alone), as many weight-conscious people use one-pole tents. Sharing poles could reduce weight. One would have to add up the grip/pole/tips/basket weight to see how it compares to some regular poles. You could also consider the tripod poles as backup poles, in case your regular poles break.
   1. Of course, if you break a pole, you’ve turned your tripod into a bipod. I haven’t ever seen a broken CF ski pole, and the FOR legs are way beefier than ski poles. I could see a damaged leg lock, perhaps. For the super paranoid, pack an extra pole.

I'm not super interested in this feature, however. I find it interesting nonetheless.

 

[Diver160651]

The plea weigh 10oz each? That’s not light for poles but seems strange that the legs are then under 2lbs and the apex and leveling is now 56oz?

MIs 20oz with the grips, straps, baskets and spikes?

again not bashing on the tripod; just the idea this is a great idea to use as ski poles or long range hikers

In fairness a lot of stuff labeled made in USA uses offshore materials

 

[carbonbased]

I figured I should inform the group I went with a RRS TFC-34. I already own an Arca Swiss B1 ballhead, and also bought a Vyce for my guns that I don’t (yet?) want to disfigure with an Arca plate. But man, my KRG w3 with that integrated Arca rail locks up sweet.

Also got a nice tripod bag from sunrise tactical and their leg wraps too.

 

[Fair chase]

You guys are making this decision hard