Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

055MF4 Magfibre v 190MF4 Magfibre

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

21 Feb 2007 - 2:34 PM

Does anyone know of a good comparison between these two Manfrotto tripods or able to recommend one over the other?

Weight (or lack of it) seems to be the main benefit of the 190 over the 055 but I'm not so sure on the 190's ability to hold something like a 5D with a battery grip and lens.

Anyone have any experience/views on these two? (I am more keen on the 190 due to it's low weight).

Thanks in advance, Paul

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
21 Feb 2007 - 2:34 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Doclassie  91135 forum posts England
21 Feb 2007 - 2:56 PM

For what its worth I chose the 190 MF3 over the MF4. The 4 sections made the tripod feel very spindly and flimsy. The slightly shorter length when folded wasn't a big enough advantage so I went for the more stable feeling MF3.

its a great tripod..... :O)

21 Feb 2007 - 3:07 PM

Thanks Andrew.
Good suggestion. What camera are you using it with?

Any other comments anyone?

Thanks, Paul

andytvcams  1110396 forum posts United Kingdom
21 Feb 2007 - 3:11 PM

Not at Focus this year Paul?

21 Feb 2007 - 3:14 PM

'Fraid not, Andy Sad
I'm off to the US in a few days

tigerminx  10237 forum posts South Africa
21 Feb 2007 - 3:17 PM

I use the 055MF4, and I'm very happy with it. Sturdy as they get. Can't really comment on the 190.


Doclassie  91135 forum posts England
21 Feb 2007 - 3:25 PM

I use a D70 with 18-70mm lens. Have also used it with my (farily heavy) 105mm Micro lens and its fine. If its quite windy you'd do well to spread the legs quite wide though. Mine once fell over atop Glastonbury Tor one cold windy morning...

I have a 486 RC2 ball head too........

So, is the 055 sturdier? I must admist I couldn't see much difference between the 190 and 055 range appart from the the 055 seems a bit chunkier.....

joolsb  927115 forum posts Switzerland38 Constructive Critique Points
21 Feb 2007 - 3:27 PM

AFAIK, there are four- and three- section versions of both. Get the four-section if you want a shorter collapsed length, otherwise get the three-section as it's more rigid and quicker to set up.

There are two main advantages of the 055 over the 190. The 055 is a good 40cms taller and has a removable centre column which can be done away with completely if you need to get really low or can be used horizontally for vertical shooting.

BTW, I have a 190D (aluminium) and an 055MF3...

Doclassie  91135 forum posts England
21 Feb 2007 - 4:11 PM

The 190 MF3 also has a removable centre column......... looks like the 055 is simply bigger then.

joolsb  927115 forum posts Switzerland38 Constructive Critique Points
21 Feb 2007 - 4:24 PM

That's about the size of it, I guess...

21 Feb 2007 - 6:00 PM

OK, thanks for the comments.

Anyone else have any pearls of wisdom on this?

Thanks, Paul

21 Feb 2007 - 7:51 PM

I use the 055 PRO non mag and find it incredibly stable even in high winds. I tried a friend's mag fibre version for a while and, with a head on it, didn't notice a great weight saving and it definitely felt more unstable to me. I know carbon fibre is very strong but I always felt wary of crushing the legs too.

Just my two pen'orth.

21 Feb 2007 - 11:48 PM

The 055 is a lot stronger and thicker in the legs than the 190. This means it's heavier and more stable in a wind. The 3 section is more stable than the 4 section.

If you want to maximise your chances of taking stable, shake free pictures [that's what a tripod is for right?] and the choice is down to these two Carbon Fibre models then it's the 055 MF3. Simple.

22 Feb 2007 - 9:05 AM

Thanks guys.
Maybe I should have been a bit clearer as to why I am looking at this. I already have a heavy, sturdy tripod but I need something light, but stable to take with me when I am hiking.
The 190 weighs quite a lot less which is why I was interested in it's capabilities.
Cheers, Paul

22 Feb 2007 - 9:24 AM


I am sure I not adding anything new but I do a lot of hiking in the mountains and find that it is always a case of compromising weight with stability. If you are going to be doing serious hikes you will enjoy them far more if you can keep the weight down to a minimum.

The sacrifice in stability is often worth it I find. I use a Manfrotto 190DB and I have just acquired a tiny Velbon thing for when the Manfrotto just gets too heavy.

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.