I have just posted the test results for the MT055CXPRO3 and MT055CXPRO4 tripods. These are the top of the line still photography tripods from Manfrotto. These tripods are somewhat large and bulky, but perform very well for the price. They represent one of the best value propositions in tripods I have seen yet. Not to mention that they also include a number of innovative features, such as a fast setup horizontal center column. These kinds of features tend to add weight and reduce stiffness, but the MT055 tripods perform well regardless.
As we can see from the snapshot of the sorted rankings below, the MT055CXPRO3 is the best performing tripod I have seen yet on a stiffness or stiffness*height/weight adjusted basis that is under $600.
The four section version performs less well, as expected, and should only be considered if the length of the folded tripod is a high priority.
I’m surprised that the pitch damping
changed dramatically but not the yaw
damping.
I would consider the measured change in the pitch damping not statistically meaningful. The python scipy curve fitting program has a tough time getting good fits to the exponential decay on the ringdown, which is why I assign such large errors to the measurement. In addition, the damping is much less linear than the stiffness. That is, I typically get less damping at small oscillation amplitude than large oscillation amplitude. So the exact damping numbers need to be taken with a grain of salt. They are much less precise than the stiffness.
Hmm. Perhaps there’s some floor on
vibration due to outside excitation?
Does it ever actually tail off to zero?
Yes, it absolutely tails off to zero. Its just an inefficient way to take data, as it would take twice as long to collect while not helping the fit parameters much. I don’t see any floor excitation, which is unlikely anyways on a ground contact concrete slab.
What’s the difference between Manfrotto MT055CXPRO3 & MT055CXPRO4??
One has three leg sections and the other has four.