TVC-33 verses Series 4 alloy Gitzo G1410 and Series 3 CF GT3541LS. All 100% crops of the centers of the test target. All shot with a Markins M20 ballhead on a slate floor on a concrete slab foundation, indoors.

All images shot at 1/10s unless otherwise indicated.

Images shot at mount heights indicated in the image titles/descriptions.

Unless otherwise specified, all images were shot with a locked down ballhead, lens collars tight, clamps tight, leg collars tight. Legs fully spread.

All images shot indoors to eliminate wind.

A wired remote release was used for all shots. Unless otherwise indicated all posted images were shot in "S" mode with no mirror delay. In each case comparative images were shot with Mirror Up (minimum 5s delay) and exposure delay mode. The Mup images were used as reference images to confirm focus since all the tripods were good enough to get a vibration free Mup image.

Images shot raw, adjusted where necessary to a standard exposure for consistency. Shot and rendered with Standard picture control with sharpening set to 5. The individual images were saved as TIFs and then composited to a PSD and then saved as highest quality JPGs with PhotoMechanic.

You may agree with me that both the CF tripods beat the larger and bulkier alloy Gitzo G1410. I believe that overall the GT3541LS marginally beat out the TVC-33, and in some cases clearly beat it. This despite the fact that the Gitzo has 32mm legs verses the 37mm legs of the TVC-33, plus more importantly it is a 3 section verses a 4 section.

Comment added 3/27/2013: Gitzo has recently evolved their Systematic line with the "2" version (GT3542LS vs GT3541LS for example). There are two major changes, 3 if you consider that spikes are now standard equipment and apparently less likely to unscrew and get lost in the field.

1. The new mount has a more positive lock between the top plate and yoke. This eliminates the need for the NSN safety plate.

2. Most importantly here, the new mount weighs about a half pound more than the old mount, and now has a distinctly triangular shape, significantly beefing up the mount joint.

I have not seen any in depth discussion from Gitzo regarding why they added a half pound or so to the mount yoke. They just generally say it is more robust or more rigid or whatever.

I see two possibilities here:

1. They were attempting to address the occasional reports over the years of broken mount joints. Typically those incidents occurred in very cold weather and in deep snow. In cold weather the metal casting is more brittle, as is all metal, and in deep snow there is a tendency to push the tripod down to find firm footing. When pushed down the legs are separated out in a way that is "not normal" and apparently severely stresses the leg joints.

2. Perhaps they were also trying to improve vibration performance but I have always believed that the old mount itself was adequately engineered and I think there are very diminishing returns to be gained there. I.e., that was not a productive use of a half pound of added weight if, indeed, that was the objective. The vibration weak link is the legs, not the mount (in terms of incremental added mass to the mount.

The above is purely speculative. However, I am fairly well convinced that Gitzo's major concern was mount integrity and those reports of breakage over the years.

I have not yet handled or even seen in the field a new '2' version. It is clear, though, that that model change has probably invalidated my results, in terms of new production. Despite my own reservations it is very possible the newer Gitzos perform even better.