[Jeff]

[Schroder]

I have one of these and it's great. A full height tripod at 2.5 oz.

[mike]

I have one of these. <$10 w/ coupon. Only a few oz.

[NacMacFeegle]

I've been through a lot of cheap and light tripods, and the problem with them is two fold; less weight means less stability (though with a camera as small as yours that isn't so much of a problem), and they have a tendency to break. Various partially destroyed tripods lurking about my basement attest to this. I recently tired of my bimonthly cheap tripod subscription and spent a wad ($175) on one of Vanguard's new VEO travel tripods, and have never looked back. It's not super light (3 pounds I think), and only comparatively compact, but its built solid and durable. I've already taken it one a number of dayhikes and backpacking expeditions, and I've found that the extra weight is definitely worth it. My long exposures and timelapses are miles better than they were on lighter, cheaper tripods. That said, it is a bit hefty. You could buy the carbon fiber version and shave a pound off, but that adds a not inconsiderable amount to the price tag. If that device that device of Schroder's works as well as he says it might be what you're looking for. Sadly it wouldn't do for me since I don't use hiking poles.

[Seventy2002]

I have a couple Joby tripods, received as gifts. I find them unsuitable for long exposures - too light and difficult to adjust precisely. The're great, however, for holding slave flashes. For over 40 years I've used a copy of the Leica tabletop tripod with a ball head. At 7.3 ounces it's not a burden to carry. I do have to use rocks and logs to gain height but it's super stable. If I had to replace it, I'd go with a Manfrotto 209 with a 492 Ball Head.

[gb]

I have the metal 8 oz. Oben TT-100 which comes with a mini ballhead. It is metal, spreads widely for stability and stands about 5-1/2" off the ground. It supports my EM-1 with the 35-100 (70-200) Panasonic zoom with no problem. The only lens I cannot use with the mini tripod is a fisheye, which has too wide a field of view. I need a taller tripod for that one.

[Jim Dockery]

I've carried all kinds of tripods over the years, and just propped my camera on my pack a lot too (lightest weight option which often works well, but framing is very fiddly). If photography is a priority on your hike, and you really want to get the most out of your camera (using it in low light, using low ISO, or getting tack sharp telephoto shots), a light weight real tripod is well worth it for the versatility in framing your shots, and ease of use. See many similar threads here. I'm with Mac on finally getting a quality tripod (and ball head) that will last. When you have the $$ it is well worth it.

[Schroder]

[Bedivere]

[NacMacFeegle]

[Kenji]

I also gave up on various cheapos, now use a Gorillapod and a carbon pod. http://joby.com/gorillapod/gorillapod-focus http://toolsandtoys.net/reviews/sirui-t-025x-travel-tripod/ The Forcus version is a bit heavier and more expensive, but it uses the standard base plate, which has been great when combined with an L adapter. Switching between landscape and portrait position is so quick. It is fine all my photo needs except when I use a star-tracker with bigger lenses. It works just fine for star-photography especially if your camera has a tilting LCD.

[Schroder]

[Jim Dockery]

Schroder, I was quite interested in that gizmo when you first told us about it. With your good review now I just ordered one for those trips where I want to go really light. I'm such a gear junkie (this will be my 5th tripod, although I don't use my old video fluid head anymore)!