login info join!
Forums > Photography Talk > C stands Kupo vs Mathews Qualitywise which is Search   Reply
12last
Photographer
the lonely photographer
Posts: 1,848
Beverly Hills, California, US


I'm in need of some durable C stands, don't know a lot about them moving up from just adequate fold up  light stands, Samy's is offering  Kupo brand, and Mathews, similar  price though, anybody  care to  offer an experience with these products, also is a turtle mount  really useful? I'm mounting profoto D1's on them  this will be , used in an auditorium
Oct 06 12 07:19 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
PTFPhoto
Posts: 117
Tallahassee, Florida, US


the lonely photographer wrote:
I'm in need of some durable C stands, don't know a lot about them moving up from just adequate fold up  light stands, Samy's is offering  Kupo brand, and Mathews, similar  price though, anybody  care to  offer an experience with these products, also is a turtle mount  really useful? I'm mounting profoto D1's on them  this will be , used in an auditorium

Matthews is the Hollywood standard and you can find them on film, tv, and photo sets around the world.  They are made in Burbank, CA.  Kupo is a new company with a quick release idea.  They are made in China.

I have half a dozen Matthews c-stands, I have beefy babies, a mombo combo, and numerous other Matthews gear.  You could run a truck over any of it, pick it up and use it like nothing happened.

Best of luck with your decision.  smile

Oct 06 12 08:12 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MN camera
Posts: 1,860
Saint Paul, Minnesota, US


Just to complicate things a bit further, American Grip is also very good stuff.  They were the first with the "Hurst shifter" style handle on grip heads and the like.  They're roughly equal in price and quality to Matthews.

http://www.americangrip.com/
Oct 06 12 08:37 am  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
GPS Studio Services
Posts: 34,444
San Francisco, California, US


MN camera wrote:
Just to complicate things a bit further, American Grip is also very good stuff.  They were the first with the "Hurst shifter" style handle on grip heads and the like.  They're roughly equal in price and quality to Matthews.

http://www.americangrip.com/

The handle is kewl, but they are not equal.  Mathews had better engineering in terms of both materials and parts design.  Look carefully at the heads, there is a clear difference.  I have owned them both!

Oct 06 12 08:48 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Warren Leimbach
Posts: 2,549
Tampa, Florida, US


Are you already invested in one?

Be careful about mixing the two.  I was on a shoot recently where the grip house dropped off a mix of both Matthews and Kupos.  It seemed that their legs opened in the opposite directions.  I didn't have time to analyze it deeply.  The result was a tangle of legs and space conflicts when placing stands adjacent to one another.  (Normally adjacent c-stands can fit neatly next to each other.)

Back to your original question: both will support your D1's with no problem.
Oct 06 12 12:30 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
nwprophoto
Posts: 13,903
Kalibo, Western Visayas, Philippines


Can't remember the details but on the video forums people were having troubles with the communist made knock offs.

-
Oct 06 12 08:29 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MDWM
Posts: 521
Los Angeles, California, US


I prefer Matthews, it's the industry standard and easy to get replacement parts when needed. The turtle base comes in handy if you're going on location or shipping. Make sure you get them with grip head and arm.

Note: Sandbags highly recommended when using c-stands plus learn how to use the grip head so it tightens towards the head or load. Use sandbag to counter balance.
Oct 06 12 09:05 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
the lonely photographer
Posts: 1,848
Beverly Hills, California, US


Samy's in LA has the KUPOS  and Mathews, Both have similar  design features,   and both have similar pricing. Theres no over whelming  price difference,  The choice is obvious,  though pricey compared to renting... over a few days  I would have paid for the cost of buying them.
Thanks guys  for your opinions
Oct 07 12 08:28 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Robert Feliciano
Posts: 486
New York, New York, US


I've never put lights on my C-stands. I use them for flags, scrims, reflectors, etc. I've never been on a pro shoot where someone did have lights on them.
Oct 07 12 09:14 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
the lonely photographer
Posts: 1,848
Beverly Hills, California, US


Robert Feliciano wrote:
I've never put lights on my C-stands. I use them for flags, scrims, reflectors, etc. I've never been on a pro shoot where someone did have lights on them.

I would hope the C stands are stronger than standard light stands that come in the  kits. No comment on your pro shoots.

Oct 07 12 10:12 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Robert Feliciano
Posts: 486
New York, New York, US


the lonely photographer wrote:
I would hope the C stands are stronger than standard light stands that come in the  kits. No comment on your pro shoots.

The lightstands that come with those kits are to hold the umbrellas, which also come with the kits. They aren't being use to hold up 4'x6' softboxes with grids and a sandbag.
The biggest shoot I've been on had junior roller stands each holding 2 pro packs superclamped to the stand as weight leading into a twin head.

Oct 07 12 01:51 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
the lonely photographer
Posts: 1,848
Beverly Hills, California, US


C  stands are built heavier than the lightstands that come with the kits.  You mean to tell me a monolight should not mounted on the post of a c-stand?  w're not talking about those arms that hold the flags scrims  and what not. There things called booms    for  the lighting. The showrooms  have all kinds of setups featuring C stands  and their accessories.
Oct 07 12 02:06 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Timo G
Posts: 106
Carlsbad, California, US


I have some turtle bases and never use.  Take that for what it's worth.  I really like Avenger C stands.  I've owned both Mathews and Avenger.  Avengers seem smoother and I like the adjustment knobs and really like the adjustment knobs on the arms.  If same price, I'd look into the avengers.  C Stands are what I use for light stands.
Oct 07 12 02:34 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Robert Feliciano
Posts: 486
New York, New York, US


I'm saying horses for courses. If portability is important, C-stands fail the test; awkward base that doesn't fit in a case well, no wheels to move while on set.
The beauty of a C-stand is the small footprint of the base. It's great for moving it in close or having many of them close together. Your OP never mentioned those 2 things, just portability and strength. There are better options if those criteria are important. I'm saying get strong folding light stands, not a C-stand and not a weak stand. You can get any good stackable Manfrotto stand, an AC stand, a steel instead of aluminum stand, or something like this if you want versatility:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/5 … Stand.html
Oct 07 12 02:35 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
the lonely photographer
Posts: 1,848
Beverly Hills, California, US


Robert Feliciano wrote:
I'm saying horses for courses. If portability is important, C-stands fail the test; awkward base that doesn't fit in a case well, no wheels to move while on set.
The beauty of a C-stand is the small footprint of the base. It's great for moving it in close or having many of them close together. Your OP never mentioned those 2 things, just portability and strength. There are better options if those criteria are important. I'm saying get strong folding light stands, not a C-stand and not a weak stand. You can get any good stackable Manfrotto stand, an AC stand, a steel instead of aluminum stand, or something like this if you want versatility:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/5 … Stand.html

That certainly is a viable option  and I would certainly consider it that foot print is much wider than the  C-stand and portability is good,   though I'm not using the boom arms to position  lights   namely to mount a light directly to the bolt.
but I'd like to hear the Members opinions, I don't think I'm wrong in assuming the C stands are stronger, than the fold up type and can handle heavier  weight with the right attachments, my concern is stability, I don't want that thing tipping over and bonking someone ,  this will be used in a theratre arena  amongst rows of  seats   and probably weighed down the equivalent of a small car.

If anybody wants to chime in  they are welcome to.  I am looking at the best option   thank you

Oct 07 12 03:19 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Robert Feliciano
Posts: 486
New York, New York, US


the lonely photographer wrote:
I don't think I'm wrong in assuming the C stands are stronger, than the fold up type and can handle heavier  weight with the right attachments, my concern is stability, I don't want that thing tipping over and bonking someone ,  this will be used in a theratre arena  amongst rows of  seats   and probably weighed down the equivalent of a small car.

You're neither right nor wrong, but you're both right and wrong. It all depends on which C-stand you are comparing to which light stands. I feel you're only comparing Matthews C-stands to lightweight stands meant to hold umbrellas, then yes, C-stands will hold more weight. But if you're comparing it to a stronger steel (not aluminum) folding stand, then you're wrong, by about 3 pounds.
If it will be in between the seats, it depends on the theater whether either base will even fit between seats. Given that most theaters have angled floors, you should look for a stand that has a variable height on one leg to compensate for the incline, like this one: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/2 … _Boom.html

Oct 07 12 08:11 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
the lonely photographer
Posts: 1,848
Beverly Hills, California, US


Robert Feliciano wrote:
You're neither right nor wrong, but you're both right and wrong. It all depends on which C-stand you are comparing to which light stands. I feel you're only comparing Matthews C-stands to lightweight stands meant to hold umbrellas, then yes, C-stands will hold more weight. But if you're comparing it to a stronger steel (not aluminum) folding stand, then you're wrong, by about 3 pounds.
If it will be in between the seats, it depends on the theater whether either base will even fit between seats. Given that most theaters have angled floors, you should look for a stand that has a variable height on one leg to compensate for the incline, like this one: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/2 … _Boom.html

I have  a kit  with lightstands,  so thats whats supplied,  you're saying those  stands should only be used for umbrellas   leaves me to wonder how to attach the monolight to the stand  since the monolight has a little hole the shaft of the umbrella goes through. And there is no  other attachment in the kit for the umbrella other than the light itself...

Oct 07 12 09:13 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
R Michael Walker
Posts: 11,957
Costa Mesa, California, US


Robert Feliciano wrote:
I've never put lights on my C-stands. I use them for flags, scrims, reflectors, etc. I've never been on a pro shoot where someone did have lights on them.

All the time...hot lights mostly but I use them from my Photogenics as well. In TV we used Matthews almost exclusively.

Oct 07 12 09:23 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
PTFPhoto
Posts: 117
Tallahassee, Florida, US


I believe he's saying the kit stands may be a little "light" for the intended purpose.  Most kit stands are awful.

Matthews, Avenger, and others make folding light stands built to the same spec as the c-stands with similar weight.  These are far preferable.

I use c-stands to put mono lights on all the time.  No problem doing this, and it's done in film and TV all the time as well.  However, traditional folding stands offer a wider base and more stability than a c-stand.   Some come with a "lazy leg" or "rocky mountain leg" which is where one leg can be directed downslope on an angled surface and extended so as to level the stand.  Very handy for that kind of use or when used on stairs.



the lonely photographer wrote:
I have  a kit  with lightstands,  so thats whats supplied,  you're saying those  stands should only be used for umbrellas   leaves me to wonder how to attach the monolight to the stand  since the monolight has a little hole the shaft of the umbrella goes through. And there is no  other attachment in the kit for the umbrella other than the light itself...

Oct 07 12 09:32 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
the lonely photographer
Posts: 1,848
Beverly Hills, California, US


my impression from  his  first posts seem to say that he never was in a photoshoot that had  lighting on C stands,   you can go  back and read it yourself. That was incorrect to mount lighting on the C stands  and to be used for scrims flags and what not.  So theres the confusion there. some  posters says its acceptable to mount lights on the bolt. Then it takes a weird turn , the folding kind  was recommended , though  certainly beefier  stronger than the  supplied junk in the kit. I got the impression he did not favor C stands,  I'm just upgrading to better hardware   andI'm open to recommendations, this stuff is not cheap,  though he did offer a choice I was not aware of   and I am seriously considering his recommendation.  thats the lightstand with the adjustable leg to comp for incline in the floor.
Something theC-stands can't do,
Oct 07 12 10:23 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Dan Howell Tearsheets
Posts: 572
Jersey City, New Jersey, US


Robert Feliciano wrote:
I've never put lights on my C-stands. I use them for flags, scrims, reflectors, etc. I've never been on a pro shoot where someone did have lights on them.

I really don't know what kind of pro shoots you've been on, but you have apparently been missing numerous pro shoots that use C-Stands to hold light heads in EVERY DAY use. I have personally seen that they are a staple in studios all over NYC where I work on my own professional shoots regularly, not only for flags and grip equipment.

Was your comment implying that pros don't put strobe heads on C-stands or that it is unprofessional to do so? If so, it would be incorrect and easily contradicted.

Oct 08 12 05:40 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Robert Feliciano
Posts: 486
New York, New York, US


I'm not saying the kit stands are just for the umbrellas. I'm saying they're for lights with the small umbrella included as the modifier. Of course the light goes on the stand and the umbrella in the light.
By professional, you mean payment for services, then yes, of course, C-stands are used by professionals. But on most shoots I've been on, stands with WHEELS are the preferred method, thus no C-stands for the lights.
Oct 08 12 05:56 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
the lonely photographer
Posts: 1,848
Beverly Hills, California, US


Robert Feliciano wrote:
I'm not saying the kit stands are just for the umbrellas. I'm saying they're for lights with the small umbrella included as the modifier. Of course the light goes on the stand and the umbrella in the light.
By professional, you mean payment for services, then yes, of course, C-stands are used by professionals. But on most shoots I've been on, stands with WHEELS are the preferred method, thus no C-stands for the lights.

LOL   I guess Robert  forgot  most MM here don't live in the exalted world of being amongst luxury of wheeled lightstands, use $150 dollar  Cstands to hold a flag or scrim (I use a potato chip clip and on a dowel and ask someone to hold  it). It sucks to be po' and broke most of the time.  Hell my idea of visiting a foreign country is going down to Tijuana.
Its all good Robert, I like the $200 dollar light stand with the adjustable leg,  its pretty much exactly what I need for the job. Its a hell of a lot safer than the C stands I had in mind.
Thanks for the tip

Oct 08 12 07:00 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
PTFPhoto
Posts: 117
Tallahassee, Florida, US


Robert Feliciano wrote:
I'm not saying the kit stands are just for the umbrellas. I'm saying they're for lights with the small umbrella included as the modifier. Of course the light goes on the stand and the umbrella in the light.
By professional, you mean payment for services, then yes, of course, C-stands are used by professionals. But on most shoots I've been on, stands with WHEELS are the preferred method, thus no C-stands for the lights.

Then I would suggest you get out of the studio for a while.  Because on location (beach, carpeted home, historical buildings, etc.) you'll get run on out on a rail for trying to wheel anything around or you gear won't work.  Want to run a set of casters?  Put them anywhere near beach sand.  The ball-bearings will implode.

I've been on set with HBO films (in my historical building) and there was not a wheeled stand to be found.  Plenty of baby and junior stands and booms, plenty of c-stands, plenty of HMIs.  But no wheels. 

In my studio we do use wheeled stands, but also c-stands, and traditional light stands.  You use what you need for the job at hand.  Wheeled stands don't work well on uneven floors, inclines, carpeting, or outdoors on rough terrain.

Oct 08 12 07:48 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MDWM
Posts: 521
Los Angeles, California, US


as mentioned previously, C-stands are your best solutions. If you're on uneven surfaces or stairs get the c-stand with sliding leg.
http://www.amazon.com/Matthews-Century- … B000TI3370
Oct 08 12 01:10 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MDWM
Posts: 521
Los Angeles, California, US


Robert Feliciano wrote:
I'm not saying the kit stands are just for the umbrellas. I'm saying they're for lights with the small umbrella included as the modifier. Of course the light goes on the stand and the umbrella in the light.
By professional, you mean payment for services, then yes, of course, C-stands are used by professionals. But on most shoots I've been on, stands with WHEELS are the preferred method, thus no C-stands for the lights.

For still photography and strobe lighting, wheels are NOT the preferred method. C-stands with sandbags are.

Oct 08 12 01:14 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Robert Feliciano
Posts: 486
New York, New York, US


MDWM wrote:
For still photography and strobe lighting, wheels are NOT the preferred method. C-stands with sandbags are.

There are many tools for many jobs and I'm sure C-stands work for you and many others. But most standard 40" C-stands don't go much higher than 10'. Sorry, but I'd be a lot less productive with a 7' Profoto umbrella on a C-stand. I'll take a 13'-14' roller any day over a 10' C-stand. My 1st studio had 15' ceilings, I was spoiled rotten. I'm down to 12' now.
I do like the floating leg C-stand, but still too short.

Oct 08 12 06:49 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Dan Connolly Photograph
Posts: 89
Los Angeles, California, US


Buy one, a Mathews from Samy's for $139.  You'll buy more after you see all the things they can be used for. It's great not having to worry about knocking a stand over.
Oct 08 12 07:09 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MDWM
Posts: 521
Los Angeles, California, US


Robert Feliciano wrote:

There are many tools for many jobs and I'm sure C-stands work for you and many others. But most standard 40" C-stands don't go much higher than 10'. Sorry, but I'd be a lot less productive with a 7' Profoto umbrella on a C-stand. I'll take a 13'-14' roller any day over a 10' C-stand. My 1st studio had 15' ceilings, I was spoiled rotten. I'm down to 12' now.
I do like the floating leg C-stand, but still too short.

The OP's question is about c-stands. Hell Yeah, if you're light is big or you're going high, I would use a high roller as well.

Oct 08 12 07:26 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jim Lafferty
Posts: 1,901
Brooklyn, New York, US


I like Avenger stands over both.
Oct 08 12 08:52 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
GPS Studio Services
Posts: 34,444
San Francisco, California, US


Jim Lafferty wrote:
I like Avenger stands over both.

I can give you several reasons why I think Avengers are inferior to Matthews.  I have both.

Oct 08 12 09:07 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Mike Kelcher
Posts: 12,711
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US


The Kupo, Avenger, and Matthews stands are all comparable. You'll likely be happy with whatever you choose. It's splitting hairs, but I like the Matthews. If you ever need to sell them, the Matthews will likely hold their value better than the other two...but who buys lights stands because of their resale value? I would stick to one brand though....and not mix 'em.
Oct 08 12 10:21 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Mister Kittens
Posts: 255
Santa Monica, California, US


Avenger is the Hollywood standard by far.  They may cost ten bucks more each, but they'll last the life of your career.
Oct 09 12 12:26 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
PTFPhoto
Posts: 117
Tallahassee, Florida, US


Brian D wrote:
Avenger is the Hollywood standard by far.  They may cost ten bucks more each, but they'll last the life of your career.

Avenger grip was started in the 90's by Italian company Manfrotto.  Matthews grip was started in 1968 by a guy formerly working for Paramount studios.  I have grip gear from both companies.  But I will say this and you can stake my name to it.

When it comes to flying gear in the air, where a failure could KILL someone, it's my Matthews gear or nothing.  Period.  When I rigged my 2K Mole 20+ feet up, you can bet it was on my MSE Combo stand.  And when I had to rig strobes for an outdoor fashion show this summer with spectators 40ft down, that Avenger gear stayed RIGHT in the bag.  If I am rigging up a camera behind the soccer goal or to the post over at first base, that big plastic handle on the superclamp is very convenient.  But I don't make life bets on convenience.  And neither does any grip or gaffer worth his union card.

You are free to do what you want and use what you want.  But you call up guys like Shawn Cullen from Sports Illustrated and ask him what he rigs with at the NBA finals, the Superbowl, or the London Games this year.  Then you call over to the grip dept. of the studios and ask where they get their grip from.  Then call Ed Philips over at MSE and ask for a Hollywood/Burbank client list.

NOBODY lasts 40+ years in Hollywood unless they are doing something very right.

Oct 09 12 01:18 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
SAG Photography
Posts: 2,797
Valencia, California, US


On almost all grip trucks and in grip dept's.  99.999999% will be either MSE or American grip.  I beg anyone to go to a film studio grip & lighting Dept. And find anything else.
Oct 09 12 05:02 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
GeM Photographic
Posts: 2,346
Chicago, Illinois, US


ei Total Productions wrote:

I can give you several reasons why I think Avengers are inferior to Matthews.  I have both.

OK. I'd like to see the reasons. I've heard the Canon/Nikon type back and forth about Matthews vs. Avenger, and I would like to know what really makes one brand better.

Oct 09 12 12:06 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
GPS Studio Services
Posts: 34,444
San Francisco, California, US


ei Total Productions wrote:
I can give you several reasons why I think Avengers are inferior to Matthews.  I have both.
GeM Photographic wrote:
OK. I'd like to see the reasons. I've heard the Canon/Nikon type back and forth about Matthews vs. Avenger, and I would like to know what really makes one brand better.

With pleasure.  Avenger is a very good piece of equipment.  I have no problems with them.  There are, however, several things about Matthews which are definitely better.

First, Matthews uses a metal disk rather than rubber in the junctions of the heads.  There have been iterations over the years, but the new metal disk in the latest generation, (rather than cork or rubber), is far more durable.  It also bites better, allowing it to carry more weight on the gobo arm.

Next, Matthews had designed a hexagonal openings in their heads which grip better than the round ones in the Avengers.  It is a much better design and if you try to prevent your load from rotating, you will see the difference.

The other features are really preferences. Things such as the handle size/shape (which Matthews has evolved) Are examples.  Some prefer the castings of one to the other, etc, etc, etc.  I think there are pros and cons to each.

There is no doubt though, the hexagonal openings and the metal disk are substantial improvements.  Those things may not be important to you but it is impossible to argue that they are not better.

Oct 09 12 03:38 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
SKITA Studios
Posts: 1,563
Boston, Massachusetts, US


ei Total Productions wrote:
Some prefer the castings of one to the other, etc, etc, etc.  I think there are pros and cons to each.

Castings make the Matthews a bit lighter.
Their black paint sucks though...the Avenger black paint is much better.
I still have a Matthews...

Oct 09 12 08:19 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
GPS Studio Services
Posts: 34,444
San Francisco, California, US


ei Total Productions wrote:
Some prefer the castings of one to the other, etc, etc, etc.  I think there are pros and cons to each.
SKITA Studios wrote:
Castings make the Matthews a bit lighter.
Their black paint sucks though...the Avenger black paint is much better.
I still have a Matthews...

I don't like painted stands, period.  They reduce glare but they are all bad, as far as I am concerned.  Have you ever broken a Matthews casting?  They use a different alloy than Avenger.  I have never broken either.

The bottom line though is that the Matthews will bear more load on the gobo arm.  As I said, I have them both and like them both.  The rest is just nitpicking.

Oct 09 12 08:23 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Innovative Imagery
Posts: 2,815
Los Angeles, California, US


I don't think the lonely photographer is going to put a 2K  20+ feet in the air.

I recommend Manfroto Maxi Stands.   These are like the kit stands, just made to a pro level of strength and fit.   You can get them with or without castors (which are removable) so no worries about going to the beach.

They have a light weight and heavy weight boom arms.  But for really booming get a Super boom or other thing.  They have different sized clamp on weights to help stabilize them.

I like all my lights on wheels in homes and studios.  They are rubber and don't scratch the floors and are easy to move and adjust, even with weight on them.

I have moved to even smaller foot print stands with counter weighted bases.
Oct 09 12 09:29 pm  Link  Quote 
12last   Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers