Forums > Photography Talk > C stands Kupo vs Mathews Qualitywise which is

Photographer

GeM Photographic

Posts: 2456

Racine, Wisconsin, US

ei Total Productions wrote:

ei Total Productions wrote:
I can give you several reasons why I think Avengers are inferior to Matthews.  I have both.

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.

Thanks, that was very helpful.

So if I ever see a great deal on Avengers, there is nothing wrong with buying them. If I am paying full price, the Matthews version has a few advantages.

Oct 09 12 11:56 pm Link

Photographer

Jim Lafferty

Posts: 2125

Brooklyn, New York, US

ei Total Productions wrote:

ei Total Productions wrote:
I can give you several reasons why I think Avengers are inferior to Matthews.  I have both.

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.

You list the reasons I can't stand the Matthews stands. To each their own.

Oct 10 12 08:02 pm Link

Photographer

American Glamour

Posts: 38813

Detroit, Michigan, US

GeM Photographic wrote:
Thanks, that was very helpful.

So if I ever see a great deal on Avengers, there is nothing wrong with buying them. If I am paying full price, the Matthews version has a few advantages.

That is exactly how I feel.   I have a couple of Avengers.  I bought out the gear from a studio that closed and that was how I got them.  I have absolutely no problems with them and no regrets.  I do like the Matthews better.

Oct 10 12 08:47 pm Link

Photographer

the lonely photographer

Posts: 2342

Beverly Hills, California, US

This thread  will probably continue with no end. I do want to report that I did not purchase any C stands,
Upon checking up on a respondents suggestions, I did find the recommendation entirely useful, and  found it to be appropropriate to the job I had in mind.  I found an Avenger  Combo lightstand, with the "lazyleg" base  perfect for the  job.  The C-stand would not work well  because of the sloped floor I was working on.  I did look at all the options and  features of each model you folks have recommended.  They are all good. Thank you. I learned a lot. I made this choice simply because the tool fits works/best for the situation.

Oct 10 12 09:05 pm Link

Photographer

fussgangerfoto

Posts: 156

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US

I have to chuckle - I read on three different forums how American Grip, Matthews and even Avenger and Kupo (Impact) are the "Hollywood" standard. American Grip are solid, unadulterated (read, no-frills) stands that will last a lifetime. Probably why they're the choice of rental companies. Features are somewhat lacking and their website is vintage 1990.

The other brands add some "features" which also makes them less reliable over hundreds of thousands of uses. Reminds me of the early days of Consumer Reports - they hated cars with frivolous features like electric windows because there was just more things to break. LOL. You can't buy a car without them today.

If you are an occasional user/hobbyist any of the C-stands mentioned will work fine, even the Chinese knock-offs. If you're working 12 hours a day in a studio and transporting your equipment constantly, look to the higher end.

Oct 30 15 03:12 pm Link

Photographer

martin b

Posts: 2770

Manila, National Capital Region, Philippines

I have Matthews and have adopted a couple of Avengers.  They work but I suggest you also get some thick 4x8 foam core and lots of sandbags and a boom or two.  I have a half dozen but wish I had a half dozen more.  I hang my dynalites on the arms all the time and on boom arms I hang mono lights.

I also like them because when I get assistants they know how to use them.

Oct 31 15 09:45 am Link

Clothing Designer

GRMACK

Posts: 5436

Bakersfield, California, US

I have the Matthews C-stands with the detachable turtle base which is great.  Mine came with the arm and adjustable clamp too.

Problem is they are the "black painted" stands and Matthews also painted the spigot portion that goes into the light's socket and it is too tight to fit into my lights.  Might be only 0.010" more with the paint, but I needed to do some sanding as well as Dremling out the lights to accept their painted stands.  I wrote to Matthews about it and heard back squat.

Although the turtle base cannot be adjusted for sloped floors, I cut some PVC pipe into different lengths and have used the stands on uneven ground by slipping one over a leg to level it up.

Oct 31 15 11:01 am Link

Photographer

RTE Photography

Posts: 1511

NORTH HOLLYWOOD, California, US

MDWM wrote:
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.

The rule is righty tighty, lefty loosiy. Keep the head to the right side of the shaft, that way the weight of the item being held will pull on the head to tighten it.
Also, put the weight directly over one of the extended legs, that will make it more stable, but you still should use a sandbag for security.

Oct 31 15 11:32 am Link

Photographer

LA StarShooter

Posts: 2730

Los Angeles, California, US

So far Matthews has been a favourite: well builit--Samy rents them by the way--I have two or three and to me they are the standard. I have a light Manfrotto video tripod. It's cool and groovy, almost space-age, but the Matthews when it comes to stands is a proud American moment in manufacturing. I want this from Mathhews: http://www.msegrip.com//sliderhome

Oct 31 15 01:10 pm Link