Slik 632 vs Aziak Backcountry Lite

KU_Geo

WKR
Joined
Sep 18, 2015
Messages
905
Location
Golden CO
Has any one been able to compare the manual backcountry lite vs the Slik 632? Looking for a light backpacking tripod and deciding between these two.
 
I've owned both the Slik 632 and Aziak Backcountry Lite tripods. Both are nice and lightweight, and quite stable for their weight. They both handled my 65 Swaro with ease. My only complaint about the Aziak was the three leg sections, which were a bit of a nuisance. I prefer tripods with two leg sections, which are more stable and quicker to set up. I also found the 632 to be a bit short. I now use a Slik 633 with the bottom leg section removed, and I really like that setup.
 
I've owned both the Slik 632 and Aziak Backcountry Lite tripods. Both are nice and lightweight, and quite stable for their weight. They both handled my 65 Swaro with ease. My only complaint about the Aziak was the three leg sections, which were a bit of a nuisance. I prefer tripods with two leg sections, which are more stable and quicker to set up. I also found the 632 to be a bit short. I now use a Slik 633 with the bottom leg section removed, and I really like that setup.
forgive my ignorance, how is the 633 taller than the 632 if you remove a leg section? Or can you helped me understand the value of going that route?

I’m tall, and finding the 632 isn’t really tall enough for me in a true chair sitting position, requiring me to sit on the ground. ~10 inches more would be enough. I do not glass standing at the moment so not a concern.

I am considering the aziak as I think the extra ~7in would be enough, but like you seem to be I am trying to place a premium on stability/durability.
 
Back
Top