The G11 has three legs. Each leg telescopes and has to be clamped at the length you want it. So that's one adjustment. Then each leg has to be tightened on to the tripod head. The result is extremely rigid and very strong.

I'm not sure how it compares to the Celestron version, but I can make a few points:

1. I've seen thousands of posts on teh Losmandy user forum (Yahoo, losmandy_users) and have never seen anyone complaining about the tripod setup, not even our converts from the Celestron product. When you join Losmandy Yahoo you get several files of information sent to you automatically, one of them compares Celestron and Losmandy, and no one even thought to include the tripod issue.

2. These days I use the G11 on a Berlebach Tripod which is sold in the U.S. by Teton Telescopes. I prefer to deal with wood in sub zero weather. It's a nice setup and all the pieces except the tray stay together which is convenient; I think that's the way the Celestron works.

There are other options including ATS piers and so on. So you can find what works for you.

The design point that Scott Losmandy is making is that one of the major sources of flexure, both up down and rotational, is the leg joints. Scott basically eliminated that in his tripod designs.

There is a heavy duty *folding* tripod that is available on the Losmandy web site, it's not over priced as far as these things go, massive, sturdy, and folds all up.

So you've a variety of options in addition to the default, and I'd spend some time thinking about them. You are of course welcome to join the Losmandy group and post a question there.

regards
Greg N