Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / February 2007
Use of monopod with DSLR
|
|
Thread rating:  |
jimphotog - 27 Feb 2007 22:53 GMT I'm ready to jump from film SLR to DSLR. Been shooting for decades, I even sell some, but overall probably best considered an advanced hobbyist. I have at least one quality Canon lens I wouldn't mind carrying forward, so that's means I'm probably looking at the 30D and 5D, but all that's for a different thread. What's pertinent here is that neither of these are light weight boxes, and I'll probably add on some pretty heavy glass, so question is: for EVERYDAY living and packing and trekking, can an appropriate monopod take the place of an inevitably clunky tripod? I'm thinking something collapsible, maybe even packable, light weight, preferably with some sort of quick-release head. I wouldn't shy from buying a good one, just wouldn't want some converted industrial I-beam, which obviously would override the convenience of turning to a monopod in the first place. I've lugged tripods forever, and still would use one for planned, pre-set situations, but otherwise I just like the idea of a less obtrusive monopod as my everyday companion for those surprising gems we all just sort of stumble upon. If marginal, what about if I turn to all IS lenses to help with stability? I'm unfortunately a fast glass guy, so not much to be done about the weight factor. Never used a monopod before, so any of you who've been there care to describe the experience? Thoughts? Opinions?
Bill Funk - 27 Feb 2007 23:27 GMT >I'm ready to jump from film SLR to DSLR. Been shooting for decades, I even >sell some, but overall probably best considered an advanced hobbyist. I have [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >monopod before, so any of you who've been there care to describe the >experience? Thoughts? Opinions? I use one, but it's not, IMHO, a true replacement for a tripod. It just isn't as stable. But, depending on your use, it's certainly much better than nothing. I use a Manfrotto 679b, BTW.
 Signature Hillary Clinton said Friday she'd use Bill Clinton as a diplomat. She is not worried about him at all. At the rate the Bush foreign policy is progressing, soon every country in the world will require their women to be covered from head to toe.
jimphotog - 28 Feb 2007 00:13 GMT >>I'm ready to jump from film SLR to DSLR. Been shooting for decades, I even >>sell some, but overall probably best considered an advanced hobbyist. I have [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >But, depending on your use, it's certainly much better than nothing. >I use a Manfrotto 679b, BTW. Thanks, Bill. I've tried a triangular shoulder harness, and looked ridiculous, certainly not seemingly as sensible as a monopod. I agree, nothing's as stable as a tripod. Question is, how did you feel about the monopod for everyday utility, unplanned set-ups where you normally would only have had your hands or maybe an inevitably wrong-angled building or tree to rest your camera against? Was it worth the effort? Maybe I'm overstating how unobtrusive a monopod is. I'm picturing it as something I could lash to or have poking out of my camera bag and always be there with me (tripod just too clumsy for this kind of everyday presence) or even just be using as a walking staff (although head may make it too silly for that. I toured Eastern Europe a couple years ago and carried a letter bag (12" x 12" x 3" soft sided affair carried against my back or hip with a single strap either over the shoulder or across the chest) with a 19" collapsed walking stick carried diagonally inside, sticking out about 5" at the upper edge, and to me, that was unobtrusive and convenient for quick use. I'm picturing something like that. With new carbon materials, I assume there are monopods of a suitable weight and strength in a reasonably thin collapsible form. I'll look up the brand you mentioned and see what they offer. Main question I pass back to you, though, is if your monopod effective for that 80% of the time you touted your camera bag along with no clear vision in mind, or was it just dead weight? Again, thanks for responding.
Lionel - 28 Feb 2007 00:29 GMT >>>I'm ready to jump from film SLR to DSLR. Been shooting for decades, I even >>>sell some, but overall probably best considered an advanced hobbyist. I have [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >have had your hands or maybe an inevitably wrong-angled building or tree to >rest your camera against? Was it worth the effort? I use a Manfrotto monopod (+ ballhead & quick-release plate) with my DSLRs in those sorts of situations, & I definitely think it's worthwhile. They're also handy in situations where you're nervous about the possibility that someone might try to mug you for your camera. ;)
 Signature W "Some people are alive only because it is illegal to kill them." . | ,. w , \|/ \|/ Perna condita delenda est ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Funk - 28 Feb 2007 15:21 GMT >>>I'm ready to jump from film SLR to DSLR. Been shooting for decades, I even >>>sell some, but overall probably best considered an advanced hobbyist. I have [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] >time you touted your camera bag along with no clear vision in mind, or was it >just dead weight? Again, thanks for responding. Actually, I don't carry it often; I don't carry the DSLR all the time, only when I know I'll want it. (I have another compact P&S that I do carry all the time for grab shots.) And, I seem to be blessed in that I can hold the camera steady at some pretty slow shutter speeds, so I don't need the support that often. The monopod goes with me to the zoo, and when I go off-roading (off-road means off paved roads, not rock-climbing!); it has a quick-release head, so it's easy to mount in a short time. On our upcoming Alaska cruise, it will go with me, too. It has a strap, so carrying it isn't a problem. I can't say anything ot the 80% question; often,when I carry it, I don't use it, but it's certainly handy when I do use it. It's not heavy to me, so it's not a burden. But then, I'm a big(!) guy.
 Signature Hillary Clinton said Friday she'd use Bill Clinton as a diplomat. She is not worried about him at all. At the rate the Bush foreign policy is progressing, soon every country in the world will require their women to be covered from head to toe.
jimphotog - 28 Feb 2007 17:55 GMT >>>>I'm ready to jump from film SLR to DSLR. Been shooting for decades, I even >>>>sell some, but overall probably best considered an advanced hobbyist. I have [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >heavy to me, so it's not a burden. >But then, I'm a big(!) guy. Thanks "big guy", it's this kind of experience telling that carries weight. What you've described is about what I envision the mono to be like. I have been using an advanced P&S for a while now, so probably, like you, will continue to carry something that on family outings, that sort of thing, saving the DSLR for my personal wanderings and "off road" searches where I don't bother everybody with my doddling. I've had success similar to yours in holding these little gems. Really have to learn to do that, cause their flashes, other than at times for portrait fill, generally are worth less than nothing. I'll think about what you said on subject of "quick release", because I expect there's a judgment of weight vs. convenience to be made there. Thanks again.
RichA - 27 Feb 2007 23:44 GMT > I'm ready to jump from film SLR to DSLR. Been shooting for decades, I even > sell some, but overall probably best considered an advanced hobbyist. I have [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > maybe even packable, light weight, preferably with some sort of quick-release > head. It can't replace a tripod unless you have a secondary thing you can prop it against and use the self-timer in the camera to do a completely vibrationless shot. Not always possible. But they do help. IMO, a monopod is similar in it's function to IS, in that it might give you a couple more stops than just hand-holding. My advise is to get a monopod that is as light as possible. Some of the smaller aluminums like the Manfrotto (Bogen) Digipod or a carbon fibre unit. There is nothing more annoying than a heavy monopod to haul around.
jimphotog - 28 Feb 2007 00:19 GMT >> I'm ready to jump from film SLR to DSLR. Been shooting for decades, I even >> sell some, but overall probably best considered an advanced hobbyist. I have [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >aluminums like the Manfrotto (Bogen) Digipod or a carbon fibre unit. >There is nothing more annoying than a heavy monopod to haul around. Thanks for responding. Check out my response to Bill Funk if you don't mind taking the time. Does that suggest anything? Am I imagining the impossible? I think your comment about being another supplement on top of IS is a good one and possibly answers a lot of my uncertainty, because add them together and you sure enough do get more added stops than IS taken alone, and that's starting to sound pretty good. Again, thanks.
jimphotog - 28 Feb 2007 04:15 GMT >> I'm ready to jump from film SLR to DSLR. Been shooting for decades, I even >> sell some, but overall probably best considered an advanced hobbyist. I have [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >aluminums like the Manfrotto (Bogen) Digipod or a carbon fibre unit. >There is nothing more annoying than a heavy monopod to haul around. Thanks for the assist. "Marginal assist" and "light weight" seem to be the advice of the day, and makes sense. I'm off to local shop tomorrow to have a look first hand. Valuable, though, to have gone through the thought process in advance. Again, thanks.
Alan Browne - 28 Feb 2007 00:54 GMT > surprising gems we all just sort of stumble upon. If marginal, what about if > I turn to all IS lenses to help with stability? I'm unfortunately a fast > glass guy, so not much to be done about the weight factor. Never used a > monopod before, so any of you who've been there care to describe the > experience? Thoughts? Opinions? If you need fast setup stability for sports and fast moving nature shoots, a _good_ monopod and a some technique will get you a lot of added stability for marginal speed shots.
IS/VR is another way to get some stability at marginal shooting speeds. But not a substitute for a good tripod.
My somewhat old Manfrotto monopod is equivalent to the current 682 model. A bit on the "rubust" side but extremely stable as well.
There are lighter monopods, but with an 80-200 f/2.8 or 300 f/2.8 (lenses I use the mono with most often) the heavier/sturdier pod is a necessity.
Cheers, Alan
 Signature -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
jimphotog - 28 Feb 2007 04:12 GMT >> surprising gems we all just sort of stumble upon. If marginal, what about if >> I turn to all IS lenses to help with stability? I'm unfortunately a fast [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >Cheers, >Alan Good comments, and thanks. Guess decision will be based on juxtaposition of inconvenience of having it in my pack vs. some level of assistance on marginal shots. I'm off to local shop tomorrow to have a first-hand look. Again, thanks.
just bob - 28 Feb 2007 03:37 GMT > I'm ready to jump from film SLR to DSLR. Been shooting for decades, I > even [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > monopod before, so any of you who've been there care to describe the > experience? Thoughts? Opinions? My experience is monopods are good for heavy lenses and video cameras. Will a monopod help me get down to 1/15 of a second when I can usually hand-hold at 1/30 of a second? Maybe. But it's not enough for me to carry it around when I can simply boost the ISO and then increase the shutter speed to something I can easily hand-hold. Especially with a 5D or 30D with great high ISO performance. I just cannot count on a monopod to steady a shot under 1/15. Keep the shutter speed high or use a tripod.
My monopod is only used with my EF 300mm 2.8 non-IS because it's heavy and the monopod helps me steady the lens for framing, especially with a teleconverter attached. But when I pull the trigger my shutter speed better be 1/320 or higher if I want a sharp shot.
I've never used the collar on my 70-200 2.8 except for on my tripod when my shutter speed must be under 1/30. And I've never had my camera on a monopod. It's just not worth carrying for one f stop.
If you own a Canon DSLR and the shutter is a bit slow, bump the ISO. If you need a long exposure, use a tripod or be sorry or maybe lucky with a monopod.
jimphotog - 28 Feb 2007 04:08 GMT >> I'm ready to jump from film SLR to DSLR. Been shooting for decades, I >> even [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >need a long exposure, use a tripod or be sorry or maybe lucky with a >monopod. Thanks for response. Your style of wisdom makes sense. Being new to high- end digital, I hadn't considered the low noise level of a 30D or especially a 5D at higher ISOs . Liked graininess for certain shots on film, but not for the things I have in mind here. I see there could be value for a 300mm, and will remember that. Otherwise, guess I should consider a monopod of limited value, juxtapose that against the inconvenience of having it in my pack, and make judgement from there. Thanks again.
default - 28 Feb 2007 04:12 GMT > I'm ready to jump from film SLR to DSLR. Been shooting for decades, I > even [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > monopod before, so any of you who've been there care to describe the > experience? Thoughts? Opinions? I use a Canon Monopod 100:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=348374 &is=REG&addedTroughType=search
And I take it almost everywhere. It is inexpensive (~$30), quite strong, collapses fairly small and has a convenient ball head. It doesn't have a quick release head, but it isn't difficult to quickly attach or remove.
It certainly isn't a replacement for a tripod in most circumstances, but it does improve the enlargibility of my photos compared to hand-held. With an IS lens and a monopod you can get away with a lot. It is much faster and quicker for casual use than a tripod for sure. It's also much less obtrusive and draws less attention than a tripod. Monopods aren't particularly expensive. Perhaps give one a try and see if it is what you are looking for.
jimphotog - 28 Feb 2007 17:41 GMT >> I'm ready to jump from film SLR to DSLR. Been shooting for decades, I >> even [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >particularly expensive. Perhaps give one a try and see if it is what you >are looking for. Thank you for thoughtful response. This is kind of the way I'd reasoned it. I'll most certainly take a look at the Canon 100, along with others recommended through this thread. I truly feel that aside from planned pre- set shoots where a tripod is a matter of course, a monopod just has to be the way to add steadying assist convenient to everyday life. Assuming I go IS, which seems to have improved over the years to 2 or even 3 stops effective, the mono seems even more appealing for non-planned catches. Boils down, I guess, to how unobtrusive the mono is, a matter of convenience vs. benefit, so I'll take a look at local shops and make a judgement. Also, a plain screw ball head probably is fine, maybe even preferable, because it's probably less massive than a quick release. At least that's the way I'm envisioning it. Probably will end up with something pretty close to what you have, but knowing me, I'll spend more just for that little extra saving in weight, that little extra compactness, that little greater stiffness. Kind of the way I am with big boy toys, certainly not with anything else, so don't even feel guilty.
|
|
|