Monopod Vs Tripod

S

Slvrbck

Guest
Hi all,
Sorry up front if this is the 1,000,000th time that this has been asked.
What's better?

I bought a cheep e-bay tripod a few months ago when I got my first DSLR but honestly haven’t used it that much.
I have tried to but it's just to big to be useful in most situations.

I want to have a go at some long exposure shots and on top of that, I'm shooting a wedding for a friend in a few weeks.

Am I going to be better off with a monopod and if so what's the difference in brands/price?
I have seen everything from £3.99 to £93.99!

Cheers for your help!
 
Monopods are great, but you can forget any idea of shooting long exposures with one, that's not what they're for. A monopod will help take the fatique out of a heavy camera/lens combo and may help you push the envelope a little beyond what shutter speeds would normally be hand-holdable, but they're no replacement for a tripod.

You say your tripod is too big, but assuming that means heavy too, then it sounds a very stable platform, although I accept it may be a PITA to cart around. It certainly sounds like it will cope very well with your friend's wedding, if you find yourself needing a tripod.

There isn't really a 'better', they're each for different purposes and one doesn't replace the other.
 
Cheers CT,
I guess I would still need to hold the monopod steady for long exp shot :wacky:

I thinking the wedding is going to be a bloody long day, prob 16 hours+ and a monopod may turn out to be a god send.

Is it worth splashing the cash on a decent one or are they all the same just with a brand name?
 
I think inevitably, you do pay a premium for a brand name, but there's probably a construction quality which justifies the cost in most cases too.

It comes down to personal preference I suppose, but I use a Manfrotto Neotech 685B. It has a pretty unique pistol grip release which means you just squeeze it and you can instantly adjust the height up or down, even with heavy gear mounted on it - no messing about with twist leg locks or clips which would drive me daft. :puke:
 
It's all tools for the trade. I have 2 tripods and a monopod and chose between them depending upon what I'm trying to do.
For example, the monopod is great for photos at say a racetrack when you're using a long lens for periods of time.
My ultra lightweight tripod was useful on holiday for supporting my camera for a late evening shot, i.e. a time when the full tripod was too heavy to have along, and a monopod wouldn't have allowed the longer required exposures.
 
That's my answer too!
I use the monopod when I want a little more stability as it does just push what is possible hand held. I have a cheap lightweight (Jessops) tripod for those occasions where I really don't want to be lugging a heavy tripod all day and I have a Calumet tripod for those specifically designed shots where I'm making the effort (and it's near the car!)

Monopods can be awkward if you want to shoot in portrait mode. They are no use sticking out at right angles!

If you are going to shoot a wedding and you are limited for light in the church then I'd grab a monopod and just be prepared to shoot in landscape. I know wedding togs who can shoot as low as 1/60sec on a 200mm IS but for the rest of us mere mortals some help is always welcome.

For the other shots on the day, you are better off on your feet and moving.
 
NorthernNikon said:
Confucious say, tripod is better than monopod in same way hammer is better than saw.
Click to expand...

:LOL:
Fair point....

Cheers for all your advice folk, think I am going to invest in a half decent one.
I'm going to be using a 28-300 f/2.8 L non IS for a lot of candid shots at the wedding and reception so firgure I will be using it a fair bit
 
Slvrbck said:
:LOL:
Fair point....

Cheers for all your advice folk, think I am going to invest in a half decent one.
I'm going to be using a 28-300 f/2.8 L non IS for a lot of candid shots at the wedding and reception so firgure I will be using it a fair bit
Click to expand...

Hmmm, I'm not so sure one would not be more of a hindrance than not. Candids require quick reactions and a monopod will restrict you. I'm not familiar with the lens you mention (are you sure it's a 28-300 f/2.8 ???) but if it doesn't have a tripod mount on the barrel switching from portrait to landscape won't be that easy even with a monopod head.
Also, you'll have to keep your shutter speeds up to a certain extenet to stop your subjects' movement blurring. Though a monopod will help you steady the camera, I'm not the benefit would out weigh the disadvantages in these circumstances.

Where a monopod does come in handy is when you have a big heavy lens as it takes all the weight.
 
I must say, I never considered a monopod for weddings. I always preferred to work hand held, but now and again you'd get a poorly lit church and some holy man on a power trip insisting no flash. On those occasions, I'd set the tripod up, but you still had to pick your moment when subject movement was at it's minimum to get your shot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top