Manfrotto Monopod?

[Abstract]

Hi,

I was thinking about getting a tripod, but I'm an "active" photographer, meaning I like to move around a lot. I'm not a particularly patient photographer, probably due to my ADHD (although the hyperactivity bit has worn off with age....ADD always persists somewhat), and I don't think I'd ever use my tripod if I bought one. I'm talking about maybe 5 times a year, which makes a Manfrotto very nice, but not worth the cost (right now), even if it were to last forever.

Instead, I'm thinking about getting a monopod. Smaller, lighter, and it'd be something I wouldn't mind whipping out. I know they're mostly to take the weight off the camera and not to keep it super-steady, but can a monopod help keep my camera steady enough to help? I'm not a pixel peeper, although I'd miss the ability to take really great photos at night. I think evenings should be ok with a monopod. It's all a compromise between what I want (tripod), and what I'd likely use.

I'm thinking about getting a "Self-Standing Monopod" MF 682B, which has legs at the bottom so that you can go hands-free. It might be steady enough for me, but I want to know your opinions. I've never used a monopod, and I've definitely never even seen a "mono"pod with more than 1 leg.

Manfrotto Self-Standing Monopod

 

[failsafe1]

What lens and shooting conditions.

All monopods come with one leg only. You really don't need a monopod for lenses shorter than 200mm and if you are doing wildlife or nature with slow shutter speeds you really need a tripod. The monopod only helps with one direction of movement and helps in the other. The tripod will work with any direction.

 

[beavo451]

A $100 tripod would probably more stable than that thing. I would use the legs to have the monopod stand there so I wouldn't have to hold it all the time. I doubt that it was designed as a makeshift tripod. I have seen it in person and the legs seem pretty weak.

 

[Silentwave]

Monopods are good for:

1) shaky hands
2) long focal lengths
3) fading light

they will not be sufficient for
1) night shooting
2) longer exposures
3) not too fast shutter speeds with long lenses.

 

[CanadaRAM]

I use a monopod for floral photography. There is no room to set up a tripod between rosebushes where I'm angling for the best shot.

 

[islandman]

I prefer the Manfrotto 685B. It costs more, but it's more stable and will last you a lot longer. I use it MUCH more than my tripod because it's easier to transport. I don't go to weddings without it anymore (and I shoot weddings professionally). Just my 2 cents.

 

[Abstract]

Yeah, that's the thing. I can think of plenty of situations where I just can't set up a tripod, and even when I can, I don't know if I'd bother carrying it with me.

But what do you mean when you say that the 685B is "more stable"? Can one monopod be more stable than another, other than the strength of the 3-4 components that need to protract outwards when you first set up?

A $100 tripod would probably more stable than that thing. I would use the legs to have the monopod stand there so I wouldn't have to hold it all the time. I doubt that it was designed as a makeshift tripod. I have seen it in person and the legs seem pretty weak.

But if it can stand there, I'm wondering how well I can manage when I absolutely NEED to have things perfectly still, but don't have a tripod ready? Since I have no experience actually using the 682B outdoors, I'll take your words about the strength of those legs into careful consideration. I figured they wouldn't be very strong legs.

Not too many stores around Australia have Manfrotto stuff, although luckily, one of the best stores in the country for Manfrotto stuff is in town. Maybe I'll ask them.

 

[ChrisA]

A mono pod is "worth" about 1/2 stop. In other words I think you can shoot about 1/2 stop lower than you can hand hold. Get one with just one leg. Those little legs are usless and get in the way and don't hold it up anyway.

I use a mnopod with a video camera some times. With the camra's built in image stbilization it is almost as good as a tripod. and I think a monopod helps stedy a 200mm lens on my D50 too.

One thing you can do is get a light weight tripod. They fold up and you carry the camera on the ripod much like you would cary the camera on the monopod. You cary eithe of them a bit like a shouldered rifle

 

[beavo451]

But what do you mean when you say that the 685B is "more stable"? Can one monopod be more stable than another, other than the strength of the 3-4 components that need to protract outwards when you first set up?

I remember some tech support email stating that Manfrotto tests the "support weight" not by the actual amount of weight the tripod/monopos can hold without collapsing. They measure it by adding weight to the support and measuring how long it takes for vibrations to be absorbed. Once it exceeds a set time limit, the max weight is recorded.

 

[islandman]

But what do you mean when you say that the 685B is "more stable"? Can one monopod be more stable than another, other than the strength of the 3-4 components that need to protract outwards when you first set up?

Yes, some monopods are put together much better than others, reducing vibrations within the monopod itself while it's fully extended. Also, some monopods are designed to hold more or less weight without vibrating excessively.

 

[Abstract]

Thanks a lot, guys.

I think I'll hold off on the self-standing monopod purchase until I can see one in person (whenever that will be), or until someone who has used it can tell me what it's like.