Tripods vs. Monopods?

[inthedeck]

Just curious...for those that own both, or have used both, how do monopods help versus tripods?

I have a tripod, and it works well for my needs, but sometimes, it's just a hassle to take everywhere (especially as a carry on, during flights). I figure a monopod would solve this issue, because it would fold smaller, and can fit in checked in luggage (I think).

So, can someone explain to me how a monopod would be as good as a tripod, to prevent camera shake, on long exposures, or is that not what a monopod is for?

Thanks in advance.

[Jon]

It's not as good as a tripod, but for "shorter long exposures", or with heavy lenses, it can help.

[Anke]

I use my monopod when doing reportage type photography, its quicker to "set up" and uses less foot space.

[inthedeck]

So it wouldn't really be beneficial for night time photography, correct?

[Grentz]

Not usually as exposures are very long and a monopod will still move slightly unlike a tripod that sits perfectly still.

[Anke]

A monopod is just to give you a tad more stability

[inthedeck]

Hmm...anyone have a pic taken on a tripod, vs. a monopod...

I guess it won't be any real benefit to get a MP then...as it won't help keep things stable. I researched tons of tripods, and still have no idea what I would want. What I do know, is that I would like it to be more stable, than the current crappy one that I have. I hate that thing...but, it's what helps during night exposures...just that it gets gruesome to carry.

Are there any tripods out there that will fit in a suitcase? Maybe something that folds to a small length that is really study, and not too heavy? Maybe I am asking to much for one product...hehe.

Thanks for the info.

[jr_senator]

I have been to several museums, botanical gardens and zoos that do not allow a tripod but a monopod is OK.

[SkipD]

The monopod's primary advantage is for holding heavier lenses in a picture-taking position for long periods of time. While there is usually a small improvement in stability over hand-holding, a monopod is absolutely no substitute for a tripod if you really need to eliminate camera/lens motion.

[inthedeck]

Thanks gentlemen (and ladies, should any have posted). I figured that a MP was no substitute. Guess I will keep the reasearch going, for something in the way of a TP that is easily folded to fit into a suitcase, and doesn't weigh a ton, but can support some heavier lenses...like the 400 5.6 in lower light conditions.

[PacAce]

Thanks gentlemen (and ladies, should any have posted). I figured that a MP was no substitute. Guess I will keep the reasearch going, for something in the way of a TP that is easily folded to fit into a suitcase, and doesn't weigh a ton, but can support some heavier lenses...like the 400 5.6 in lower light conditions.

The 400 f/5.6 is by no means a heavy lens. ;)

Anyway, how about something like this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/475898-REG/Gitzo_GT1540T_GT_1540T_Traveler_6X_Carbon.html

Not cheap but it does fold small enough to fit into a carry-on. :)

[inthedeck]

Thanks PacAce, and no, it's not a heavy one...I use it handheld most of the time. Just that when one has to carry everything everywhere, to be able to lighten the load a little always helps.

Thanks again.

[Methodical]

...a monopod is absolutely no substitute for a tripod if you really need to eliminate camera/lens motion.

But what if the lens has IS?

[zeva]

Nice revive... the IS might help but it wont eliminate shake completely

[Champion201]

I know I'm still kind of a newbie and all but IMHO there is a time and place for both.

[SYS]

I know I'm still kind of a newbie and all but IMHO there is a time and place for both.

I agree. I'll replace "vs." with "and."