View Full Version : Mono VS. Tri pod??
zacker
27th of June 2005 (Mon), 10:35
Is there much of a difference between the mono and the rti pods?? I mean, I know what the difference is but what about usage, would i be better off with a tri pod for all around usage? im thinking the mono would be nice but do you find its still hard to get long exposure shots while using it, is it easy to hold still??
-zacker-
lostdoggy
27th of June 2005 (Mon), 10:49
Tripod is great if you have the room and time to setup. Monopod is for times where you are mobil but still need support. I use the monpod when I walking and shooting like a parade or a sporting event. Its especially helpful when you have a large lens mounted on the camera. It really takes the weight of your arms. Tripod is for times where still is needed like shooting landscape, portrait or macros, where setup and room is not an issue.
gasrocks
27th of June 2005 (Mon), 10:57
Well put. They aren't really comparable - they are for different situations. You'll probably need both. I have 3 monopods and 2 tripods. Which to get first? Depends again on your particular needs.
zacker
27th of June 2005 (Mon), 11:04
well, i went to the everglades this winter and the foot paths (most of them) are either wooden walkways or paved roads... most guys had tripods but im thinking a mono pod is better because you dont need level ground, there is only one adjustment, up and down and it can be set up on a small foot path or wide walking path or road. What im concerned is being that you still need to hold it steady, do you all find that you still get camera shake on longer exposure shots? Im to be going to Shenendoa (spelling?) hopefully the end of this summer and would like to bring one.
-zacker-
CyberDyneSystems
27th of June 2005 (Mon), 11:07
Both.. you must have a tripod.. ad a monopod is very handy also for certain situations :)
lostdoggy
27th of June 2005 (Mon), 11:11
Well put. They aren't really comparable - they are for different situations. You'll probably need both. I have 3 monopods and 2 tripods. Which to get first? Depends again on your particular needs.
Wow three monopod, put them together and you got a TRIPOD. Wouldn't that be nice. A Novel idea, just need to design a head to put them together. A forth monopod to make the center column.
By the way they make Tripod with the center as a Monopod and monopod that can be converted to tripods by removing the bottom and reversing it to expose three short legs. Bogen offer an attachment that will convert my 729 to do this and model 682 includes this.
JoshBowers
27th of June 2005 (Mon), 12:46
How long of an exposure do you plan to take?
I use my tripod for scenes I set up. I use my monopod when hiking/walking, whenever I constantly have to move. Also my tripod weighs 10 pounds, my monopod is 10 oz.
Tripod so I can leave my camera in one spot while I set something up, or adjust a reflector. When I take macro's and I need super rock steadiness, and so I can set the timer to go off without me touching the shutter button, or on long exposures.
SkipD
27th of June 2005 (Mon), 13:09
In my opinion, if you can't afford both a good tripod and a monopod, get a good tripod first. You will find far more situations where it is the best choice anyhow. A monopod is OK for some situations, but definitely is not a substitute for a tripod.
A tripod, on the other hand, can substitute for a monopod. Just extend one leg, not all three.
lostdoggy
27th of June 2005 (Mon), 13:18
In my opinion, if you can't afford both a good tripod and a monopod, get a good tripod first. You will find far more situations where it is the best choice anyhow. A monopod is OK for some situations, but definitely is not a substitute for a tripod.
A tripod, on the other hand, can substitute for a monopod. Just extend one leg, not all three.
Check out the Manfrotto/Bogen 682 it can in a pitch use as a tripod.
zacker
27th of June 2005 (Mon), 14:15
hey josh... Im not planning on any or many long exposures but if the case does arise, id like to know it can be done.Ya know, for that cool waterfall shot or the wings on a bird or a misty morning shot....that sort of thing.
-zacker-
DavidEB
27th of June 2005 (Mon), 17:26
I agree with CyberDude.... both.
One wrinkle: tripod should be very rigid, high quality but this doesn't matter as much for a monopod. Get the cheapest monopod you can find, unless you're planning on shooting pro sports with a giant 10 pound lens. Try this one (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&kw=SLEZPJ&is=REG&Q=&O=productlist&sku=48616) which has a tilt table in the head.
Your monopod purchase shouldn't be but a tiny fraction of the cost of your tripod.
kram
27th of June 2005 (Mon), 17:35
I do use the tripod like a monopod at times - keep the three legs together (which is how I carry them with camera attached) and its useful to take quick snaps without setting up the tripod :)
JoshBowers
27th of June 2005 (Mon), 19:41
I agree with skip, tripod first, monopod second. The main reason I bought a monopod is because I didn't want to lug around a 10 pound tri pod for long distances in the woods.
For your plans, I think tripod is much better idea.
vBulletin® v3.6.12, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.