Manfrotto Monopods: 680B vs 676B

I am doing my homework before I buy a monopod. I discarded a lot of monopods in the process and now is up to 2 choices: 680B vs 676B

Manfrotto 680B
(Holds 22 lb) (Weights 1.69 lb) (Round Section)
4-section 20.0" - 60.0" $57

Manfrotto 676B
(Holds 10 lb) (Weights 0.80 lb) (Triangle Section)
4-section 18.9" - 60.6" $33

The heaviest lens I own is the 70-200mm f4L IS (1.7lbs) on my 40D (1.7 lbs).
I like the fact the 676B is more compact folded and extends longer, also that is half the weight. I will be using the 3229 head.

I have seen that most of the people in the POTN forums own the 680B instead of the 676B. Is the triangle section weaker than the round section? Why did you chose the 680B if holding 10lbs seems more than enough for almost all lenses.

Thanks for the replies!

i have the 680B cause i'm a firm believer in overkill . no really i just like to know that it can handle what i have with room to spare.

Bill

I also have 680B, but the only lens I that I put on it is 300 2.8 IS with both converters and 1D. It's holding great. Go with the smaller.

To piggy back on telles75 question, what head would you use/recommend for the 676B?

Buy the 680B to future proof your equipment. I have like 4 tripods and 3 monopods as a result of trying to save a few bucks and thinking "I won't need that much".

telles75 wrote in post #5203332
I am doing my homework before I buy a monopod. I discarded a lot of monopods in the process and now is up to 2 choices: 680B vs 676B

Manfrotto 680B
(Holds 22 lb) (Weights 1.69 lb) (Round Section)
4-section 20.0" - 60.0" $57

Manfrotto 676B
(Holds 10 lb) (Weights 0.80 lb) (Triangle Section)
4-section 18.9" - 60.6" $33

The heaviest lens I own is the 70-200mm f4L IS (1.7lbs) on my 40D (1.7 lbs).
I like the fact the 676B is more compact folded and extends longer, also that is half the weight. I will be using the 3229 head.

I have seen that most of the people in the POTN forums own the 680B instead of the 676B. Is the triangle section weaker than the round section? Why did you chose the 680B if holding 10lbs seems more than enough for almost all lenses.

Thanks for the replies!

i use the 679B and manfrotto 3229 tilt head with my 1d mark III and 100-400L. i'm a firm believer in if it's too big or too heavy i'll never have it with me when i need it .

ed rader

I also bought the 680B for future in my opinion it is rock solid and will handle whatever I am going through at it in the future. I just ordered the 70-200 f/2.8L IS which obviously is a heavy lens.

I figured I might as well have overkill then be wishing I didn't spend the extra for $ for the one with the higher capacity.

I have the 676B and have used it without incident with my equipment, including what I now use. I like it's low weight and short folded length ...

Maxdave

I haver the 680B...love it I don't think its to heavy at all and I have the 486 RC2 head on it...

Why is the "681" never mentioned when there is talk of the "680"....is the extra 6 inches in folded length too much to compensate for the extra 3.4 inches of height when extended?

I am trying to decide between the 680 and 681......

680:
Maximum Height: 60.0" (152.4 cm)

Folded Length: 20.0" (50.8 cm)

Load Capacity: 22.00 lb (9.98 kg)

Sections: 4

Leg Lock Type: Flip levers

Weight: 1.69 lb (0.77 kg)

---------------
681:
Maximum Height: 63.4" (152.4 cm)

Folded Length: 26.4" (50.8 cm)

Load Capacity: 26.4 lb (9.98 kg)

Sections: 3

Leg Lock Type: Flip levers

Weight: 1.70 lb (0.77 kg)

ed rader wrote in post #5206203
i use the 679B and manfrotto 3229 tilt head with my 1d mark III and 100-400L. i'm a firm believer in if it's too big or too heavy i'll never have it with me when i need it .

ed rader

Wow really? I wouldnt have thought that head would hold all that. I didnt trust it. Would like something like that, but they dont make one for the RC4 QR system. Might have to look to another brand...

I discarded the idea of the 681 and the 679 because they are not compact enough for my taste. I really don't mind putting the extra $$$ to get the 680 instead of the 676, however carrying dobule the weight if I do not need the extra sturdiness is the factor that matters to me. If I plan on keeping in position, let's say shooting surfing or wildlife for a couple of hours I would use my tripod instead of a monopod. But when I need on-the-go extra stability for quick shots I rather have the lightest monopod I can get.

Maxdave wrote in post #5208369
I have the 676B and have used it without incident with my equipment, including what I now use. I like it's low weight and short folded length ...

Maxdave

How do you find the Triangle Section, does it feel weird compared to Circular section?

Beski wrote in post #5208632
Why is the "681" never mentioned when there is talk of the "680"....is the extra 6 inches in folded length too much to compensate for the extra 3.4 inches of height when extended?

I am trying to decide between the 680 and 681......

680:
Maximum Height: 60.0" (152.4 cm)

Folded Length: 20.0" (50.8 cm)

Load Capacity: 22.00 lb (9.98 kg)

Sections: 4

Leg Lock Type: Flip levers

Weight: 1.69 lb (0.77 kg)

---------------
681:
Maximum Height: 63.4" (152.4 cm)

Folded Length: 26.4" (50.8 cm)

Load Capacity: 26.4 lb (9.98 kg)

Sections: 3

Leg Lock Type: Flip levers

Weight: 1.70 lb (0.77 kg)

My 681 should turn up tomorrow. I went for that one due to the extra high and to save my back!

ben_r_ wrote in post #5209099
Wow really? I wouldnt have thought that head would hold all that. I didnt trust it. Would like something like that, but they dont make one for the RC4 QR system. Might have to look to another brand...

the 3229 works fine with my set-up.

ed rader

c_b_b wrote in post #5210092
My 681 should turn up tomorrow. I went for that one due to the extra high and to save my back!

If you are tall then I can see a vlaid point in your way of thinking. I am 5'7" so I am more than ok with the 680 or 576 height.