Tripod Users Vs. Non-Tripod Users

I am a non-tripod user. I used to be a user, in my film days, and just after making the switch to digital. However, ever since I bought my first DSLR, Canon D30, I have not used one regularly. I do have one, a nice Manfroto head on SLIK legs. But I only use it indoors, for self portraits and shooting macro stuff in my light tent.

I am a photographer. I have almost 9 years of experience, and I know that shooting with a pod is a big deal, but I can't seem to actually pick the damn thing up as I am heading out the door. it's a pain in the hind quarters. I have used a monopod in the past, mine broke just a couple of weeks ago, but I find it to be quite cumbersome as well.

What I am wondering here is, why do you non-tripodders, like myself, not use one, and do you think your images suffer from not using one? And, how do you tripod users deal with this awkward piece of equipment, yet still manage to get shots that look like you were HH your cameras?

There are just some shots you can't pull off without one. I don't see how you could be shooting for so long without it, shots that imply motion, night shots, long exposures etc. If you can pull those off with just IS, then more power to you.

choomps wrote in post #6058606
There are just some shots you can't pull off without one. I don't see how you could be shooting for so long without it, shots that imply motion, night shots, long exposures etc. If you can pull those off with just IS, then more power to you.

Actually I am brand new to IS. I just got my first IS lens about a week ago, right here on POTN. I have never relied on it, having not had it. I have always wanted to shoot birds, yet I never had the reach until now. With the 100-400 IS. Other than ducks on the ground, I have only had dismal results shooting birds. I have not really attempted to use the 400 for this yet, but I was thinking I would def. need a pod for that. I just feel a bit like I don't know how to use it anymore. It is a real crisis point for me when I am packing to go out. I always end up leaving it. I guess that has to change. I just hope I see some real advantage to using it, because that is why I gave it up in the first place all those years ago.

You should always use a tripod any time you can in any situation! The increase in sharpness alone will make the effort worth it!

Use it, not use it, it's really up to you.

To me, and many others, without the use of tripod, we simply cannot take long exposure pictures. I mean LONG exposure, at least 2 minutes and up.

For example, can you shoot star trails without tripod? (75 pictures, 3 minutes long exposure time each) Without tripod and timer, can you tell me how to take this kind of photos?

I don't know how you can do it. Maybe you have special talent none of us have. In this case, good for you.

ben_r_ wrote in post #6061997
You should always use a tripod any time you can in any situation! The increase in sharpness alone will make the effort worth it!

I completely agree with your statement about the use of a tripod. This was one of two main points given at a lecture I attended given by Ansel Adams (dating myself). To me, if Ansel said that the best way to go, I follow.

I just don't do long exposures, that's all. I might explore that area at some point in the future, but I certainly don't feel that my life is incomplete because I'm not able to shoot star trails currently. *shrug*

Calicajun wrote in post #6062123
I completely agree with your statement about the use of a tripod. This was one of two main points given at a lecture I attended given by Ansel Adams (dating myself). To me, if Ansel said that the best way to go, I follow.

What was the second main point?

Riff Raff wrote in post #6062146
I just don't do long exposures, that's all. I might explore that area at some point in the future, but I certainly don't feel that my life is incomplete because I'm not able to shoot star trails currently. *shrug*

Do not let "long exposures" cloud you decision on whether to use a tripod or not.

I think you would be shocked at how much better your images can be using a tripod. This is true even if you are shooting a fast shutter speeds and with IS lenses.

One of the reasons why good tripods (e.g. Gitzo) are expensive is not that they carry heavier weights, but that they are very good at dampening viabrations. In most cases, particularly with longer lenses, viabrations which will effect image quality will never be felt...only seen....and many times you will not notice it unless you can compare handhelt to (good) tripod.

Most of the time when I shoot, my situations do not call for one like car photography or nightclub work. I have one sitting at home but only use it for more night scenes really which is very few and far between. Just depends on your shooting style.

almo wrote in post #6058563
I am a non-tripod user. I used to be a user, in my film days, and just after making the switch to digital. However, ever since I bought my first DSLR, Canon D30, I have not used one regularly. I do have one, a nice Manfroto head on SLIK legs. But I only use it indoors, for self portraits and shooting macro stuff in my light tent.

I am a photographer. I have almost 9 years of experience, and I know that shooting with a pod is a big deal, but I can't seem to actually pick the damn thing up as I am heading out the door. it's a pain in the hind quarters. I have used a monopod in the past, mine broke just a couple of weeks ago, but I find it to be quite cumbersome as well.

What I am wondering here is, why do you non-tripodders, like myself, not use one, and do you think your images suffer from not using one? And, how do you tripod users deal with this awkward piece of equipment, yet still manage to get shots that look like you were HH your cameras?

I think the more relevant question is why you don't use the tripod. You state it is a pain. Well, why is it a pain? Have you tested some of the newer and lighter setups? Having traversed the tripod path of cheap --> Manfrotto --> Gitzo I have no qualms in including my legset when I pack for a shoot. In fact, I look forward to using my legsets because I know they help improve my images.

I don't use my tripod most of the time either, but all I have for a tripod is a very inconvenient pos from ritz. Knowing what I know now I wouldn't buy this one again. It starts to collapse from the weight of my camera and flash with the kit lens. (30D, 430ex and 18 -55) So I have invested in a mono pod because of moving so much during weddings. The only thing I don't like about my mono pod is it doesn't have a quick release so doing any shots on the ground can be inconvenient to detach and reattach it. But I have to say it have helped my shots overall. I do want a really nice tripod with a good head on it. I bet my wrists would feel better too. I now am carrying a 40D, 24-105L lens, 430ex all on a flip bracket so if I don't use my mono pod my wrist kills by the end of the night. Although I work at a restaurant with 3 catering rooms and I have yet see a pro photog with a tripod at a wedding. And it amazes me how many of them set there camera in the grass to set up formal shots.

I've screwed up more shots because I didn't use a tripod then because I did use one.
If it's possible, I'll use a tripod.

troypiggo wrote in post #6063018
What was the second main point?

Never center your subject between the Horizon and foreground, pick one or the other but not both in the same picture. May not be exactly how it was said but you get the idea, it was years ago to say the least.

Calicajun wrote in post #6064919
Never center your subject between the Horizon and foreground, pick one or the other but not both in the same picture. May not be exactly how it was said but you get the idea, it was years ago to say the least.

Yea thats a good one too! Kinda goes along with following the rule of thirds.