monopod---40d and 100-400

i need a monopod, what is a good one to get?

i dont need to stick with the canon brand, but what do you guys think of this one?

http://www.amazon.com …ics&qid=1219458​185&sr=1-1

what would i need if i wanted to mount my camera vertically on a monopod?

i would go with a feisol, www.feisol.com, they are awesome and work great with that combo...i had that canon one and it really couldn't handle it...

Manfrotto Digi's are nice. I have one. For vertical shooting you just use a ball head or other type of head that can angle to 90 degrees.

Ultimate CC wrote in post #6159975
i would go with a feisol, www.feisol.com, they are awesome and work great with that combo...i had that canon one and it really couldn't handle it...

did the canon one feel crappy compared to other brands?

thanks!

this might sound somewhat confusing, but what holds the camera in place when you have it on a ball swivel?

the only thing it is connected to is a nut. with my tripod and my 70-200 4, when i had it, the camera started to lean forward when i angled it 90 degrees, since there was nothing to hold it from going down...i tightened the nut more, and it seemed to stay in place, but i had it pretty tight, and i didn't feel comfortable tightening it that much.

manfrotto 681 (black or silver, doesnt matter).

i have it, love it, does the job, and heavy duty, and most important of all, not overpriced.

edit again: you want something thats reliable; so dont get a cheap one.

edit: you need some kind of head (or maybe you dont, depends how you like it). you attach that head to the monopod (or tripod) and maneuver the head for position / angle adjustment. There's some type of plate included with heads. You dont need a head for monopods, since, you can move it in any direction anyway!
if you want it to tilt - then manfrotto 234RC - simple and does the job.

(btw i have all the stuff i said in this post)

tomdlgns wrote in post #6160011
this might sound somewhat confusing, but what holds the camera in place when you have it on a ball swivel?

the only thing it is connected to is a nut. with my tripod and my 70-200 4, when i had it, the camera started to lean forward when i angled it 90 degrees, since there was nothing to hold it from going down...i tightened the nut more, and it seemed to stay in place, but i had it pretty tight, and i didn't feel comfortable tightening it that much.

Not sure I understand your question, do you mean the camera creeps when on a ball head? Can you rephrase please?

Anke wrote in post #6160026
Not sure I understand your question, do you mean the camera creeps when on a ball head? Can you rephrase please?

yes...

my tripod now, has the nut for the camera and a small plastic nub. the nub is an extra piece of plastic that fit into my old camcorder, i believe it is universal.

this way, when the plastic nub and the nut were in place, there was no way for the camera to lose its position regardless if it were flat or vertical.

my 40d doesn't have this extra spot for the nub to fit in, i dont know any DSLRs that do.

the nub is spring loaded, so the weight of the 40d pushes the nub into the tripod head.

canon grips have the same concept designed, let me find a pic to elaborate...

tomdlgns wrote in post #6160068
yes...

my tripod now, has the nut for the camera and a small plastic nub. the nub is an extra piece of plastic that fit into my old camcorder, i believe it is universal.

this way, when the plastic nub and the nut were in place, there was no way for the camera to lose its position regardless if it were flat or vertical.

my 40d doesn't have this extra spot for the nub to fit in, i dont know any DSLRs that do.

the nub is spring loaded, so the weight of the 40d pushes the nub into the tripod head.

canon grips have the same concept designed, let me find a pic to elaborate...

A ball head won't have this little "nub", it's just the screw thread. Manfrotto ball heads are so tough that they hold my 1D Mark III with 100-400 on it at all angles with no slippage.

This is the ball head I have: http://www.dpfphotocen​ter.com …catalog/images/​488RC2.jpg

The Manfrotto 679,680,and 681 pods are all good, and all relatively cheap. I use the 679B with the 3232 swivel head on my 100-400. With that lens, you're going to want to mount the pod to the tripod collar on the lens, not on the camera. That will give you better stability, and the collar will allow you to rotate the camera to portrait orientation.

Count me as another vote for the Feisol. It's carbon fiber, unbelievably lightweight and very solid. Better yet, it's a steal for the price.

crn3371 wrote in post #6161023
The Manfrotto 679,680,and 681 pods are all good, and all relatively cheap. I use the 679B with the 3232 swivel head on my 100-400. With that lens, you're going to want to mount the pod to the tripod collar on the lens, not on the camera. That will give you better stability, and the collar will allow you to rotate the camera to portrait orientation.

correct, with the 100-400 i would use the tripod collar...that was my intention the entire time, however, i didnt realize that i could just loosen the collar and rotate.

thanks guys

I just bought the manfrotto 680b and a 234RC tilt head. I previously had a slik monopod and a ballhead. The ballhead gives you too much movement, when for a monopod I really want stability and stiffness.

The 234RC lets me tilt it in one direction only - i.e up and down. so it won't be wobbling about at the top of the monopod. Then when I use the 100-400 on its collar I can loosen the collar to flip between portrait and landscape orientation.

I'd get a head with an RC quick release plate, then you can get a ballhead for your tripod that also uses the same one, and just leave a plate on your camera and one on the 100-400 tripod collar so you can switch around between monopod/tripod/camera/​collar quickly and easily.

Ultimate CC wrote in post #6159975
i would go with a feisol, www.feisol.com, they are awesome and work great with that combo...i had that canon one and it really couldn't handle it...

ok I just watched the little intro clip and all I have to say is: LOL. That looks awkard as hell, let alone completely absurd.