Do you need tripod 500L or 600L?? - monopod do?

As title says... just wondering - i have a faint vision of ownership of a longer lens - one day - and knowing my shooting style can imagine only wanting to go out with a monopod with one of these lenses

i understand the 600 is much heavier and negates any chance of handholding... although i can imagine the use of a monopod would make life easier... for both lenses... with the chance of some handholding with the 500 - im a builder so think i have some strength and stamina for possibly doing this

as it is i occasionally go to the lake with cam, 100-400 and mono because its easy and when i only have 30min to spare - it is do-able... i understand these lenses are much bigger - and i suppose it depends on subject for how fast you can manouvre the lens? faster with a wimberley style head i can imagine?

i can see myself being too static with any camera and lens... is this a do-able proposal for taking bird and sport photos (for fun) or would the reply be more like "you idiot - dont even think about buying one of these fine lenses and shooting without a full rig of tripod gear"

i do know the importance of support, IS, shutter speeds etc etc and i know using a mono would bring in some instability - just want to know if many of you out there would grab mono-cam and tele and are generally happy with the results... makes for a nice way to carry the rig when wandering too

thoughts?

The 500 is considerably lighter than the 600 and for many people they sit either side of the handholding limit. If you're of a bigger build the 600 can be handheld, though probably not for long. Almost all pros I've ever seen using the 600 at sports events are using a monopod. IS is a big help in all this.

yeah cheers mark - i watch aussie rules (AFL) and have never seen a pro on the sideline with anything other than a mono.. although i do consider this out of necessity as they are often sitting to stay low against the boundary... i personally cant imagine why i couldnt shoot mono most of the time... i guess if i were in a hide somewhere sometime i would want a tripod but the chances of that are nada nil zilch... unless i get sick of my pool building job and want to run away to africa or something... (*makes mental note to consider this)

i know the serious birders go for full rig... but do you guys wander around and shoot mono much?

I am big 6"6" and eat all my dinners and I know I can't hand hold a 600 as I have tried. I use a 500 for hours on end at the track and could not do that if it were not on a monopod.

I get great results with a monopod and a tripod and gimbal would just not suit the type of photography I do.

thanks neil... my main concern is Tri Vs Mono rather than handholding... i would not consider really taking such a lens out without the mono... but i think you answered my Q - you frequently use just a mono with great results?!

Oh yes 500mm on a big fat carbon monopod

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Great shots Neil.

Super-Nicko wrote in post #8217825
As title says... just wondering - i have a faint vision of ownership of a longer lens - one day - and knowing my shooting style can imagine only wanting to go out with a monopod with one of these lenses

i understand the 600 is much heavier and negates any chance of handholding... although i can imagine the use of a monopod would make life easier... for both lenses... with the chance of some handholding with the 500 - im a builder so think i have some strength and stamina for possibly doing this

as it is i occasionally go to the lake with cam, 100-400 and mono because its easy and when i only have 30min to spare - it is do-able... i understand these lenses are much bigger - and i suppose it depends on subject for how fast you can manouvre the lens? faster with a wimberley style head i can imagine?

i can see myself being too static with any camera and lens... is this a do-able proposal for taking bird and sport photos (for fun) or would the reply be more like "you idiot - dont even think about buying one of these fine lenses and shooting without a full rig of tripod gear"

i do know the importance of support, IS, shutter speeds etc etc and i know using a mono would bring in some instability - just want to know if many of you out there would grab mono-cam and tele and are generally happy with the results... makes for a nice way to carry the rig when wandering too

thoughts?

Depends on what you're shooting, IMO.

I use a 500 f/4L for motorsports on a monopod exclusively. It can be hand-held for a while but I wouldn't want to make a day out of doing it.

For what I'm doing, a tripod is simply out of the question, but if you're in a more static position I would think a good tripod would certainly be helpful.

Going to the 500 from a 100-400 is a bit of a step up. It's bigger, heavier, and requires some practice to hold steady, even with a monopod.
One thing I did discover, it sucks in strong winds! The damn thing is like a sail!!

The plus side is when used correctly, the images are to die for. I thought my 100-400 was an amazing lens (and it was) but the 500 is just that much better! Of course for about 4 times the price it should be!

While I've seen people do it, frankly carrying a 1-series body with the 500 f4 by the monopod makes me nervous. I prefer to carry it using the tripod mount shoe as a nice, convenient handle instead of putting the strain of all that weight on the little screw holding the lens to the monopod. Maybe I'm being over-cautious, but considering the price tag on a 1D MKIII and a 500 f/4L, I think it's not a bad thing to be a little cautious.

ok ya proved ya point!!! very nice shots... are they full shots or some crop?

DennisW1 wrote in post #8217933
While I've seen people do it, frankly carrying a 1-series body with the 500 f4 by the monopod makes me nervous. I prefer to carry it using the tripod mount shoe as a nice, convenient handle instead of putting the strain of all that weight on the little screw holding the lens to the monopod. Maybe I'm being over-cautious, but considering the price tag on a 1D MKIII and a 500 f/4L, I think it's not a bad thing to be a little cautious.

I do this but only because I have big Arca Swiss plates on the lenses and a very secure clamp on the monopod (BTW Even though the plates are black I am sure they are made out of gold judging by the price of them)

Super-Nicko wrote in post #8217949
ok ya proved ya point!!! very nice shots... are they full shots or some crop?

These are full shots. It's all down to timing (and really knowing the circuit helps)

thanks dennis i appreciate your reply and your thoughts (same to neil).. goes towards one of my major considerations to make before stepping up to a big lens... 1-4 has never blown my socks off... like to shoot sports, birds and surfing etc - 500 comes in a remotely close to a budget that i have in my head... was thinking about a 300 but i think i would use longer lens more - covering the low end (for now ) with 1-4. I guess part of me thinks 500 isnt that much more than 400, but 500 goes nicely with a 1.4x to give a (lightish) more portable, more affordable long tele option to the 600.. something i would take the effort to go out and shoot with when i get time.. as i do now with 100-400, and enjoy... just seem to always want to be CLOSER! (and to not crop the crap out of my images)

neil_r wrote in post #8217959
I do this but only because I have big Arca Swiss plates on the lenses and a very secure clamp on the monopod (BTW Even though the plates are black I am sure they are made out of gold judging by the price of them)

yes i can imagine a 488rc2 would basically be made redundant by the 500 or 600.

I borrow a friends 600 occasionally and to be honest I do not enjoy using it. It has way more bulk and weight than the 500 and the extra reach is, to be honest, not that great. I now just slap a 1.4 on the back of the 500.

cheers neil i think i have been coming around to that same thought... on skype now to brother in law who is in miami on a work trip.. he going to NYC sometime soon - just asked him if he consider picking 500 f4 up for me, while i consider risking a divorce over it with my wife - its $7200 AUD from B&H compared to $10,000 bought locally!

would have to loan it as a fee for him getting it for me im sure - goodnight.. its 12:30am and im knackered... chat soon