Monopods - what are they good for

Can I use a monopod to shoot landscapes on a long hike? Or do I need a tripod.

Simon

What shutter speed were you going to be using? 10-22 lens gives pretty decent pix handheld. Monopod would help, is portable. But, really long exposures will require tripod or something to set the camera on.

And a good monopod makes a great walking stick when needed. Just don't treat it like a piece of heavy lumber in doing so.

I agree 100% with what gasrocks said.

Syburn,
I recently did some action shots at softball games using a 70-300mm telephoto lens and no flash. Without the monopod there was no way I could hold it still enough to get any shots. Believe me I tried. 200/1600 It just gives you some support to help with camera shake. Easy to move around for fast position changes versus tripods. The would not let me on the field with a tripod but the monopod was no problem. That's my two cents worth...

Use IS lenses helps a lot

You can use a monopod, but not as stable especially if you want a slower shutter speed.

I bought a cheap monopod to see the difference in handheld shooting and monopod shooting and the difference was pretty dramatic with my 100-300mm f4 and TCon, even though they're not as stable as a tripod. It made me buy a decent tripod, but monopods can be useful as a walking stick as well as camera/lens support: double function.

Also.. like hand held shooting .. monopod shooting benifits tremendously from practice and proper technique. As you grow mpre experienced with it's use.. the benifits will continue to grow.

Hi syburn. I've got a very old but solid Velbon tripod and am wanting to get something light and compact. Today I had a look at several lightweight tripods and monopods and was staggered by the range of "floppiness" of both. I really think you need to get into a shop and try them yourself. It's not simply a choice of monopod versus tripod. Since you want it for hiking, you might want to kill two birds with one stone and buy a hiking pole with camera mount.

Another GREAT reason for a monopod. I sometimes use my 70-200mm f2.8L IS lens, possibly with a 1.4 converter, to shoot birds at my wife's bird feeders. I like to have the camera "at the ready" so that that I have to make little to no motion with the camera after the birds arrive, to avoid scaring them away. Holding that camera/lens combination pointing at the feeder for an hour or so can get very tiring. Put a monopod under it, with the 'pod resting on the ground or on the chair I may be sitting in, takes 99% of the weight off my arms. Even though the shutter speeds are high enough and I have the IS, the monopod is extremely useful in these situations.

For such conditions wouldn't be more handy a tripod ?

Not really, because the tripod keeps the camera too far away from my body when I'm sitting back in a lawn chair for the hour or more. With the camera on a tripod, I'd have to move up to the camera to make the necessary changes to position, focus, and possibly exposure. It's far easier to do all that using the monopod without too much body motion that could scare the birds away.

I can it all so clearly ... lounging back in the chair, barely needing to move an inch, beer in one hand, home delivery Pizza in the other. Isn't nature wonderful

condyk wrote:
I can it all so clearly ... lounging back in the chair, barely needing to move an inch, beer in one hand, home delivery Pizza in the other. Isn't nature wonderful

GOOD IDEA!!!