Question about a monopod

Hello there,

I'm in dire need of either a mono- or tripod. Now, I'm just a dirt-poor student so money is quite a problem (too bad ). Now, I was looking and stumbled upon this little baby here and the reviews are all very positive. It sounds good and I like that it's light and small. I don't plan on using it for wildlife or whatever, just so I can take a nice stable shot.

Pretty much what I'm asking for is if anyone has experience with this monopod, or if someone has a good alternative, which can be a tripod too. I have a feeling that a quality tripod is múch more expensive than a quality monopod (like the one I linked to?)

EDIT: Here a little extra info on the monopod:
http://www.velbon.co.u​k/newvelbon/pages/mono​pods.html

Regards!

I recommend the Manfrotto 679B Monopod. You can get it for around $50 on amazon. Also, you would want to get a head to connect your camera to the monopod. While it is not required, it is very helpful. I have the Manfrotto 234RC. Having a head allows you to pan, tilt, etc.
Best,
Lindsay

lindsaytblum wrote in post #11468907
I recommend the Manfrotto 679B Monopod. You can get it for around $50 on amazon. Also, you would want to get a head to connect your camera to the monopod. While it is not required, it is very helpful. I have the Manfrotto 234RC. Having a head allows you to pan, tilt, etc.
Best,
Lindsay

Thanks for the response! Problem is still my budget. The Velbon monpod is just 20 quid, while your setup is 90$, quite a difference, and not totally in my budget to be honest.
Also, the minimum height of 65cm is way too large for my liking. I'd like to fit it in my backpack, which won't be possible with the Manfrotto monopod, I know it's much better than the velbon one, but it doesn't quite fit my requirements. I'd just like a word of approval from someone that knows something about monopods as I have no clue whatsoever about them. I wouldn't really know what is important about a monopod except that the locking mechanism works (which it does seeing the positive reviews).

TijmenDal wrote in post #11468851
I don't plan on using it for wildlife or whatever, just so I can take a nice stable shot.

A monopod will not help with this. It will only stop motion in one direction, which is up and down. A monopod is used for one thing and that's to hold up a heavy lens.

I don't know about...

I don't know about the used market in the UK but, here in the states, tripods and monopods often do not hold their value on the used market. The result is that they are often quite good buys on eBay or some such web site. You might check your local eBay and if you have a Craigslist, check that also...

You need a tripod, not a monopod. Monopods are generally used with longer, heavier lenses as an extra means of support. Your 18-55 is neither long nor heavy. Either work on your hand holding technique and avail yourself of the IS, or get a tripod for shots requiring a longer shutter speed than is possible handheld.

would 300mm be long enough to require a monopod? Would a monopod be sufficiant if a tripod is impractical?

Yes, and No. A monopod will give you a stop or two more leeway than hand-holding; but it's no substitute for a tripod once you get much below 3 stops slower than the advisable hand-held speed (1/f.l., and if it's a "crop" body, figure in the "crop factor" on the f.l.).

I was mainly thinking of using it to make photo's like this one:
http://c0003976.cdn2.c​loudfiles.rackspaceclo​ud.com …2008/09/simondu​montnz.jpg

Now of course I don't expect them to be as nice, but I figured that when making a picture like that it's important the background doesn't shift, otherwise you can't layer them properly.

Sledhed wrote in post #11469491
A monopod will not help with this. It will only stop motion in one direction, which is up and down. A monopod is used for one thing and that's to hold up a heavy lens.

Yep. You still need a fast shutter speed using a monopod with a long lens. If you want slow shutter speeds get a tripod.

TijmenDal wrote in post #11480026
I was mainly thinking of using it to make photo's like this one:
http://c0003976.cdn2.c​loudfiles.rackspaceclo​ud.com …2008/09/simondu​montnz.jpg

Now of course I don't expect them to be as nice, but I figured that when making a picture like that it's important the background doesn't shift, otherwise you can't layer them properly.

For that you absolutely need a rock-solid tripod and head combination. A monopod won't cut it.

What Jon said.

Also, there's no way you can replicate the photo composite you posted without an understanding
of some sort of decent photo-editing software and multiple fast-rate exposures.

You'll most certainly need a good tripod for that sort of shooting, as well as some familiarity
with some darkroom techniques or a software program to replicate the effect. Also consider
some sort of remote which allows fast-frame shooting without your fingers contacting the camera,
as this can eliminate shake induced by physical contact.

SkedAddled wrote in post #11482164
What Jon said.

Also, there's no way you can replicate the photo composite you posted without an understanding
of some sort of decent photo-editing software and multiple fast-rate exposures.

You'll most certainly need a good tripod for that sort of shooting, as well as some familiarity
with some darkroom techniques or a software program to replicate the effect. Also consider
some sort of remote which allows fast-frame shooting without your fingers contacting the camera,
as this can eliminate shake induced by physical contact.

Thanks guys! So pretty much I'm gonna need a 200€ at least to make something like that (and a camera with more fps)? I'm good enough with photoshop to make something like that, just wondering about the pictures itself.

200€ will be a minimum. As far as fps - how long do you figure that guy's air time was? Even the 1D3 or 1D4 can only handle 10 fps, so unless he was up for around 2 sec., you'd have trouble catching that many intermediate stages. The other thing to consider is the camera's buffer - for a contrasty situation like that you might need RAW; in any event you'd need a camera with a big enough buffer to handle the total jump time plus a bit on either side.

TijmenDal wrote in post #11480026
I was mainly thinking of using it to make photo's like this one:
http://c0003976.cdn2.c​loudfiles.rackspaceclo​ud.com …2008/09/simondu​montnz.jpg

Now of course I don't expect them to be as nice, but I figured that when making a picture like that it's important the background doesn't shift, otherwise you can't layer them properly.

HA! You need a tripod man!