Tripod, Monopod or both?

Ellen

Ellen

Suspended / Banned
Messages
43
Name
Ellen
Edit My Images
Yes
I recently purchased a Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD lens to go with my Canon EOS 1200D camera. I find this particular lens heavy when using my camera for long periods of time. I currently have a basic tripod but was considering buying a monopod to help with handling the weight of the lens but, wasn't sure if it was necessary if already have a tripod. Would it be best to have both? I've seen basic monopod's and monopod's with "feet" which I'm not sure how stable they would be compared to a tripod. Any suggestions?
 
•


The only places I use a monopod is where there
are people: concerts, events and likes where the
use of tripods may be unpractical, restricted and
/or even forbidden.
 
A monopod can be much more versatile than a tripod just for moving around and helping to 'carry' the weight of the kit, whereas a tripod is primarily for providing a fixed stable platform. So it really depends what your need is, if it's just to help support the weight a monopod can do that.
 
Both. Each has their own place.

Monopods are ideal for supporting the weight of a camera and lens for extended periods, often where slow shutter speed isn't necessarily the problem - but of course it can assist stabilising the camera when conditions or artistic requirements mean slowing shutter speed to levels where camera shake can be a problem.

Tripods are ideal for situations where a long shutter speed is required - landscape photography, product photography etc.,

There are those who eschew monopods and take macho delight in handholding heavy equipment all day. My take on it is that I've only got one spine and its got to last me the rest of my life, and taking care of it now is likely to pay dividends later in life.

My monopods are conventional with a single rubber foot.

If you find your lens heavy after extended use, a monopod may well help - but they do take a bit of getting used to, sometimes you'll unclip it from the monopod as waving around a 5 foot metal pole at 90 degrees to the camera isn't practical. For that reason, I have a head that uses the same QR plates as my tripod - and for balance purposes, many heavier lenses come with tripod / monopod mounting collars.
 
At a pinch you can just extend one leg of your tripod and use it as a monopod but if you are going to use it often it is worth getting a mono pod.
 
What situations or what subjects will you need it for?
 
Kodiak Qc said:
•


The only places I use a monopod is where there
are people: concerts, events and likes where the
use of tripods may be unpractical, restricted and
/or even forbidden.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the advice Kodiak :)
 
gramps said:
A monopod can be much more versatile than a tripod just for moving around and helping to 'carry' the weight of the kit, whereas a tripod is primarily for providing a fixed stable platform. So it really depends what your need is, if it's just to help support the weight a monopod can do that.
Click to expand...

Thank you Gramps :)
 
As people have said you need both on differing occasions. I use a monopod when photographing kite surfers to help support the weight. When taking macro photos or for long exposures I use a tripod. As @sirch suggested, I have also occasionally used one leg of the tripod to quickly get a little help with supporting the lens.
 
I used a tripod for garden use as its heavy and awkward but for walking I use a monopod. I attach the lens to the monopod then the balance is spread evenly.
 
andrewc said:
Both. Each has their own place.

Monopods are ideal for supporting the weight of a camera and lens for extended periods, often where slow shutter speed isn't necessarily the problem - but of course it can assist stabilising the camera when conditions or artistic requirements mean slowing shutter speed to levels where camera shake can be a problem.

Tripods are ideal for situations where a long shutter speed is required - landscape photography, product photography etc.,

There are those who eschew monopods and take macho delight in handholding heavy equipment all day. My take on it is that I've only got one spine and its got to last me the rest of my life, and taking care of it now is likely to pay dividends later in life.

My monopods are conventional with a single rubber foot.

If you find your lens heavy after extended use, a monopod may well help - but they do take a bit of getting used to, sometimes you'll unclip it from the monopod as waving around a 5 foot metal pole at 90 degrees to the camera isn't practical. For that reason, I have a head that uses the same QR plates as my tripod - and for balance purposes, many heavier lenses come with tripod / monopod mounting collars.
Click to expand...

Thank you Andrew, I find my arms ache and my wrists hurt too after awhile when using my telephoto lens. I was thinking a monopod would be beneficial when I know I will be out all day with my camera, but I haven't really seen many photographers use them. I don't think I would trust the monopods with feet. I guess it would need some practice using one to see if it helps. I have been lucky to help out on a equestrian event when i discovered my lens was alot to handle over a long period of time. I guess it may be difficult to manoeuvre with fast moving subjects such as horses but it could help for when the horses are stood still.
 
sirch said:
At a pinch you can just extend one leg of your tripod and use it as a monopod but if you are going to use it often it is worth getting a mono pod.
Click to expand...

Thank you sirch, I never thought of that :)
 
Gyles said:
What situations or what subjects will you need it for?
Click to expand...

I mainly use my telephoto lens for photographing animals (if I can find any while I'm out and about). I have also helped out on equestrian event which was a long day carrying around my telephoto lens. I'm hoping to be asked to help on other equestrian events so I was thinking of buying a monopod to help handle the weight but I'm not sure if it would be practical for fast moving subjects, or it could help with some of the shots where the animals are stood still.
 
Bebop said:
As people have said you need both on differing occasions. I use a monopod when photographing kite surfers to help support the weight. When taking macro photos or for long exposures I use a tripod. As @sirch suggested, I have also occasionally used one leg of the tripod to quickly get a little help with supporting the lens.
Click to expand...

Thank you Bebop :)
 
Shirleyr said:
I used a tripod for garden use as its heavy and awkward but for walking I use a monopod. I attach the lens to the monopod then the balance is spread evenly.
Click to expand...

Thank you Shirley :)
 
A tripod with one leg extended will be clumsy to handle and not really indicative of what a proper monopod would be like. A basic Manfrotto 680 or similar isn't expensive and is probably all you need.
 
I have a tripod that has a Leg unscrew to make it a mono. Best of both worlds
 
Some people use a bean-bag and a natural feature or wall to support the lens if you don't want to carry a pod of any kind! You could say beans have a pod but that may be seen as flippant! Enjoy your photography whatever you decide...
 
Monopods with extendable tripod feet aren't much good as a tripod. They are very good at reducing the swing of the camera around the axis of the pod, the one movement a monopod doesn't control.
 
andrewc said:
A tripod with one leg extended will be clumsy to handle and not really indicative of what a proper monopod would be like. A basic Manfrotto 680 or similar isn't expensive and is probably all you need.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the suggestion, I will look into the Manfrotto 680.
 
wave01 said:
I have a tripod that has a Leg unscrew to make it a mono. Best of both worlds
Click to expand...

Thanks, I noticed a few tripods like that when I've been looking at mono pods, it is a really good idea.
 
Keefh said:
Some people use a bean-bag and a natural feature or wall to support the lens if you don't want to carry a pod of any kind! You could say beans have a pod but that may be seen as flippant! Enjoy your photography whatever you decide...
Click to expand...

Cool, I didn't know about the bean-bag support for cameras. That's another option I could consider.
 
chris malcolm said:
Monopods with extendable tripod feet aren't much good as a tripod. They are very good at reducing the swing of the camera around the axis of the pod, the one movement a monopod doesn't control.
Click to expand...

Thanks Chris :)
 
I think monopods have weight limits too ! Make sure the one you buy can handle the weight of your equipment.
 
Ellen said:
I mainly use my telephoto lens for photographing animals (if I can find any while I'm out and about). I have also helped out on equestrian event which was a long day carrying around my telephoto lens. I'm hoping to be asked to help on other equestrian events so I was thinking of buying a monopod to help handle the weight but I'm not sure if it would be practical for fast moving subjects, or it could help with some of the shots where the animals are stood still.
Click to expand...
For this kind of stuff my preference would be to handhold. I own numerous tripods and a couple of monopods, but I only use them if I have to or for stationary/studio type work.
Honestly, a 70-200/2.8 is a hefty lens compared to basic kit, but it's not that much weight. It's under 4lbs total, use it frequently and you'll adjust.

You might want to look at your handholding technique... "proper" technique transfers most of the weight to your body/ribs. I frequently handhold a setup that weighs 15+ lbs, not for long periods at a time mind you, but I'll do it all day long. I'm not a big guy by any means, I'm old, and I have nerve/muscle damage in my left arm which is what supports/transfers the weight.
 
I find a monopod to be much more versatile than a tripod. However, you never get a full break when using one as you always have to keep a hold of it. Tripods mean you can let go and have a proper break, but they take a bit more setting up. A monopod is in the position you want it in immediately and can be moved easily. A tripod you need to make sure it is level and true, so moving it is more difficult. If you'll be moving position constantly and working on the go, you need a monopod. If you will be setting up camp for chunks of time and not moving, the tripod could well be the fella for the job. Just my opinion by the way
 
Last edited:
Manfrotto do a monopod that has 3 spindly legs that unscrew out of the bottom to give a little more support. I have it but I don't know the model number! Its OK, not particularly a tripod replacement but gives a little more stability to a monopod. I think monopods are pretty handy, just add that bit of extra support... Downside is not such quick, free movement as hand held. I also use a tripod, rock solid, sharp images, slow and cumbersome. Depends what you are doing. Incidentally Manfrotto sometimes have a clearance sale. 50% off. Maybe not 50% of a dealer price, but some excellent prices saving a good third of typical dealer price.
 
I use both. Monopod for sports (mainly rugby). Tripod for still life and landscapes. I have head for the monopod which is mostly a waste of time as i mainly use it with a long lens with a foot and screwing to foot and turning lens/ camera in collar is better.
 
This more than some people would spend but it comes up on offer from time to time and the head is designed for monopod use and I was really impressed previously I just screwed the monopod straight in but it's awkward then depending how much you move without the head, it took my 500 f4 VR with ease so it's strong enough for your requirements for sure

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sirui-P-32...&qid=1473277314&sr=1-9&keywords=sirui+monopod
 
I should have said it was recommended to me on here by t had bought the same kit
 
Also, the best way to use a mono is having the thing at an angle from your body with your two legs making the 'tripod' , not having it between your feet.
 
AdamSi said:
This more than some people would spend but it comes up on offer from time to time and the head is designed for monopod use and I was really impressed previously I just screwed the monopod straight in but it's awkward then depending how much you move without the head, it took my 500 f4 VR with ease so it's strong enough for your requirements for sure

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sirui-P-32...&qid=1473277314&sr=1-9&keywords=sirui+monopod
Click to expand...
I like Sirui and use that head on their 306 monopod... Personally, I wouldn't pay more for a CF version monopod. I actually picked up a CF Gitzo locally for a bargain... sold it in favor of the 306.
 
Last edited:
Ellen said:
I recently purchased a Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD lens to go with my Canon EOS 1200D camera. I find this particular lens heavy when using my camera for long periods of time. I currently have a basic tripod but was considering buying a monopod to help with handling the weight of the lens but, wasn't sure if it was necessary if already have a tripod. Would it be best to have both? I've seen basic monopod's and monopod's with "feet" which I'm not sure how stable they would be compared to a tripod. Any suggestions?
Click to expand...

It depends on what and where you are going to use a tripod. For studio work a good solid heavy tripod such as the Manfrotto 055xprob is about as solid a rock tripod you can get. If for travelling about I have been looking at the Manfrotto Befree travel tripod range at around £118.
A couple of things to consider. There is the question of pay load a tripod can take and how steady fully extended. Shutter slap in a flimsy fully extended tripod could produce camera shake to some degree. I have a monopod which does take the camera/lens weight off having to hold them but don't use a head on it although as Robert says it makes it easier to adjust.

Just one other thing weigh your camera and lens ( I use wifes kitchen scales;)) so you know what payload it is and then allow for a heavier lens for future use. Nothing worse than having a tripod with a head that drops down because what is on top is too heavy. That is unless you like photographing the ground
 
Last edited:
sk66 said:
I like Sirui and use that head on their 306 monopod... Personally, I wouldn't pay more for a CF version monopod. I actually picked up a CF Gitzo locally for a bargain... sold it in favor of the 306.
Click to expand...

I took the deal think it was £130 max with head so felt a good price as head on its own was around £100 ? before I had the manfrotto 680b alloy one which was good but this carbon one is lovely (I am a carbon tart that haha)
 
monopod when doing motorsport & tripod when landscapes I find best for me ...
Panning with a monopod is easier for my setup ....
 
I have both a monopod and a tripod. One of my tripods - Brian from 3LT - has a leg which can be transformed into a tripod. I used it with a 5D3 and a 100-400 II when we were in the Rockies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top