I like to shoot from the ground level, usually. Google mostly showed me the monopods with minimum height of some 30 cm.
Are there some monopods which are flexible and at the same time can be actually made to sit on the ground?
Would a GorillaPod work for you? I know you said monopod but when you are getting down to 10cm, it hardly seems to matter if it is 1 leg or 3. This image is from the JOBY site, they make them.
Check more discussion of this question.
I see that most monopod are not very tall when fully extended.
How important is it to choose a monopod that is high enough??
I am six foot two (189cm) and my eye level is roughly around 175cm.
Many monopods only gets to 150cm or 160cm. Adding the height of my camera, it is still usually a few cm lower than my eye level (when I am standing straight, with shoes on)
I would like to seek some advice from experienced monopod user. Do you think it is important to get a monopod that, when everything is mounted, at least meets your eye level at a comfortable standing position?
I tried a monopod in a store today and it is about 5 cm short. Meaning that when I mount my camera on it, standing perfectly straight, the viewfinder will be at the level of my nose, not my eye.
Would that bother you?
I've found that I like my monopod tall enough so that the viewfinder is pretty much exactly at eye level. If it's much lower than that then I find that after only a short period of use, my neck starts to cramp. It should also be noted that if I'm shooting something above me (birds in flight for instance) then I'll tend to have the viewfinder above eye level, so I can look up through the camera without having to crouch, so in my case I like the monopod to be capable of extending about 5-10 cm above eye level.
Check more discussion of this question.
I sometimes (about 5 times per year) decide to shoot a panorama, just for me, with no intentions to sell or use the photo outside my family and close relatives.
Currently I use my Pentax DAL 18-55 lens and free Hugin software for it but I plan to buy Samyang 8 mm fisheye. I made few panoramas using my monopod (better than to shoot "from hand"). However I read something about things like nodal point etc. and found out that the head mount should be located not on the bottom of the body but near the rear lens element.
I know of things like Nodal Ninja etc., but it is too expensive and I do not plan to shoot panoramas often. When I would stick with my monopod and lets say with the Samyang fisheye, than some simple small and light aluminum profile with two holes, tripod nut and screw would make it possible to mount the camera and rotate it around nodal point - is it right? Does it make sense to build such gadget or do you think I will have similar results using standard mount?
Yes, you can do it. I know some people that have, one friend made one out of wood because it was easier than metal. If you intend to do it for your 8mm, it will be relatively easy since there is ONE fixed nodal point, contrarily to the zoom.
You said you do not do panoramas often but do you do Macro? If so, a macro rail is sufficient to work for a DSLR with a short lens and it will work for the 8mm and your zoom at all focal-lengths.
Included in my How To Make a Panorama tutorial are instructions with an example on how to find the nodal point (technically entrance pupil).
Check more discussion of this question.
I'm thinking about getting a combined monopod/trekking pole, as I use a trekking pole already and I can't really be bothered to carry a heavy tripod into the hills during daylight. I'm wondering how much difference they make. Is there a rule of thumb such as "allows 2 stops better than 1 over focal length"?
Also, does lens image stabilisation work with monopods? I believe you should turn it off when using a tripod, but I'm not sure with a monopod. Any ideas?
And as to weight, I have a Canon 40D and often use my 18-200 lens, so I think that makes between 1 and 2kg.
I was long a user of monopods out in the field. With the advent of image stabilization lenses, I find I almost never haul it out any more. About the only use case I have for it now is when I'm using my 300/1.4x combo with waterbirds or shorebirds, and even then, I'm most likely to either carry the tripod or go handheld.
I see the use case for monopods in two broad areas: the situation above where you want the ability to reposition quickly but want the added stability, or a similar setup where you're shooting sports (baseball or football), especially extended sessions where handholding might cause arm fatigue. The third case (locations like museum where a monopod might be allowed and tripod not...) might make sense in certain special cases.
But in general, improvements in lens speed/quality and IS, and carbon fiber tripods reducing weight, have made monopods a niche tool. lighter tripods means I'm not as likely to choose the monopod as a compromise for weight, and remember you can always just put down one leg of a tripod and use it as a funny looking monopod, but you can't extend the other two legs of a monopod for stability...
In some cases the "string monopod" might be a useful alternative, too. use a bolt in the tripod connector (it's a 1/4 20, I believe) and attach a string to it that reachers the ground. then stand on the string and pull up to create tension -- and it'll stabilize the camera. I need to experiment more with this, but unless you are using the monopod to avoid arm fatigue, it seems to give you all the benefits of the monopod for stability, at almost no weight and similar stability improvements.
So for me, it's using IS lenses where possible, and either carrying a tripod or going handheld. monopods just aren't that useful with modern technology.
Check more discussion of this question.
