ann clancy
(K=2014) - Comment Date 6/27/2007
|
i have several monopods, my favorite is a bogen 3245 (i think).
it has a release grip which automatically raises or lowers the legs with a ease.
i am using a quick release plate on a simple tilt head. works well for my needs.
|
|
|
|
Rany Lutz
(K=17) - Comment Date 6/29/2007
|
I use and like the Cannon 100 that I got from B & H Photo for $30.00 US.
The way to use a monopod is to put it to full length, then straddle it like riding a broomstick. Then pull the center of it up tight against your crotch. Then rotate the ball to put the camera against your eye and hold tension on your legs and the monopod. When you are in the correct position, the monopod and your legs will create a three legged pod and the upper monopod shaft will be locked against your upper body. You can do this with the camera strap around your neck and can even pull it down tight against the monopod shaft with one hand to provide even more stability.
|
|
|
|
ann clancy
(K=2014) - Comment Date 6/29/2007
|
unless one is wearing a dress lol
|
|
|
|
José Azevedo
(K=9845) - Comment Date 6/29/2007
|
Hmmm... It's an idea. But I'm afraid it can be somewhat dangerous for men...
|
|
|
|
Levi Miller
(K=433) - Comment Date 7/2/2007
|
Honestly, I purchassed a simple tri-pod to take out-and-about. If needed, I just drop one leg. Instant monopod.
Regards,
Levi
|
|
|
|
Jeroen Wenting
(K=25317) - Comment Date 7/2/2007
|
sharp images are in large part a matter of technique, of knowing when NOT to take the shot and/or configuring your system to have the right area in focust at the right time.
A monopod will give you some more leeway when it comes to increasing the shuttertimes at which you can get sharp results, but it's no magic bullet.
Neither is a tripod in fact, unless maybe it were made of 4" thick steel beams welded to the floor and each other.
But always remember that there is no golden bullet. In some situations you're just not going to get the shot no matter what.
Also remember that a lot of things that you think are due to shaking are actually your subject moving or you having focussed on the wrong thing (maybe due to incorrectly gauging your depth of field), things that the sturdiest tripod won't help with.
|
|
|
|
Jeroen Wenting
(K=25317) - Comment Date 7/2/2007
|
http://www.usefilm.com/Image.asp?ID=1322457 used a monopod here to get greater DOF than I could have gotten handheld (by allowing a longer shuttertime).
And here it pays off. Each rivvet is visible and sharp. Even the peeling sticker of the P&W logo is clear and crisp.
|
|
|
|
Clive Carter
(K=8603) - Comment Date 7/3/2007
|
A monopod is a very handy support but ...they take a bit of getting used too. I am over 76 years old and have similar problems.
You need to brace the monopod against your foot and leg in some way to give a firm support especially when using slow shutter speeds.
Tying a strap around your body and around the monopod and pushing against it helps quite a lot.
|
|
|
|
Dave Holland
(K=13074) - Comment Date 7/3/2007
|
The only time I use a monopod is when I am shooting sports with a long lens. I have a little RRS ballhead which is specifically designed for a monopod, but it's too small for big glass. For serious landscape photography, I take the tripod. You will likely feel the same way about a monopod as you do the tripod -- I'm not sure it is your answer.
Learning happens in steps, and I have found that a person can plateau for years. If you commit the effort to use the tripod you will move up to that higher step.
Dave
|
|
|
|
Dave Holland
(K=13074) - Comment Date 7/3/2007
|
Glancing over your portfolio, I'm not sure that either a tripod or a monopod would have helped with most of those. Certainly the PJ style snapshots need the versatility of a camera around the neck. The shots you posted seem plenty sharp to me!
I think your perceived lack of sharpness is partly due to the scanner, partly due to the slow film from those days, and maybe from slower lenses. Also, these days automatic flash will help boost perceived sharpness. To me one of the great advantages of digital is the ability to instantly dial ISO up to levels not seen in the 70's. Sure, we could change film, but film in those days was slow and grainy. What are you shooting with now?
Dave
|
|
|
|
Jeroen Wenting
(K=25317) - Comment Date 7/3/2007
|
One major advantage of a monopod not yet mentioned is that it can serve as a cane, walking stick, or baton as well when needed.
Can give you that little bit of an edge walking the streets at night.
|
|
|
|
José Azevedo
(K=9845) - Comment Date 7/3/2007
|
Thanks for the input, Clive, very useful.
Regards,
José Azevedo
|
|
|
|
José Azevedo
(K=9845) - Comment Date 7/3/2007
|
Hi Dave,
thanks for your time and interest in looking at my portfolio. I really appreciate that.
At the size here, they all really look sharp, but at 30 x 20 @ 300 DPI many are not that Thack sharp - ok, they're fine for being handheld and most people wouldn't complain about it. But I'm being very critic here since I intend to start making money with photography soon, if everything goes fine, and sharpness is a must then.
My scanner is a Nikon Coolscan III, a film scanner, and it's very nice, I really don't think the problem is with it since sharp images like "Rolleiflex by Nikon" ( http://www.usefilm.com/image/1321124.html ) come out extremely sharp. Thins wasn't handheld and the mirror of my F2 was locked, which contributes greatly for ultimate sharpness.
I use mostly a Nikkor 85/1.4D AF and a 180/2.8 ED AIS. Both are teles and every single shake is enhanced thanks to it. On my pictures with a 20mm or 50mm lenses, shakes are hardly noticed. As they're not on the ones with my Rolleiflex 75mm/3.5, which is a joy to handle. So, with the lenses I use most I'm inclined to say a monopod'd help me improve sharpness at bigger enlargements.
All my actual equipment is mechanical and film based, the exception being my F3. The other cameras are an F2 (DE-1), an F2A and an F2AS. I also have a Pentax 280P, an amazing point-and-shoot with a fantastic lens. There are many pictures with it at my portfolio.
My lenses are all Nikkors - 20/2.8D AF, 50/1.4 AI, 50/2.0 non AI, 85/1.4D AF, 180/2.8 ED AIS and a 300/4.5 EDIF AI. I'm selling the 20 and the 300 since I don't use them too much.
I shoot film, love Fuji's Provia family, and scan it at home.
If I start a photo business I'll have to move to digital to reduce costs and shorten times between shots. Thanks to crop factors, my preferred lenses will become even more "teles" on their look. I think a monopod will allow me to shoot with some mobility and more sharpness.
Tripods are perfect and a necessity for both landscape and studio work, but sometimes "on the street" they become a problem, be requiring more time to use or attracting too much attention. On location, on the other hand, when you're asked to do a job on a certain place, not only photograph your daughter at the park, they're also a must.
I know in the end I'll have both, but I'll probably buy the monopod first.
Nice to meet you here, Dave!
Best regards,
José Azevedo
|
|
|
|
José Azevedo
(K=9845) - Comment Date 7/3/2007
|
Hi Jeroen,
this is a monopod's special quality I've also been considering very positive ;)
Thanks for the inputs and the nice sample you posted a link. They're all helpful.
Regards,
José Azevedo
|
|
|
|
Jon O'Brien
(K=11321) - Comment Date 7/4/2007
|
I bought a monopod after a trip to Montreal during which I took some interior shots of Notre Dame, wishing mightily for a tripod all the while. However - if I had had one, I might not have been forced to get creative and thus might not have gotten this shot - arguably one of the best photos I've taken.
http://www.usefilm.com/image/1209194.html
Cheers,
Jon
|
|
|
|
Jon O'Brien
(K=11321) - Comment Date 7/4/2007
|
Which is not to say that they aren't useful, although I have to admit I haven't gotten a great deal of use out of the one I did buy. But it does make me feel safer walking around at night.
|
|
|
|
José Azevedo
(K=9845) - Comment Date 7/5/2007
|
Great image, Jon! Looks like the floor is water, great effect. I always trusted serendipity - just like it happened on your image - but I'm afraid I can't always count on it (I know I will...) if get a bit more serious on making money with photography. Results will have to be more predictable, more "perfect" and less "artistic".
Or not...
Maybe that'll be my differential ;)
That's one of the reasons I'm, at the same time, considering and delaying my decision. But I agree that the safety factor is very positive anywhere in the world.
Thanks for the input and congratulations for your image. Really worth the earned titles.
José Azevedo
|
|
|
|
Jon O'Brien
(K=11321) - Comment Date 7/5/2007
|
Thank you for your kind comments, Jose. I have just browsed through your portfolio, and I have to admit to being greatly flattered... you are the Master! :-]
PS: Brazil, cold? Oh, Jose, you must come to Saskatoon in February.
Jon
|
|
|
|
José Azevedo
(K=9845) - Comment Date 7/5/2007
|
Jon, me a Master?!?!? :)
What can I say? Thank you'd be nothing... I think I try to do my homework the best I can, my standards are high and I always try to go for the best, but I'm far from being a Master.
You're lowering Ansel Adams, Richard Avedon, Edward Weston, HCB, Diane Arbus and all the real ones and they don't deserve this.
I still have an extremely long way to reach their level and it's surely not a yellow brick one. Thanks for enjoying my portfolio. I don't even have any significant award here.
Now who's flattering who?
PS - Well, it's winter here... Temperatures are around 18ºC at night... ;)
My best, Jon!
José Azevedo
|
|
|
|
Dave Holland
(K=13074) - Comment Date 7/6/2007
|
OT, sorry.
Jose, still shooting film? I like the idea of film, and I bought a used EOS 3 several months ago. However regretfully it hasn't had much use, compared to my little 20D. Film made me slow down and be more careful -- certainly a great advantage. Somehow posting photos has become a little too easy for some, and I feel the average upload quality has faded as the masses jump in. Jon made a great point that technology (in this case a monopod) could actually be a disadvantage because it allows an easy pathway to mediocrity. However digital imaging offers quick feedback, and hence steepens a learning curve dramatically. I've found it really important for off camera lighting, as the eye doesn't necessarily see what the camera does with the flash.
Dave
|
|
|
|
