# Tripod or a monopod?



## jshelto3 (Feb 18, 2008)

I am trying to decide between a tripod and a monopod. I have never really used either for photography. Can the two really be compared? What would be some situations that a monopod would really shine over tripod?


----------



## Yahoozy (Feb 18, 2008)

9 times out of 10 a tripod is more beneficial than a monopod
its more stable, easier on the photographer, and ultimately more useful than a monopod

monopods are most beneficial when space is limited and you cant use a 3-legged setup


----------



## peterbj7 (Feb 18, 2008)

A monopod is ideal for stabilising a hand-held camera, and is pretty quick to deploy.

A tripod takes much longer to set up but then can be free-standing.

Different products with different applications.  If you know you'll need a tripod then a monopod won't substitute, but if you're just going out and taking photos opportunistically then a compact monopod can be a useful addition to your gear bag.


----------



## domromer (Feb 18, 2008)

I have both. I never use the monopod. Every time I think to use the monopod it seems the tripod would be better. I don't shoot much sports or zoo animals. I don't know why I bought it. It's brand new and I've used it once. I think maybe I'll sell it. Damn thing is heavy to.


----------



## JimmyO (Feb 18, 2008)

Well when ur running around takin shots from all angles of sumtin like say, skateboarding, its nice to have a monopod.

But ya, they really cant be compared, the only real simiarity is that they hav pod in the name and attach to your camera


----------



## lifeafter2am (Feb 18, 2008)

For sports and wildlife, like was already said, monopods are awesome.


----------



## reignmkr (Feb 19, 2008)

get both. some museums I've been to don't allow tripods, but for some odd reasons allow monopods.  most churches do the same. You'll need a tripod for several occasions.  apples vs. oranges imo.


----------



## Alex_B (Feb 19, 2008)

Yahoozy said:


> 9 times out of 10 a tripod is more beneficial than a monopod



How can you say this? This is a generalisation from your personal photography. But depending on what you shoot, either the tripod or the monopod is totally useless.

For Architecture, Landscape and long exposure, it will certainly be a _sturdy _tripod.

For sports with fast motion a monopod is certainly the only option when shooting with a long and heavy tele lens, even more when you have to change your own position often.

in Wildlife photography it really depends. If you are sitting for hours in your camouflage tent and wait for the critters to arrive, then it will most likely be a tripod ... if on the move however, it will be a monopod.

So the two are not really comparable, as they are really made for totally different purposes.


----------



## selmerdave (Feb 19, 2008)

It's not an either or, they serve completely different purposes.  Personally, I can't imagine how anybody could do without a good tripod (keyword: good) as shooting with one is the theoretical ideal.  I also don't think it's too likely that one would have shooting habits that would not be aided by a tripod unless one really only ever did one kind of photography and it was on the move.  I think using a tripod is the easiest way to improve image quality.  

Dave


----------



## jshelto3 (Feb 19, 2008)

thanks guys. this I believe this does answer my question. I guess you can't compare the two. Now I need to decide which will better serve me now.


----------



## Jon0807 (Feb 19, 2008)

It really depends on what kind of photography you'd be doing.  There are times when a monopod is absolutely invaluable as in sports shooting and there are times when a tripod would be useful as in long exposures or  hands free shooting.


----------



## JimmyO (Feb 19, 2008)

jshelto, what type of shooting will you do the most?


----------



## jshelto3 (Feb 19, 2008)

Mostly outdoor shooting of flowers, walls, streets, people and recently water. This all came up when I wanted to used a long shutter speed to get that misty look with water. I do alot of walking around. I mostly use a 50mm f/1.8 on a d100.


----------



## farski (Feb 19, 2008)

a Bogen 680B is like $30 used, and they plenty good up to like 300m. there's also not much that can go wrong with them, so you can be pretty confident with a used purchase, and it will last a while given the low price.

basically I'm saying a monopod is like a nothing purchase in the larger scheme of expensive photography, so there's really no reason not to have one.


----------



## DSLR noob (Feb 19, 2008)

tripod for you then, if you want long exposures to purposefully get movement, then a tripod will hold it still. For just slightly low light were you need a stop or 2, but need to move around, a monopod.


----------



## MichaelT (Feb 19, 2008)

All monopods do is hold heavy lenses so you don't have to. They do not work for time exposures, HDR imaging, critical framing, or any of the multitude of things you use a tripod for. On the other hand, there is nothing a monopod can do that a tripod can't.  (All you do is tie the legs together and your tripod is a monopod.)

One reason I always use a tripod for portraiture is because it allows me to get away from the viewfinder and have eye to eye connection with the subject.

There is absolutely no choice in this decision - you NEED a tripod. A monopod is just an accessory.


----------



## DSLR noob (Feb 19, 2008)

MichaelT said:


> All monopods do is hold heavy lenses so you don't have to. They do not work for time exposures, HDR imaging, critical framing, or any of the multitude of things you use a tripod for. On the other hand, there is nothing a monopod can do that a tripod can't.  (All you do is tie the legs together and your tripod is a monopod.)
> 
> One reason I always use a tripod for portraiture is because it allows me to get away from the viewfinder and have eye to eye connection with the subject.
> 
> There is absolutely no choice in this decision - you NEED a tripod. A monopod is just an accessory.


although I agree that a tripod better suites the shooting style of the OP, YOU NEED TO STOP POSTING LIES!

A monopod can get you 1 or 2 stops which can be very helpful. Also, have you ever been to a crowded auto show, parade, concert, etc. You try and get a tripod through all those people. As for using a tripod as a monopod, the legs may not stay together, and it is heavy. Please do not spread false information on a forum designed to HELP new user, not hinder them. You have to use the viewfinder reguardless of weather or not the camera is on a tripod or not. Also, have you ever had to fully set up a tripod to be just perfect, IN THE MIDDLE OF AN EVENT THAT MAY LAST BRIEFLY. Don't lie to our member just because you shoot with a style that doesn't need a monopod.


----------



## StreetShark (Feb 19, 2008)

IMO a monopod does a lot more then just take the wight off a big lens. It is also nice to have when you need both stability and mobility such as in a crowded not-so-well lit gym.


----------



## Happy Hour (Feb 19, 2008)

MichaelT said:


> All monopods do is hold heavy lenses so you don't have to. They do not work for time exposures, HDR imaging, critical framing, or any of the multitude of things you use a tripod for. On the other hand, there is nothing a monopod can do that a tripod can't.  (All you do is tie the legs together and your tripod is a monopod.)
> 
> One reason I always use a tripod for portraiture is because it allows me to get away from the viewfinder and have eye to eye connection with the subject.
> 
> There is absolutely no choice in this decision - you NEED a tripod. A monopod is just an accessory.



To say a Mono pod has no purpose. Is like saying dog can walk better than humans because they have more legs. First of all my monopod is about a 1/4 of the weight of my tripod. 2 Monopods are faster to set up and move around!. 3 I've been doing portrait work for 20+ years and rarely use a tripod! Unless you want that 1970's boring look. As for monopod use. Well the zoo is a great place I keep it screwed on and just collapse the leg as needed. Museums are another place that a monopod is more useful than a tripod. Imagine you spend all that time setting up your tripod so that 100's of people can stand right in front of your subject1 Now you have to pick up the whole tripod and reposition only to find out theres another 100 assh*les walking in front of you again! A mono pod you just slide or pick your camera up and move like it's not even there. So to say a tripod $100-300 is better than a $20 monopod? I think not! They both have there own special purpose. Otherwise one of them would not exist!


----------



## usayit (Feb 19, 2008)

Yahoozy said:


> 9 times out of 10 a tripod is more beneficial than a monopod
> its more stable, easier on the photographer, and ultimately more useful than a monopod
> 
> monopods are most beneficial when space is limited and you cant use a 3-legged setup



Thats not necessarily true.  Sports photographers in bright outdoor lights is going to say that 9 out of 10 the monopod will provide enough stability and 10 out of 10 times provide the mobility.  

It is a balance between certain needs.  Sure for you it might be true... but generalizations are completely useless.

9 times out of 10 a sledge hammer is more beneficial than a regular hammer.  A carpenter will agree but a metal will definitely disagree.


btw.. I met one photographer that does a lot of long exposures.  Nothing but a high quality WOODEN tripod will work for him.  Geez.. now that thing is HEAVY... but STABLE.


----------



## usayit (Feb 19, 2008)

jshelto3 said:


> thanks guys. this I believe this does answer my question. I guess you can't compare the two. Now I need to decide which will better serve me now.



Some tripods will have a center column that doubles as a monopod.  They are a lot more common now than when I purchased this a long long time ago:


----------



## SBlanca (Feb 19, 2008)

to be honest, not having used a monopod i can't say much, but im just curious, isn't a monopod as unstable as just taking the photo without anything?


----------



## usayit (Feb 19, 2008)

Nope it is not...  A monopod is much more stable.. 
But learning to use a monopod efficiently takes practice.

Learning to use a tripod is pretty straight forward...


----------



## SBlanca (Feb 19, 2008)

dunno, will have to try one out


----------



## Happy Hour (Feb 19, 2008)

usayit said:


> Some tripods will have a center column that doubles as a monopod.  They are a lot more common now than when I purchased this a long long time ago:


WTF!!! I want one!!! I never have seen one like that! Then again I never looked. But that is nice! Thanks allot Usait! Now I have to go buy 1 (LOL)


----------



## RKW3 (Feb 19, 2008)

SBlanca said:


> to be honest, not having used a monopod i can't say much, but im just curious, isn't a monopod as unstable as just taking the photo without anything?



I was kinda thinkin like you once, before I went to the zoo recently. But once I showed up with my 400mm lens, it was kinda heavy and it is very hard shooting handheld at 400mm. My dad's friend lent us a monopod though, it was actually great! I loved being able to carry my camera by the monopod, and it was mobile and stable enough for my shooting.


----------



## usayit (Feb 19, 2008)

Happy Hour said:


> WTF!!! I want one!!! I never have seen one like that! Then again I never looked. But that is nice! Thanks allot Usait! Now I have to go buy 1 (LOL)



Unfortunately, they (Bogen/Manfrotto) has not made one in years.  When I was searching for a tripod, I was actually looking for a combo just like this but my search came up empty.  No one made anything like it. Then I came across one of Bogen's catalogs and saw the listing (under accessories) and called to make an order.  The sales rep on the phone already said they were discontinued but I managed to get my hands on one.  The issue now was that I had to find legs that would work with it.  If you look closely at the picture, the center column is not beveled like the current center columns of Bogen/Manfrotto.  I managed to find a left over 3001 S (shorts) that I really liked as they were a little lighter and more compact (see below).  This was my main tripod/monopod up to today.  I later got some full height 3001 legs that were also compatible from a camera swap for $35... it is heavy though.






The last time I checked, I saw nothing replacing it in Bogen's catalog but other companies including Giottos have made similar products.


----------



## MichaelT (Feb 20, 2008)

Well, I see some fur is ruffled the wrong way!  And I must admit that I'm not sorry about it at all.

I've been teaching photography for many years and I can say without any reservation that a tripod should be the number 2 item in a photographer's kit, only following the camera.  When my students are having problems with sharpness they immediately complain about the camera or the lens or some other goofy thing, but when I start insisting that they use their tripod, they begin to see amazing results.

If anyone ever asks me what one thing will make a real difference in their photography, a tripod is the FIRST item on the list.  Yes, you can use other contraptions as a substitute, but when you start chatting with the real pros, you'll find that their tripod is a constant companion.

And of course, there might be times when working with a tripod slows you down too much or requires too much muscle to horse around, but those times are the exception, not the rule.  So I'll tell jshelto3 a thousand times over, get a good tripod and witness a great stride forward in your photography.

And by the way, a dog is SO much more stable than a human.  Go take your dog for a walk on the ice and see who goes down first!


----------



## jshelto3 (Feb 20, 2008)

I'm going to go ahead and get a tripod. If nothing else it will slow me down and make me think about my  shot. I don't mind caring a few extra pounds either.


----------



## schuylercat (Feb 20, 2008)

...but then again, I was a racing photographer and had never done studio work.  Actually, I need to correct myeslf - I had four or five monopods before I bought a tripod, because even the best Bogen/Manfrotto monopods I could find would get dirty and wear out (fail to clamp tight enough to support the camera and lens) because I abused them so badly at the track.  The last one I bought, and still have, is a Slik - I can't find the model number, it's so old, but the outermost barrel is 2-3/4 inches in diameter, and I used to put a big Canon 600mm f/4 on it and use it as a prop to hold myself up.  Best mono I ever bought.

Having said that...my case is special.  If I were even considering a career shooting studio or portraits back then, I'd have bought at least one, and maybe two tripods - one big dependable brute for indoor work, and one lightweight, portable one...and even though was used to them I might not have even bought a monopod.  I totally agree with Alex B: "Go take your dog for a walk on the ice and see who goes down first!"

The right tool for the job, in this case.


----------



## usayit (Feb 20, 2008)

Every professor knows that there isn't 1 tool for all jobs....  this is true for all studies.


----------



## roadkill (Feb 21, 2008)

I carry both.  The mono pod is a bit quicker to set up as I keep it clipped to the side of my camera pack and the tripod is strapped up under.  I definitely prefer the tripod.  Pick up both though as you can get a decent monopod for 20 to 30 dollars.


----------



## roadkill (Feb 21, 2008)

also the mono pod weighs only about 10 ounces


----------



## brileyphotog (Feb 22, 2008)

I like having a tripod, especially for long exposures. I do own a monopod but I never use it. I used to use it shooting sports but I like to change height levels quickly sometimes and a monopod (at least mine) won't let you do that. If you don't like holding up a big heavy lens all day then they are a good idea...but I'm super buff so I don't need one.


----------



## eclipse13 (Feb 22, 2008)

I have both and use both. I use a tripod for night/scenic stuff. I use my monopod when photographing surfing, drag racing, etc. when it is good to be able to move quickly.


----------

