Tripods v. Monopods?

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

steveTQP

steveTQP

New member
Member's gallery
Greetings Photographers!
I'm a landscape and product photographer, and have always used a tripod for 99.9% of my shooting, because I want the sharpest possible images. Lately, I've been thinking about a monopod for when I hike in the mountains of Colorado, and really don't want to carry a tripod. My question is, has anyone compared the sharpness achieved with a monopod v. a tripod? If so, are the "keeper" images obtained when using the monopod any "less" sharp than those obtained using a tripod (under similar conditions, same exposure, lighting, etc.)? Thank you very much!
 
Member's gallery
steveTQP said:
Greetings Photographers!
I'm a landscape and product photographer, and have always used a tripod for 99.9% of my shooting, because I want the sharpest possible images. Lately, I've been thinking about a monopod for when I hike in the mountains of Colorado, and really don't want to carry a tripod. My question is, has anyone compared the sharpness achieved with a monopod v. a tripod? If so, are the "keeper" images obtained when using the monopod any "less" sharp than those obtained using a tripod (under similar conditions, same exposure, lighting, etc.)? Thank you very much!
Click to expand...
I use a monopod when hiking, but I primarily use it to stabilize longer lenses that I'd otherwise hand hold. Personally I use a lot of very slow shutter speeds for landscape photography and really want a tripod and not a monopod for that kind of work. I would say there are times when I can just handhold scenic shots in brighter light but then I don't tend to need any additional support. I've owned monopods for a couple of decades and do find uses for them when trying to travel lighter but in all those years I don't think I've used a monopod for landscape photography as it doesn't provide nearly enough stability for things like waterfall blurs, long duration astro shots, HDR composites or slow shutter speeds associated with small apertures, polarizing filters, maybe ND grads and keeping ISO low in twilight shots. YMMV...
 
Member's gallery
I use an alpenstock with a tilthead as a monopod (no height adjustment) when hiking. As long as I can keep the shutter speed to 1/30 or above it works very well. For waterfalls or other low shutter speed shots I much prefer a tripod -- but I've used the monopod for a few 1/4 second waterfall photographs and find that as long as the camera's set to take a burst there will probably be a quite acceptable image.
 
I'd like a tripod but for trail hiking i try to keep the weight down. I would use a hiking stick anyway so I carry an aluminum walking stick with a quick release head. They make these with base stands but I just made a lightweight wooden base that allows it to stand upright when I step on it, with careful supervision if the wind isn't blowing.
 
Member's gallery
DRwyoming said:
I use a monopod when hiking, but I primarily use it to stabilize longer lenses that I'd otherwise hand hold. Personally I use a lot of very slow shutter speeds for landscape photography and really want a tripod and not a monopod for that kind of work. I would say there are times when I can just handhold scenic shots in brighter light but then I don't tend to need any additional support. I've owned monopods for a couple of decades and do find uses for them when trying to travel lighter but in all those years I don't think I've used a monopod for landscape photography as it doesn't provide nearly enough stability for things like waterfall blurs, long duration astro shots, HDR composites or slow shutter speeds associated with small apertures, polarizing filters, maybe ND grads and keeping ISO low in twilight shots. YMMV...
Click to expand...
Thank you for the detailed information! I too, do HDR composites, and do realize that these are among those techniques that require a tripod. The main scenario in which I’d prefer a monopod is hiking on trails where a monopod would be easier to work with and maneuver.
 
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
I'd like a tripod but for trail hiking i try to keep the weight down. I would use a hiking stick anyway so I carry an aluminum walking stick with a quick release head. They make these with base stands but I just made a lightweight wooden base that allows it to stand upright when I step on it, with careful supervision if the wind isn't blowing.
Click to expand...
Yes, using a “walking stick” when hiking is yet another reason I am researching monopods. Thank you!
 
Member's gallery
I use both extensively and habe been doing so for several decades. A monopod works best if you want to steady long lenses; I also use it occasionally for my scope on hikes in difficult terrain when weight and size are the overriding factors.

However, for landscape and macro photography any decent tripod works a heck of a lot better than any monopod. What I did was get a small, lightweight tripod for such trips. Mine is too short to use in a standing position, I have to sit or kneel behind it. Tall lightweight tripods aren't worth the bother IMO. Mine is a Gitzo GT 0532. Works extremely well with a high quality, lightweight ballhead, almost as well as a larger tripod, as long as you don't extend the center column at all. But that applies to almost any tripod.
 
Member's gallery
steveTQP said:
I'm a landscape and product photographer, and have always used a tripod for 99.9% of my shooting, because I want the sharpest possible images. Lately, I've been thinking about a monopod for when I hike in the mountains of Colorado, and really don't want to carry a tripod.
Click to expand...

If you don't want to carry a tripod and since a monopod won't really do much for shooting while hiking, I think you might want to look at Olympus/Panasonic m43rds mount. With the right lenses (e.g: Olympus 12-100, Panasonic Leica 12-60mm) and proper technique, you can hand-hold down to 1s or even longer times.
 
Member's gallery
I consider a tripod and a monopod to be very different tools and in my experience a monopod is seldom a substitute for a tripod. As others have mentioned, when shooting landscapes or macro, I most often prefer small apertures and low ISO. In such cases , a tripod is the tool I select. Same for hdr or panos or when I want slow shutter speeds to intentionally blur motion. Tripod all the way. As I think about it, the only time I choose the monopod is when I need to physically support a heavy body/lens combo that I would have difficulty hand holding and/or when a tripod would be too unwieldy such as sideline sports or shooting critters in the wild.

Don’t get me wrong - a monopod does indeed help steady the rig in a pinch if a tripod is not handy and it can allow you to get sharp shots you might have missed hand holding, but in no way is a monopod a substitute for a quality tripod with an appropriate head if aperture, shutter speed, ISO and precise composition is critical. BTW - I do have the luxury of having multiple tripods in different sizes that I can use to minimize weight if a long hike is expected, but the laws of physics are set in stone. Equipment choices in photography is almost always a compromise. Using a smaller, lighter tripod and head to shoot with a 400/2.8 just won’t work regardless of how far i need to walk.
 
Member's gallery
Hermann said:
I use both extensively and habe been doing so for several decades. A monopod works best if you want to steady long lenses; I also use it occasionally for my scope on hikes in difficult terrain when weight and size are the overriding factors.

However, for landscape and macro photography any decent tripod works a heck of a lot better than any monopod. What I did was get a small, lightweight tripod for such trips. Mine is too short to use in a standing position, I have to sit or kneel behind it. Tall lightweight tripods aren't worth the bother IMO. Mine is a Gitzo GT 0532. Works extremely well with a high quality, lightweight ballhead, almost as well as a larger tripod, as long as you don't extend the center column at all. But that applies to almost any tripod.
Click to expand...

Hi Hermann. While I know that your Gitzo is a very solid, stable, functional and high-quality setup, for my current Z7, I found a brand called Leofoto, that makes an amazing travel tripod, AND it includes a fantastic ball head with one feature that I've not found INCLUDED on any other ball head...namely, a panoramic head! This allows the single ball head to function as a pano head, plus, if you swing it into the notch, turns the pano head into a "poor man's " gimbal head! (Max payload = 22 lbs.) Also, another feature of this tripod/head combo, is that the knobs/controls on the ball head each have a different shape and texture (ALL metal, CNC aluminum)! Simply ingenious design, because it eliminates the possibility of inadvertently loosening the wrong knob!! Why ALL ball head manufacturers don't do this is beyond me...actually, probably because of design and manufacture costs. In any case, this Leofoto LN-254CT Tripod is awesome...10X carbon fiber legs, included quality metal spikes (with rubber gaskets), included handy carabiner allen tool, and a very nice carrying case. Well worth $380, IMHO.…Thanks, and Be Safe!
 
Member's gallery
I agree with what has been already said:
- I use a Monopod mainly to be able to use slower shutter speeds at dawn and relieve weight of a heavy lens
- I use Tripod solely for Landscape (combined with Exposure delay mode and Mirror Up) to get sharpest image or for Time-lapses

Monopod gives better stability but no where near a Tripod. On the other hand, it is much lighter and is quicker (adjusting height / flexibility).
I personally would find it hard to balance a Camera with a small Landscape lens on a Monopod..
 
Member's gallery
I don’t think there is any doubt that a descent tripod will be more stable than a monopod.
However using a good monopod with detachable tripod feet can be very versatile.
I use My Siriu p-204sr aluminium monopod with a gimbal head and with a little technique works very well with the Canon 500 f4. The feet can detach to form a low level tripod for slow shots of fungi etc with the addition of a ball head.
I have attached an angled aluminium bracket at the top of the monopod, this hooks over my shoulders making carrying the telephoto lens more comfortable.
 
Member's gallery
I actually did a video about this topic:


Still, in your situation I'd probably favor a tripod. As mentioned, even a lighter tripod tends to be better for landscapes than a monopod - in fact, it's a rare day where I shoot a landscape with anything else. I can probably count the number of times in the last five years I shot a landscape sans tripod on one hand - and still have a finger or two left to scratch my head. However, I suppose if you were really at a border-line hand-holding speed the monopods would deliver. The thing is, I'd hate to discover a great spot in wonderful light and find myself wishing I had a tripod along.
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
I actually did a video about this topic:


Still, in your situation I'd probably favor a tripod. As mentioned, even a lighter tripod tends to be better for landscapes than a monopod - in fact, it's a rare day where I shoot a landscape with anything else. I can probably count the number of times in the last five years I shot a landscape sans tripod on one hand - and still have a finger or two left to scratch my head. However, I suppose if you were really at a border-line hand-holding speed the monopods would deliver. The thing is, I'd hate to discover a great spot in wonderful light and find myself wishing I had a tripod along.
Click to expand...
Very good points, Steve! I do already use a very decent tripod (a Leofoto LN-254CT, with a 22 lb. max payload, and ballhead with built-in panning function). However, on the ocassional hike in uneven terrain (in daylight), I'm just thinking that a monopod would do double duty, serving to provide better stability than hand-held, and also as a walking stick. Now, I do use a camera/lens combo with IBIS/VR, as well as shutter speeds mostly in the 1/125 - 1/1000 range (with a Nikkor AF-P 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 E FX on a Z7), and frankly, even handheld with good technique and exposure delay, electronic shutter, my images are pretty sharp. Perhaps I'm just suffering from G.A.S., when reading reviews of monopods like the IFootage Cobra 2. :)
 
Member's gallery
Hermann said:
I use both extensively and habe been doing so for several decades. A monopod works best if you want to steady long lenses; I also use it occasionally for my scope on hikes in difficult terrain when weight and size are the overriding factors.

However, for landscape and macro photography any decent tripod works a heck of a lot better than any monopod. What I did was get a small, lightweight tripod for such trips. Mine is too short to use in a standing position, I have to sit or kneel behind it. Tall lightweight tripods aren't worth the bother IMO. Mine is a Gitzo GT 0532. Works extremely well with a high quality, lightweight ballhead, almost as well as a larger tripod, as long as you don't extend the center column at all. But that applies to almost any tripod.
Click to expand...
Sounds good, Hermann! Fortunately, I find that my Leofoto tripod is quite solid even when extending the center column only an inch or two. When pixel-peeping those images, they are equally sharp as those taken without column extension. Of course, that's as far as I'd ever extend it anyway.
 
Member's gallery
steveTQP said:
Greetings Photographers!
I'm a landscape and product photographer, and have always used a tripod for 99.9% of my shooting, because I want the sharpest possible images. Lately, I've been thinking about a monopod for when I hike in the mountains of Colorado, and really don't want to carry a tripod. My question is, has anyone compared the sharpness achieved with a monopod v. a tripod? If so, are the "keeper" images obtained when using the monopod any "less" sharp than those obtained using a tripod (under similar conditions, same exposure, lighting, etc.)? Thank you very much!
Click to expand...
My experience with a monopod is that it is better than hand-holding, but not by much.
 
Member's gallery
Just a wild thought ... There are some very light-weight tripods and nothing says that you must splay out the legs when using one. So how about using one as a monopod when necessary and a tripod when needed?
 
There are creative ways to stabilize when trying to save trail weight. None beat a tripod. I carry around three 15 inch sticks cut from driveway markers, a half dozen rubber bands, and 10 feet of kitchen twine, along with the monopod/trekking pole. One stick is a 'mahlstick' for stabilizing macros, three banded together and held in the claw of my left hand is a 'tripod.' And believe it or not using the string to make a triangle from one foot over the camera on the monopod under the other foot and tensioned over my shoulder can be fairly still with some fiddling,. Also tying the monopod off to fence posts, using the backpack as a support, neccesity is the....
 
Howard5252 said:
Just a wild thought ... There are some very light-weight tripods and nothing says that you must splay out the legs when using one. So how about using one as a monopod when necessary and a tripod when needed?
Click to expand...
Good idea. And there are footed monopods, similar idea.
 
RickW said:
A monopod with feet? That is like using a tabletop tripod with a 5 foot center column.
Click to expand...

I guess there is a shutter speed for every situation. Slower than a monopod, faster than a tripod. Keep the IS engaged.
 
Member's gallery
steveTQP said:
Greetings Photographers!
I'm a landscape and product photographer, and have always used a tripod for 99.9% of my shooting, because I want the sharpest possible images. Lately, I've been thinking about a monopod for when I hike in the mountains of Colorado, and really don't want to carry a tripod. My question is, has anyone compared the sharpness achieved with a monopod v. a tripod? If so, are the "keeper" images obtained when using the monopod any "less" sharp than those obtained using a tripod (under similar conditions, same exposure, lighting, etc.)? Thank you very much!
Click to expand...
Well, you have read different opinions on a monopod for landscapes with pros and cons. Now I would advise you to purchase a monopod, try it out and see what results you get before the trip to Colorado then you will have answered your own question. Good shooting to you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top