| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Monopod suggestions
Tim Darby, Photographer
 |
Lakeland | FL | USA | Posted: 6:42 PM on 08.04.10 |
| ->> I'm currently using a Manfrotto 680B monopod and after a couple of years it cannot support the weight of my 300 2.8 without slipping. I have tried to repair it/tighten the clamps but nothing seems to work. I definitely don't want to deal with that again this upcoming football season. I'd also like something lighter if at all possible. Anything under $100 that would get the job done? Thanks for any help! |
|
Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Randy Abrams, Photographer
|
Bath | NY | US | Posted: 1:21 PM on 08.05.10 |
| ->> The first pod I had was a Bogen-Manfrotto 685B. That supported my 300/2.8 well enough, but was a little shaky with my 400/2.8. I've since gotten a Gitzo GM3551. Very light and a great range of height adjustment which at 6'3" allows me to be able to sit on the ground and stand without leaning over or bending down. The Gitzo is a little pricey though (over $200). I figured if this pod has to support nearly or over $10,000 between camera and lens, sending a little more is worth it. |
|
Stephen Brashear, Photographer, Assistant
|
Seattle | WA | USA | Posted: 1:48 PM on 08.05.10 |
| ->> Tim - Take a look at the Induro line of monopods. They are fairly inexpensive and have a carbon fiber model that is affordable. I've had mine for three or four years now. |
|
Jeanine Leech, Photographer
|
South Park | PA | United States | Posted: 4:12 PM on 08.05.10 |
| ->> While we are talking monopods, does anyone have a good suggestion for a monopod that will support a 400/2.8 ? I prefer the flip lever clamps to the twisters. My Manfrotto 679B seems a little shaky, even though the support weight is 22 lbs. |
|
Tim Darby, Photographer
|
Lakeland | FL | USA | Posted: 5:52 PM on 08.05.10 |
| ->> Thank you so much for all of your helpful comments Jim, Randy, & Stephen! I will definitely look into those options! Totally agree about the monopod supporting nearly or over $10k so I may adjust my budget a bit. I don't have to worry about the height thing. I'd need a ladder to see through your viewfinder Randy :-) |
|
Jack Arent, Photographer, Assistant
|
Alameda | CA | | Posted: 11:30 PM on 08.05.10 |
->> If it loosens up in the field grab an old receipt from your back pocket, fold it a couple times and wedge it between the lock mechanism while released, re lock it and it will get you through the day.
MacGruber!!! |
|
Rob Foldy, Photographer
|
Gainesville | Fl | USA | Posted: 4:15 AM on 08.09.11 |
->> Randy brought up something that doesn't apply to everybody, but is very important to consider for those of us who it does affect: height. Your monopod HAS to be tall enough that the distance from the ground to your viewfinder equals the distance from the ground to your eye. (me = nerd) This may very from lens to lens. Mounting a 70-200 (although, why would you...wuss) is going to result in a different height then mounting a 300 or 400. I'm 6'1" and a I bought a replacement monopod that was 60". With a 300 2.8 it was about 1-2" too short. Man, that was a long day. I sold it to a short friend of mine who wanted one to mount her 70-200 (noob) and bought a taller one.
One more thing I didn't consider was the importance of the compacted size. The taller model is a 3-section instead of the more common 4-section, but is a lot larger folded up and doesn't fit in my think-tank bag. D'oh!
One day i'll learn...
Anybody want a used 63.4" monopod? |
|
Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer
|
Lexington | VA | USA | Posted: 6:22 AM on 08.09.11 |
| ->> 10+ years ago I bought an ancient Gitzo monopod on eBay. Never needed anything else. |
|
Sam Santilli, Photographer, Photo Editor
 |
Philippi | WV | USA | Posted: 8:34 AM on 08.09.11 |
->> Rob, when I was not in my 50's, I thought an 80-200 on a monopod was very weak. But now, with a piece of crap right shoulder, I can see why some people use that lense on a monopod. I will not do it, since I am still a man, and not a little baby, I would rather eat ibuprofen and have no liver or kidneys, or whatever. But I can see why some "older people" and "little babies" have to use them.
Jack..great tip, thanks! |
|
Keith Coward, Photographer
|
G.M. Andrews, Photographer
|
Mobile | AL | USA | Posted: 5:39 PM on 08.10.11 |
->> Another recommendation for the Induro carbon fiber monopods. I used a CM-24 for all of football season last year, and it held 400's with ease.
And it weighs less than one pound. |
|
Jeff Gammons, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Niceville | Fl | USA | Posted: 8:48 PM on 08.10.11 |
| ->> I just ordered the am24, the price to weight difference wasn't enough to justify the carbon version. |
|
Daniel Goncalves, Photographer
|
Jacksonville | FL | USA | Posted: 10:44 PM on 08.11.11 |
| ->> Gitzo, I agree make sure it's tall enough. My Manfrotto was about 2 inches to short and I got fed up (have gone through two different models). Bit the bullet and got a Gizo. It's tall enough where I can stand on a chair and shoot and I'm not short. It cost me what I paid for the two junk manfrotts as I bought it used. Might be an option. Buy one. Monopod that will last a lifetime(ish) and no more worrying. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|