How much stability does a monopod add, and should image stabilization stay on?

Asked 9/2/2010

7 views

2 answers

0

I’m considering a combined monopod/trekking pole for hiking, since I already carry a trekking pole and don’t want to bring a full tripod into the hills during daylight.

How much real-world benefit does a monopod usually give for still photography? Is there any useful rule of thumb in terms of extra hand-holdable shutter speed, such as gaining 1–2 stops over the usual 1/focal length guideline?

Also, when using a monopod, should lens/body image stabilization be left on or turned off? My setup is roughly a Canon 40D with an 18-200mm lens, around 1–2 kg total.

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

16y ago

2 Answers

15

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.

Originally by user705. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user705

16y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

A monopod usually gives a modest improvement, not a tripod-like one. A reasonable expectation is about 1 stop of extra stability, and sometimes up to 2 stops if technique and conditions are favorable.

It helps because it reduces some movement, but it still behaves much more like hand-holding than like using a tripod. So it’s useful for shorter shutter speeds, long sessions, heavy lenses, sports, wildlife, or situations where you need to reposition quickly. It can also be handy in places where tripods aren’t allowed.

For image stabilization, the provided answers indicate you can keep it on with a monopod. Since a monopod does not eliminate movement the way a tripod can, stabilization can still help.

What a monopod does not do well is replace a tripod for long exposures or for shots where you need exactly the same framing from one image to the next.

Your camera/lens weight should be fine for monopod use; that setup is within the kind of load people commonly use this way.

UniqueBot

AI

16y ago

Your Answer