Monopod for landscape

Hi all, I'm intending to get a monopod for traveling around during my holiday trip for landscape shooting (especially crucial for night landscape). I knew that most people would rather prefer tripod than monopod for landscape shooting due to its stability in order to produce a tact sharp images. However, there are few reasons for me to get a monopod for landscape shooting is that I would prefer to move around and also able to retract it with ease than the tripod. I had been shooting day landscape with hands but when come to low light, it is a handicapped. So I would like to hear some opinions for those who experiences it with both for landscape photography and other shots as well. And what are the recommendation for the monopods? I knew some of the monopod are quite short (approx. 160cm) which I don't think it will suit my height as I am around 190cm.

I have the GM5541, which is way overkill because I wanted to use it as a walking stick in sticky situations (not recommended use), but this model is lighter & cheaper (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=1389517282&pf_rd_i=507846

What I like about the Gitzo's is their interchangeable feet. The 80 mm bigfoot is incredibly stable, and have been able to get 1 sec shutter times with it (50% of the shots).

Like it so much, that almost never go hand-held: Monopod or tripod.

I have both tripods and a monopod. I use the monopod mostly for sports photography, where the action points are moving, and occasionally for landscapes if a tripod is too intrusive, for example in relatively congested streets. Nonetheless the tripod is better for landscapes, both for stability and composition. A modern tripod can be very quick to erect and traveller versions, when collapsed, are not that much larger than monopods. I can fully deploy my tripod in 45 secs and pack it away again in just over 1 min.

So provided you are not photographing in a crowded location or with lots of movement, I suggest you might wish to reconsider the use of a tripod. Or, like me, get both.

Good answers already. I use a Gitzo monopod primarily for support with long lenses and a tripod or handheld for landscape photography. The monopod does give me a couple of extra stops of latitude in low light conditions, however.

When figuring in the height of the monopod, don't forget to add the several inches you get by adding a head! That too-short monopod may turn out to be perfect with a head attached.

Michael W00d said:

Michael W00d wrote:

I have both tripods and a monopod. I use the monopod mostly for sports photography, where the action points are moving, and occasionally for landscapes if a tripod is too intrusive, for example in relatively congested streets. Nonetheless the tripod is better for landscapes, both for stability and composition. A modern tripod can be very quick to erect and traveller versions, when collapsed, are not that much larger than monopods. I can fully deploy my tripod in 45 secs and pack it away again in just over 1 min.

So provided you are not photographing in a crowded location or with lots of movement, I suggest you might wish to reconsider the use of a tripod. Or, like me, get both.

Click to expand...

I think you are right. I should go for both.

'Both' is a good choice. I use a monopod most of the time, and really like it. A monopod really won't allow you to do night landscapes, however.

And be aware that there is a 'learning curve' and some technique involved with getting maximum effectiveness from a monopod. As for the height, I don't think you'll be limited by any of the popular models. I find I rarely use one at full extension, and I'm 6'.

I get better results when I have the viewfinder about at my chin or neck level, then lean forward, allowing the monopod to support some of my weight. It is much more stable than simply standing erect behind it and allowing the monopod to support only the weight of the camera.

I have a relatively inexpensive Manfrotto carbon fiber with a tilt head. Seems to work well for me.