Monopod Question

[Huck]

So I am looking for an entry level monopod that wont break the bank for me. I came across this one after reading some reviews and a friend of mine uses.

Manfrotto 679B Three Section Monopod (Black) 679B B&H Photo

Along with this head:

Manfrotto 234 Swivel Tilt Monopod Head - Supports 5.5 lbs 234

So my question is, the monopod itself supports 22lbs, where the head supports only 5.5 lbs. I am shooting with a Canon 20D and my soon to be 70-200 which I am sure will support it just fine, but I am also looking at renting a 300/400 F2.8 lens next year for some stuff. Will this head be okay for this, or will I need something stronger? Is it the total support weight of the head and monopod count or is it just what the head supports?

[SCone]

The monopod supports everything, the head only supports the camera & lens. What's the total weight of your rig?

[Jim Boyd]

Thomas,

How are you going to use this setup?

[Huck]

I am shooting most sports. So that is what I was looking for this to use. As for the total weight of my setup, I don't know. The 70-200 hasn't come in yet, and I have never rented a 300 or 400 F2.8 but I know that a monopod is a must for that. Perhaps I should invest in a stronger head. Might be better to buy more then needed for now instead of buying the head twice.

[SCone]

20D is around 1.5-2lbs
70-200 f2.8 about 3lbs
300 f2.8 about 6lbs

If the head only handles 5.5lbs, you'd be pushing it's limits

And a 400mm.... f4 around 5lbs, f2.8..... about 12lbs

[shnitz]

Thomas, I used this same monopod shooting sports, with a 70-200 f/2.8 and a 300 f/4. If I were you, I'd just skip the head and shoot straight from the monopod. All the lenses that you're planning on using have tripod rings like mine did, so you'll be able to adjust orientation from portrait to landscape. You can also tilt the monopod forward or backward to get framing; you aren't required to keep it perfectly orthogonal to the ground. You won't need more than a few degrees.

[Huck]

Originally Posted by shnitz

Thomas, I used this same monopod shooting sports, with a 70-200 f/2.8 and a 300 f/4. If I were you, I'd just skip the head and shoot straight from the monopod. All the lenses that you're planning on using have tripod rings like mine did, so you'll be able to adjust orientation from portrait to landscape.

Good point. I did not even think about the tripod rings to move the camera from portrait to landscape. That clears up a lot for me thanks.

[Jim Boyd]

I agree with Ariel about using the monopod without the head. I doubt you would have a problem with the 70-200. The head might slip when you're using the 300 or 400 and you sling the monopod over your shoulder.

That head/monopod combination can be used when you need to get a high shot over a group of people. You tilt the head slightly, and extend the monopod with a remote shutter switch. You need a light weight lens to do that - usually a fisheye. Other than that use, I don't think I'd recommend it.

[Flores]

I use a small gimbal head with a monopod when doing birds, but never needed it for sports. I even tried it once at the race track, and can't honestly say it made much of a difference.

save the cash on the head for now.

[Jim Boyd]

Thomas,

One more thing. If you attach that head to your monopod, apply some blue (semi-permanent) locktite to the threads.

[Huck]

Thanks for the replies. I am new to the monopods and heads world. My next adventure is going to be a good tripod, but I do not really need one for now. The one I have now serves me well, I just prob. should buy a plate with a quick release lever on it as all I have know screws into the camera and is a pain to take on and off. Its old, but metal and heavy duty, so I keep it around. Starting to get into things now that requires me to have a tripod/monpod so I am learning as I go.

[Dobick]

just an FYI, at 6 lb, the 300 f/2.8 is as easy to hold and shoot by hand as a good rifle.

The 400 f/2.8 can get a bit heavy though, so you will want a monopod when you use that.

[shnitz]

Originally Posted by Dobick

just an FYI, at 6 lb, the 300 f/2.8 is as easy to hold and shoot by hand as a good rifle.

The 400 f/2.8 can get a bit heavy though, so you will want a monopod when you use that.

Yeah, but for sports, even holding the 70-200 can get iffy. Once the 4th quarter of a football or basketball game is rolling around, or the last 1/4 of a soccer game, your framing capabilities start to suffer a bit. I've seen exactly one man that could effectively use a 300mm f/2.8 all game. I went afterwards to talk to him, and of course he is an ex-Recon sniper.

Plus, when shooting from a monopod I was able to track motion and frame much more precisely and quickly, because all my energy was going towards that instead of having to hold the lens. One hand on the camera, and the other wrapped around the zoom ring, to push the front element into position and zoom in and out. With the 300mm being such a small angle of view on an APS-C camera (I used a 10D), that 5.5 degree angle of view was much easier to paint on my subject being supported.

[Dobick]

I as well as Tom handhold the 300 for an entire football game almost always. Tom seems to do fine.

I always found that the monopod limited my tracking abilities as well as the ability to quickly change from the QB to a downfield reciever in time to acquire the critical shots.

[kenw]

I think we are overanalyzing this a bit. A decent monopod can be had for $20-30 and at that price, you buy one, try it awhile and then either upgrade it if necessary (I use my $10 version often and it works just fine) or sell it if you find you don't need it.