DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Monopod or Tripod
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 70, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 02/25/2013 05:14:08 AM · #1
In the next week or so I intend purchasing a CANON EOS 650D

There's a special on at the moment [$1046]and it includes 2 lenses: Canon EOS 650D
1. 18-55mm
2. 55-250mm

Do I buy a Monopod or a Tripod?

Do I buy 2 x ND filters to protect the actual lenses?

Any thoughts?

Message edited by author 2013-03-01 23:50:17.
 02/25/2013 05:24:46 AM · #2
I think opinion is divided on the use of filters for protection. I don't use them at all myself, even on my top end lenses. I tend to keep the hoods on at all times though, and, for me, that's enough protection from knocks etc. The glass on lenses is surprisingly durable and it takes quite a lot of damage to actually comprimise image quality. If you do decide on filters for protection, though, i don't think ND filters are suitable. I think you can get special protection filters, UV or polarisers and the like.

As to tripod or monopod. It entirely depends on your use. There are benefits to both.
 02/25/2013 06:43:16 AM · #3
ditto clive on the filters, unless you spend the money for the very best. if you have good glass, why would you want anything that would diminish it's capabilities?

i typically use my tripod to shoot things that aren't moving and my monopod 1) when i'm shooting things that are moving, but there's not enough light to get it sharp enough hand-held, and/or 2) when i'm using a heavy lens for an extended period of time.

enjoy your new gear!
 02/25/2013 07:15:46 AM · #4
having bought a 60d as my first dslr, i got two cheapo lenses thinking they'd cover me, a 50 and a 75-300

now i know that was a mistake, i really love landscapes and needed a wide angle.

im only mentioning because i see some awesome landscapes on your profile and you might be better served getting the body and a wide angle instead...
 02/25/2013 07:20:54 AM · #5
Originally posted by FourPointX:
having bought a 60d as my first dslr, i got two cheapo lenses thinking they'd cover me, a 50 and a 75-300

now i know that was a mistake, i really love landscapes and needed a wide angle.

im only mentioning because i see some awesome landscapes on your profile and you might be better served getting the body and a wide angle instead...


Your combination really wasn't a good one for landscapes, but the 18-55mm will give him a decent start for wide angle. Buying only a wide angle is very limiting unless he decides that landscapes is all he wants to shoot.
 02/25/2013 07:25:03 AM · #6
true....but he's already got a nice L zoom lens, so it's worth considering.

plus, after having borrowed a friend's 10-22, i discovered my true want. just thought i'd throw it out there
 02/25/2013 07:28:13 AM · #7
Originally posted by FourPointX:
true....but he's already got a nice L zoom lens, so it's worth considering.

plus, after having borrowed a friend's 10-22, i discovered my true want. just thought i'd throw it out there


He doesn't have any lenses. He says on his profile that he is using his nephew's equipment.

I agree about the wide angle though. My Sigma 10-20mm is my favourite lens.
 02/25/2013 07:34:32 AM · #8
reading IS fundamental! i looked at his lens list and pictures but failed to notice the bio that he was using a borrowed lens :)

disregard everything i've said, those are pretty good starting choices.

well don't disregard what i've said about the UWA, i fell in absolute love with it immediately

no to threadjack, but i'm tossing the idea of the buying 10-22 vs the sigma/tamron, and the more i hear people talk the more i believe there's very little dropoff from the higher priced canon...i'm leaning that way
 02/25/2013 08:11:33 AM · #9
On the question of tripod vs monopod: get a tripod, no question. Tripods are much more useful. The monopod is a good thing to get later if you do a lot of hiking or other activities where the tripod becomes a burden.
 02/25/2013 08:57:30 AM · #10
Rollei tripod can also be used as monopod.

02/25/2013 09:36:44 AM · #11
Depends on venue too. A lot of zoos wont let you take in a tripod, but monopods are allowed.
 02/25/2013 11:42:16 AM · #12
before we can recommend a tripod or a monopod we need to know what do you intend to accomplish with either or why you think you need one.

a monopod will only help you stabilize your shot when you need and extra stop or two in shutter speeds where handshake starts to take over or it will help you support you camera for longer periods if you are stationary, for instance if you were photographing a sporting event and you need to avoid the fatigue of standing there in the ready position waiting for a shot.

a tripod will allow you much longer shutter speeds and when you don't want your shot to change from shot to shot. if you want to do long exposures you need a tripod.

both have distinct purposes and neither is a replacement for the other.

as far as filters, you are looking for UV filters, however they offer no optical benefit for digital formats, only protection of the front element. ND filters or polarizers serve a purpose in the way they filter light but you wont one ALWAYS attached. a lens hood offers optical benefits and protection and i would suggest that route instead. there are occasions where you may wish to protect the front element of your lens with a UV filter, for instance a windy day on the beach or macro work where your lens is very close to the subject.
 02/25/2013 03:06:22 PM · #13
Originally posted by gcoulson:
Depends on venue too. A lot of zoos wont let you take in a tripod, but monopods are allowed.


Yeah, a lot of places ban tripods because of fire code and the fact that tripods form obstructions. Some places prohibit tripods because they want to discourage photography of quality, as well. In the first case, monopods are usually okay but always ask.
In general, always remember that you can USE a tripod like a monopod if you really want to, by only extending one leg (it's clunkier than a mono but it still works pretty well), but you can't do the opposite with a monopod. I've got both, and I definitely USE both, but the monopod is more specialized for sure.

Mike/Skip pretty summed up everything else I'd mention.
 02/25/2013 05:17:01 PM · #14
Originally posted by johnbrennan:
Do I buy a Monopod or a Tripod?

Do I buy 2 x ND filters to protect the actual lenses?


Just to add to the consensus, you will probably end up with both, but the tripod is essential, and the monopod is a luxury.

As far as lens protection, how you protect your lens depends on how you shoot. If you are out at the beach in windy conditions, you need something that can take the sandblasting without ripping the delicate film of chemicals off the front element of your lens. Mostly I do not use a filter, and count on lens hoods and proper paranoia to keep the lens safe, but I keep a UV and a polarizer in my bag.

You certainly do not want a 2X ND filter for every day protection. A good quality UV is the default filter, then specialty filters like a polarizing filter is nice to have, then look at various ND filters to increase exposure times, but the ND is a specialty tool, not suitable for your walk around lens protection.
 02/25/2013 05:55:31 PM · #15
a good tripod is essential a cheap one is mostly worthless in all but ideal conditions. keep that in mind you don't need a great one, but a $50 big box store special wont cut it.

Message edited by author 2013-02-25 17:56:25.
 02/25/2013 06:56:09 PM · #16
Originally posted by mike_311:
a good tripod is essential a cheap one is mostly worthless in all but ideal conditions. keep that in mind you don't need a great one, but a $50 big box store special wont cut it.


Very important point. Another way of looking at it is why would you trust a flimsy $50 piece of channeled aluminum to hold your $1,000+ gear sitting upon it?
 02/26/2013 04:53:24 AM · #17
Tripod:
the tripod is essential, and the monopod is a luxury. BRENNANOB
On the question of tripod vs monopod: get a tripod, no question. giantmike
a good tripod is essential a cheap one is mostly worthless mike_311
why would you trust a flimsy $50 piece of channeled aluminum to hold your $1,000+ gear sitting upon it? spiritualspatula
if you want to do long exposures you need a tripod. mike_311

From this general consensus, I have decided to purchase a tripod.
I find myself running out of light on landscape photography, furthermore, I enjoy night photography.
I am not sure what you would pay for a BALL HEAD and TRIPOD but that is another story. Maybe it's around $300 or maybe it's around $500.
I am still researching on this site at previous threads on BALL Heads and Tripods.
When I worked as a video camera operator, I got very used to a SINGLE BUBBLE, a circular bubble.
The Tripods were sturdy Millers, but I am not sure what the heads were. That was 8 years ago and the video cameras were heavy.
The equipment was provided by the production house, and I would just rock up to the gig, set up and shoot. On the other hand, wedding production houses would give me the equipment for the day and I would lug it around in my car, moving from location to location. Great long days of 12 hours or more [Brides House / Ceremony / Gardens / Reception]

Now I just want to enjoy my photography at a leisurely pace.

I really appreciate all the feedback that you have provided, firstly, on clearing up the Tripod issue, secondly, on the lens protection issue and thirdly, on the WIDE ANGLE lens issue.

Even though there is a special on for a twin lens kit 18-55 and 55-250 maybe I should invest in a 10-20 as well?

I estimate that all this will cost around $2,000.

If anyone would like to add to what they have already stated, I would be keen to hear it.

Particularly interested in your preference of WIDE ANGLE Lens.

02/26/2013 05:21:44 AM · #18
Wide Angle Lens

My Sigma 10-20mm is my favourite lens GinaRothfels
So I am seeing now that a 18-55 may not be wide enough.
FourPointX gave me some great suggestions on this.

the 18-55mm will give him a decent start for wide angle. GinaRothfels

So would I buy a Canon to match the camera or a Sigma. Is the Sigma a Tamron or are they different?

Message edited by author 2013-02-26 05:37:12.
 02/26/2013 05:35:46 AM · #19
Lens Protection Filter

unless you spend the money for the very best. if you have good glass, why would you want anything that would diminish it's capabilities? Skip

Not sure whether I completely understand the filter situation. rooum gave me some interesting facts.

BRENNANOBoffered me this advice: As far as lens protection, how you protect your lens depends on how you shoot. If you are out at the beach in windy conditions, you need something that can take the sandblasting without ripping the delicate film of chemicals off the front element of your lens. Mostly I do not use a filter, and count on lens hoods and proper paranoia to keep the lens safe, but I keep a UV and a polarizer in my bag.
02/26/2013 05:46:31 AM · #20
I am reading up on UWA UWA
 02/26/2013 05:46:33 AM · #21
The Canon 10-22 is a better lens than the Sigma optically, but the Sigma is a good lens for a better price than the Canon, and it is mountable on a full frame camera, which the Canon EF-S mounts are not. The Tamron is not as well reviewed as the Sigma, and is a bit longer at the wide end. DPR comparison is here.

You can get by with 18mm as your landscape minimum, but wider is always better.
 02/26/2013 07:00:11 AM · #22
Yes, thank you for that BrennanOBI just did not realise that they were so expensive. Pleasing to know that the Sigma is mountable on a FULL FRAME camera, in case I go that way in the future.

So what to do?
1. Stick with the yet to but 18-55
2. Go with the cheaper F4 Sigma @ $479
3. Go all out with the F3.5 for @ $600
 02/26/2013 07:13:02 AM · #23
There is no real advantage to buying everything at once. Work with 18-55 and see if bothers you not to have the extra width. It may turn out you hate zooms and want to look at weird wide primes like the Rokinon 14mm If you can put the various lenses in your hand before you make a decision.
 02/26/2013 08:08:55 AM · #24
I will offer a counter opinion on the wide angle lens: avoid it.

Unless you plan to do interior architecture or like the effects of a subject close to an ultra wide angle, that is. It will not be better for landscape. The better option for landscape is to learn how to do panoramic stitching. I now shoot many landscapes with my 50mm lens, taking 6 to 20 shots and stitching them together with Hugin. This provides me much more detail and clarity.

Panoramic s are not allowed in DPC competitions with the exception of Expert challenges, so that is the one drawback to this technique.
 02/26/2013 08:32:58 AM · #25
Hi giantmike one of the things that I learnt at film school was that wide angle lenses flatten images. Telephoto, on the other hand, not only compresses fg bg perspespective but accentuates the tallness of the mountains and the deepness of the valleys. I think that's what I learnt. Your stiching process may be a good idea.[Not for me just yet]

So if you took a series of telophoto images and stiched them, I guess you would see taller mountains and deeper valleys. My concern, however, is Vanishing Point. Are we able to see a distinctive landscape or would it appear like a mural, particularly with 6 images.

With that said, point taken

I will offer a counter opinion on the wide angle lens: avoid it. giantmike

I, more than likely, will stick with my yet to buy 18-25 and see how I go.

Great point, however.

Message edited by author 2013-02-26 09:27:56.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/03/2025 06:20:46 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/03/2025 06:20:46 PM EDT.