# Next thing in Monopods



## CanineCandidsByL (Feb 29, 2012)

I'm looking at upgrading from a great 15 year old aluminum monopod, and I have two questions.

1. A while back, carbon fiber became the next great thing, offering advantages in weight, strength, and/or rigidity. Does anyone see something on the horizon that would be as major of a leap as carbon fiber or do we have at least another 5/10 years of continuing minor improvements?

2. I saw a device a while back that was basicly a thing that attaches to the bottom of the camera via the tripod mount. It contains a string/wire and that wire has a little paddle on it. The idea was you step on the paddle, pull the camera up to the desired height, lock off the spool of string/wire, and you have something that gives similar stability to a monopod in an even more portable form. Can anyone point me to one of these things? And if you happen to have some experience with one...what was your opinion?

Thanks!


----------



## Del (Feb 29, 2012)

Been using the Manfrotto 561BHDV-1 monopod now for 3-4 months and I have to say that it is amazing, has 3 little feet at the bottom so will stand by itself (not recommended though with camera locked on), but it extends beyond 2m (or 6'6") and I've used it to take shots over a fence where I cannot see through the viewfinder, so use the timer button instead...and it works. The only downside is that it is quite bulky :-\


----------



## Positron (Feb 29, 2012)

I think it will be a while before Aerogels are a viable material to make monopods out of.  You should be safe with carbon fiber for now.

I think the thing you're talking about is this. I have no experience using one or even seeing one in use.


----------



## candyman (Feb 29, 2012)

Positron said:


> I think the thing you're talking about is this. I have no experience using one or even seeing one in use.




And a review here


----------



## Astro (Feb 29, 2012)

CanineCandidsByL said:


> It contains a string/wire and that wire has a little paddle on it. The idea was you step on the paddle, pull the camera up to the desired height, lock off the spool of string/wire, and you have something that gives similar stability to a monopod in an even more portable form. Can anyone point me to one of these things? And if you happen to have some experience with one...what was your opinion?



my opinion in one word: crap

the idea is maybe not completely stupid.. but it´s not working out in real life.


----------



## awinphoto (Feb 29, 2012)

I've been using an old aluminum manfrotto monopod I bought on ebay new 9 years ago for $40. It's light, strong, a workhorse... It's been perfect for me albeit the rubber footer is well worn... I cant see how it could be any more lighter with carbon fiber or any other thing without it being too flimsy and unsecure.


----------



## Seanlucky (Feb 29, 2012)

If you really want one of those wire devices, don't spend $30 on one... You can make one out of a screw, piece of string, and a washer.


----------



## muldereric (Feb 29, 2012)

CanineCandidsByL said:


> It contains a string/wire and that wire has a little paddle on it. The idea was you step on the paddle, pull the camera up to the desired height, lock off the spool of string/wire, and you have something that gives similar stability to a monopod in an even more portable form. Can anyone point me to one of these things? And if you happen to have some experience with one...what was your opinion?



If you ask me it is indeed quite useless. If you want to steady your equipment while not using a monopod, tripod or any other form of mount, it is important that you find a pose which enables you to relax your muscles. In other words, and I am speaking as a marksman for which the same rules apply, using your muscles to apply force (you have to keep the wire under tention) will only make you even more "unstable". And the longer it takes before you take the picture the more unstable you will be. Much better of with a monopod or tripod. It might not be as small as that "thing", but much more reliable! Carbon is a nice upgrade if you can afford it, else just take aluminum. Personally I think alu is just slighty more stable, but the downside is that it's more heavy ofcoarse!


----------



## briansquibb (Feb 29, 2012)

With a large white on a gimbal I use my tripod as a bipod - more stable than a monopod as it can't move left/right


----------



## CanineCandidsByL (Feb 29, 2012)

Seanlucky said:


> If you really want one of those wire devices, don't spend $30 on one... You can make one out of a screw, piece of string, and a washer.



Thanks for that. I did that with my old Canon A1 25 years ago and completely forgot about it. I think its time to check the work shop for bits and bobs and see if I still like the idea before spending any real money.


----------



## tt (Feb 29, 2012)

Collecting three into a triangle formation, with one base plate, to provide stability in 3 dimensions?


----------



## CanineCandidsByL (Feb 29, 2012)

If you ask me it is indeed quite useless. If you want to steady your equipment while not using a monopod, tripod or any other form of mount, it is important that you find a pose which enables you to relax your muscles. In other words, and I am speaking as a marksman for which the same rules apply, using your muscles to apply force (you have to keep the wire under tention) will only make you even more "unstable". And the longer it takes before you take the picture the more unstable you will be. Much better of with a monopod or tripod. It might not be as small as that "thing", but much more reliable! Carbon is a nice upgrade if you can afford it, else just take aluminum. Personally I think alu is just slighty more stable, but the downside is that it's more heavy ofcoarse!
[/quote]

I just can't totally agree with you on the sting, although you may have noticed I'm going the home made, cheap option to try it out again before I consider something commercial. The reason I disagree, partially, is that I find heavier gear to be more stable...i.e. a light weight camera body with a small lens will shake in my hands more than a heavier body with battery grip and heavier weight lens. There is limit though, and beyond that you will induce shake. However at long as you can put some tension against the string, your ability to move is limited to an arc, like a chunk of a sphere, which is exactly the same as a monopod. Except with a monopod, if verical, you only need to apply enough force to keep its position, which with the string you need to apply slightly more force than is necessary to just hold the camera.

As several people pointed out, a good three point brace, such as a camera strap running around both your elbows (3rd point is your hands/camera), works very well, but obviously is limited to your ability to not sway. Its also based on the idea of continous light pressure to maintain the tension in the system, but not so much you exhaust yourself.


----------



## BobSanderson (Feb 29, 2012)

I travel with a Bogen 3216 with a Manfrotto 852 and have found the combination, although old and not super light, to be very stable and practical. Perhaps as important, the combo mimics a weapon which I believe makes my trips abroad safer in certain circumstances. I have noticed on many occasions particularly that young tough guys taking a special interest in this black stick as they pass by.


----------



## Dianoda (Feb 29, 2012)

tt said:


> Collecting three into a triangle formation, with one base plate, to provide stability in 3 dimensions?



Genius. ;D


----------



## crasher7 (Feb 29, 2012)

I am a firm believer in using CF in particular situations. However when it comes to areas susceptible to dents, dings or other damage I will stick with Al. 20+ years in road cycling taught me this. I use an Induro AT313 tripod. I love it and feel it will stand up to abuse and keep going. I'd rather deal with a dent than a splinter for a little bit more weight.


----------



## flanniganj (Feb 29, 2012)

I'm waiting for the graphene monopod myself.  Pretty amazing stuff. Hardest substance known to science right now, and it doesn't take a million years to create like a diamond. Not sure how this would be helpful in a photography sense, but when I hear you could lay out a sheet of it, put a pencil on top point-down and then have an elephant stand on top of the pencil without puncturing the graphene, I feel like everything should be made out of it! (that or whatever the pencil is made out of that could support the weight of an elephant


----------

