crazydaddio wrote:
Anyone out there use a ballhead on a monopod? Like to hear their experience.
I should think you would need to loosen the head to allow for range of motion to the point the whole setup would be squirrely. Given a monopod inherently is free to move and for me, allows me to take out a ton of camera shake while still allowing me to track moving objects. A ballhead (or wimberly for yhat matter) would be freedom upon freedom in a live motion shooting scenario.
Wimberley on a tripod? Thats the 50cal setup as another UHHer has mentioned. The military probably did a little research to come up with that....i will trust that... :-)
Anyone out there use a ballhead on a monopod? Like... (
show quote)
If it’s that loose, it’s not being used correctly. See Rongnonuo’s earlier post regarding use of the ballhead
imagemeister wrote:
For speed of use, compositional accuracies, and PROPER use of a monopod, you WILL Need a tilt head on a monopod - unless you always shot straight eyelevel and NEVER shoot down or up.
Tilt head on a monopod. Yep.
The rest of the movement you need is built into your body and arms :-)
Dont need a pan head as the monopod pans by itself (as long as it doesnt have the little tripod feet. In which case it acts more like a tripod.)
You still need to rotate your body around the monopod like you would a tripod with a pan head hence the pan is not needed for a monopod.
I would recommend the quick release for the tilt head just in case you want to quickly pop the setup off the monopod to adopt a low position or to shoot straight into the sky. Having the camera/lens screwed to the monopod is a pain for this reason.
LoneRangeFinder wrote:
If it’s that loose, it’s not being used correctly. See Rongnonuo’s earlier post regarding use of the ballhead
Saw that. I have tried to use a ball head before and found I had too much freedom and got weird horizontal issues due to the rotation around the ball...even when tightening it down to create a "fluid head" feel to it so there was some smooth resistance...probably more an issue with my technique than the concept...
Leitz wrote:
The OP's lens has a rotating tripod collar - there would be no point in flopping the whole lens/camera combination over for a vertical shot.
That is what I was just thinking. That is one of the things I appreciate about a lens with a foot.
Some tilt-pan heads would be good for video. Another option would be a gimbal head, which is made to track moving objects. I use one for avian photography. With the right amount of tightening you can swivel easily laterally of vertically. I use mine with a 200-500 zoom. I seldom lock the tripod in any position, except when I wish to take my hands off the camera.
Gene51
Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
Cookie223 wrote:
I have learned more from you folks than I would have if I just read all the manuals out there. As far I'm concerned nothing beats hands on experience.
I have a Canon 7d MK II. The largest lens I'll be using is a Tamron 150-600 G2. I mainly shoot my granddaughter playing softball and not much else (So far). I also have a Sirui P-204 SR monopod. So here is my question: Since this monopod has the ability to tilt, and swivel would I need a head for it? I'm retiring in February and just want to get what I need before then.
I'm trying to keep the cost to around $125 max and the selection is huge.
Thanks for your help.
I have learned more from you folks than I would ha... (
show quote)
Try shooting without a support other than your arms - the stabilization in that lens is pretty awesome. Besides, leaving the tripod/monopod home makes the whole process easier.
I often shoot with a 150-600 Sigma Sport hand-held. And the stabilization is not as good as the Tamron G2. But if you are shooting sports, you are likely to already be using faster shutter speeds in which case stabilization would be less effective.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.