Lacking a Handy-Dandy Pocket Tripod, what's your most favorite way to attain stability, for a long-range shot?
Nov 20, 2017 00:24:24 #
I know! ... With tripods now available small enough to fit in a large purse, why SHOULD you be lacking one? ... But, still ...
Nov 20, 2017 00:27:56 #
Chris T wrote:
I know! ... With tripods now available small enough to fit in a large purse, why SHOULD you be lacking one? ... But, still ...
What's a long range shot?
Nov 20, 2017 00:35:34 #
RichardTaylor wrote:
What's a long range shot?
Well, I suppose - anything longer than "normal" I suppose ... I dunno ... 300, 400, 500 would be longer than 100-400 ... right?
And with that Tamron 18-400 now, supposedly hand-hold-able ... I guess 500 ... non-mirror reflex, of course ....
Nov 20, 2017 01:09:55 #
RichardTaylor wrote:
What's a long range shot?
Richard ... is that 150-600 (500?) you've got, supposed to be hand-hold-able, or no?
Does it have a tripod collar on it?
Nov 20, 2017 01:22:10 #
I it's been a vey long time (if ever) since I used a long to very long lens on a tripod.
If it is a 100-400 or a 150-500 I use a monopod to help with the weight, especially on long shoots.
If the light levels are low I feel a monopod will give you about 1 stop of stabilistaion.
If the light levels are very low I will shoot wide open at very hig ISO values.
Example #1 Before sunrise - Image stabilistion was on.
If light levels are good, and the subject suits, I will shoot at very high shutter speeds.
Example #2 1/1600 @ f8 and ISO 800, F=500mm on a 1.6 crop body.
On vacations I do not take a tripod or monopod, and lenses over 300mm, so it is a combination of Image stabilistion/and or high ISO values and fast shutter speeds (if light levels permits)
Example #3 Canon 75-300mm lens (no image stabiisation) on a 1.6 crop body F=300 at 1/800 @ ISO 800 (This was shot in Cascade Canyon in Grand Teton National Park)
From personal experience, a long time ago very small tripods are a waste of time (and money), unless you are shooting with a very light camera.
If it is a 100-400 or a 150-500 I use a monopod to help with the weight, especially on long shoots.
If the light levels are low I feel a monopod will give you about 1 stop of stabilistaion.
If the light levels are very low I will shoot wide open at very hig ISO values.
Example #1 Before sunrise - Image stabilistion was on.
If light levels are good, and the subject suits, I will shoot at very high shutter speeds.
Example #2 1/1600 @ f8 and ISO 800, F=500mm on a 1.6 crop body.
On vacations I do not take a tripod or monopod, and lenses over 300mm, so it is a combination of Image stabilistion/and or high ISO values and fast shutter speeds (if light levels permits)
Example #3 Canon 75-300mm lens (no image stabiisation) on a 1.6 crop body F=300 at 1/800 @ ISO 800 (This was shot in Cascade Canyon in Grand Teton National Park)
From personal experience, a long time ago very small tripods are a waste of time (and money), unless you are shooting with a very light camera.
#1 Canon 100-400 on a 1.6 crop body ISO 3200
(Download)
#2 Sigma 150-500 and 1/1600
(Download)
#3 F=300 @ 1/800
(Download)
Nov 20, 2017 01:25:52 #
Chris T wrote:
Richard ... is that 150-600 (500?) you've got, supposed to be hand-hold-able, or no?
Does it have a tripod collar on it?
Does it have a tripod collar on it?
It's a 150-500 and it is not really hand holdable in my hands (it is big and heavy). It does have a tripod colar as well as its own carrying strap.
From another site - Weight: 1780 g (62.8 oz)
Nov 20, 2017 01:29:14 #
RichardTaylor wrote:
I it's been a vey long time (if ever) since I used... (show quote)
On the cheap tripods .... I hear ya ....
The Moose? .... " on a 1.6 crop body F=300 at 1/800 @ ISO 800 " ... think ya left something out, huh?
Nov 20, 2017 01:31:34 #
Chris T wrote:
On the cheap tripods .... I hear ya ....
The Moose? .... " on a 1.6 crop body F=300 at 1/800 @ ISO 800 " ... think ya left something out, huh?
The Moose? .... " on a 1.6 crop body F=300 at 1/800 @ ISO 800 " ... think ya left something out, huh?
f5.6 (wide open)
Nov 20, 2017 02:09:36 #
Chris T wrote:
I know! ... With tripods now available small enough to fit in a large purse, why SHOULD you be lacking one? ... But, still ...
Beanbag
Nov 20, 2017 02:14:30 #
RichardTaylor wrote:
f5.6 (wide open)
Gotya ....
Nov 20, 2017 02:22:42 #
RichardTaylor wrote:
It's a 150-500 and it is not really hand holdable in my hands (it is big and heavy). It does have a tripod colar as well as its own carrying strap.
From another site - Weight: 1780 g (62.8 oz)
From another site - Weight: 1780 g (62.8 oz)
Then it's designed to be tripod-mounted, Richard ....
Which means you really shouldn't even TRY to be hand-holding it ... certainly not when using it at its full range, anyway ...
Must be an oldie ... don't see it listed, anymore ... just the 150-600 (and the 50-500) ....
The former is probably one with a tripod collar, don't think the latter is, though ....
Probably - 400 is the max anyone should be using handheld ...
I have a Tokina 80-400 (has a tripod collar) ....
Nov 20, 2017 02:24:42 #
BHC wrote:
Beanbag
a) where do you use it, BHC?
b) what kinda beans do you put IN it?
Baked ... Lima ... Green ... ????
Nov 20, 2017 02:55:55 #
Modifier: ... Long Range - can have many connotations, can't it? .... Although the actual distance covered doesn't really change ... lenses on diff format cameras - can attain longer ranges hand-held, can't they? ... For instance - 2000mm on a Nikon Coolpix P-900 is an everyday affair, huh? ... Whilst 2000mm on a FF ... is not likely to be. 800mm on an APS-C is probably pushing it to some .... whilst double that is nothing to an MFT shooter. So, it does have very many perspectives. Perhaps, I should've thought this one out a little better. Let's just go with this, then. Suppose you HAVE a lens with a tripod collar, but don't have your tripod with you (for whatever reason) ... and you want to use your lens at its fullest reach. So, then, what's the best way for you to stabilize that lens and camera combination (and, what are they?)
Nov 20, 2017 03:15:41 #
RichardTaylor wrote:
It's a 150-500 and it is not really hand holdable in my hands (it is big and heavy). It does have a tripod colar as well as its own carrying strap.
From another site - Weight: 1780 g (62.8 oz)
From another site - Weight: 1780 g (62.8 oz)
That's a really big lens, huh, Richard ?
Almost 4 lbs!!!!!
Why, the D5 doesn't even weigh THAT much!!!!
No wonder it has its own carrying strap!!!! ... Where (and how) - is the strap attached?
Nov 20, 2017 05:15:06 #
Chris T wrote:
a) where do you use it, BHC?
b) what kinda beans do you put IN it?
Baked ... Lima ... Green ... ????
b) what kinda beans do you put IN it?
Baked ... Lima ... Green ... ????
A. Just about anywhere...... on a rock, limb, tree fork, stack of dried cow pies, window ledge, car bonnet or boot, locomotive railing, walker beam-rod, scooter tiller, etc.
B. I prefer white beans, prepackaged in ziplock bags (with a touch of organic insecticide) before being inserted into the Novoflex or VD Steadybag. I prefer the small white beans for two reasons. First, they are, being small, more adaptive to irregular surfaces. Second, the likelihood of worms is considerably less than with larger beans. I have been using similar beanbags for over fifty years, originally as a forearm rest for my long range rifles before their application to photography.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.