Getting Tack Sharp Images..

Hi... I've recently been reading 'The Digital Photography Book' by Scott Kelby. One of the pieces of advice he gives for getting Tack Sharp images is to use a tripod. He goes further to say that it is more or less essential if you want to avoid blur. Now even though I can see that what he is saying must be true, a tripod would really spoil the spontineity (Spelling) of photography for me. I tend to go out with my camera in a bag with a couple of lenses and thats it! But, partly acknowledging what he says I went for a compromise and ordered a Manfrotto 679 Monopod and swivel head which I figured is easily carried and doubles as a walking stick.
I must admit I have been getting more aware of the need for sharpness in my pictures recently and whilst trying not to become obsessed I have found myself resting the camera and leaning into things more. I'm hoping that the combination of Shake reduction and the Monopod will be a good compromise... How many of you guys use a monopod instead of lugging around a tripod, and how have you found it?
Cheers

If you are taking flowers, small insects that are stationary, macro subjects, etc., then the trpod is pretty much essential. You need DOF and that means slower shutter speeds.

My monopod is bult into my hill-walking stick and is OK up to a point, but more often i use the SR and, if necessary, up the ISO until I have an appropriate shutter speed.

A ball and socket head will make any monopod more useable, but it's still too easy to wobble to and fro, but not of course up and down.

In spontaneous photography ultimate sharpness may not be the objective.

If only it was possible to keep the things that you want to photograph stationary.

I took these in my garden recently:

http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t244/chris5gd/Public/IMGP3654-1cr.jpg

http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t244/chris5gd/Public/IMGP3666.jpg

The bees were flitting around a lot, they were spending literally only a couple of seconds in each flower. I suppose with a tripod pointing at one flower I might have got one eventually, but the breeze was blowing them about quite a bit, so it would have been hit and miss even if a bee had arrived in the one I was pointing at. It was easier to follow the bees hand-held. I used the built-in flash to supplement the rather harsh daylight, and got a couple of decent captures out of the dozen or so I took.

The second one isn't bad, I think (comments gratefully received), but the first one really emphasises John's point about depth of field - the bee isn't sharp, although the buds are, and that spoils a shot that I'd otherwise be quite pleased with. The second one is better, I think, but I'd prefer it sharper still really.

I echo the comments made by Chris and coincidently also spent some time dancing around a rhodendendron trying to capture Bees at feeding time.
There are still a few shots left on the roll so not sure how they will turn out (the need for instant feedback, or is it gratification is what will eventually convert me to digital)
Conditions were reasonable but I will consider myself lucky if I get shot with both Bee and flower sharp.

with my K10D I never use a tripod unless I'm doing set up shots.


I find SR and good technique renders a tripod largely unnecessary, which is good because I've always hated them.

There does come a point where the need for depth of field means you have no option but to use a tripod, but TBH in the real world if you're using exposures that long you'll be lucky to get a shot without motion blur anyway.

I use my tripod quite a lot. I use it mostly for wildlife with the Bigma but also for landscapes. If I don't use the tripod I rest the camera on something if I can. But then I don't have SR so maybe if I had that I would use the tripod less.
I am considering getting a monopod for countryide stomping, and for when I fly to go on holiday.

Chris,

I know you wern't asking for feedback on the shots, but I think they're very nice. The overall colours are lovely and I especially like the bokeh.

Cheers

Agreed.

G

I thought bokeh was the rounding out of highlights in the out of focus background, relating to the number of aperture blades.

I can't see much evidence of that in either picture, what should I be looking for?

I use both a monopod and a tripod. I find the tripod is particularly useful for macro shots of flowers, but can be a pain to lump around. Tends to depend what mood I am in as to whether or not I get it out of the boot of the car!