Monopods
Posted 05/09/2007 - 14:10
Link
I've owned a monopod (one of the Manfrotto ones) for at least a decade now however I'd be surprised if it's had a dozen outings in all that time.
It's definitely an improvement on hand-holding but not by as much as I'd expected (perhaps I don't have long enough lenses) and also, IMHO, not as much as the K10D's image stabiliser. In low light conditions I usually find something to brace myself against and I think that works at least as well as a monopod as well.
What subject where you shooting? One option might be to shoot raw and deliberately underexpose the image to get a higher shutter speed - later fixing the exposure on the computer.
It's definitely an improvement on hand-holding but not by as much as I'd expected (perhaps I don't have long enough lenses) and also, IMHO, not as much as the K10D's image stabiliser. In low light conditions I usually find something to brace myself against and I think that works at least as well as a monopod as well.
What subject where you shooting? One option might be to shoot raw and deliberately underexpose the image to get a higher shutter speed - later fixing the exposure on the computer.
Posted 05/09/2007 - 14:55
Link
Quote:
I've owned a monopod (one of the Manfrotto ones) for at least a decade now however I'd be surprised if it's had a dozen outings in all that time.
It's definitely an improvement on hand-holding but not by as much as I'd expected (perhaps I don't have long enough lenses) and also, IMHO, not as much as the K10D's image stabiliser. In low light conditions I usually find something to brace myself against and I think that works at least as well as a monopod as well.
What subject where you shooting? One option might be to shoot raw and deliberately underexpose the image to get a higher shutter speed - later fixing the exposure on the computer.
In 30 years I've never felt the need to own one until now, but needs must I fear. Unfortunately I dont have SR. I'm shooting dance rehearsals in a theatre, one of the biggest opera houses in the country - no set, no lights other than 6 flourescent tubes which must be at least 60 feet above the stage which is painted black and most of the performers wear black too. This is dark, dark, dark. A tripod is too cumbersome to drag about the stalls so I thought a monopod might help. At the price I can bear it if it never sees the light of night again. I wont go down the on, or slightly off, camera flash route and its just too big for studio flashes. The company dont pay for house sparks during rehearsals so no help there!I've owned a monopod (one of the Manfrotto ones) for at least a decade now however I'd be surprised if it's had a dozen outings in all that time.
It's definitely an improvement on hand-holding but not by as much as I'd expected (perhaps I don't have long enough lenses) and also, IMHO, not as much as the K10D's image stabiliser. In low light conditions I usually find something to brace myself against and I think that works at least as well as a monopod as well.
What subject where you shooting? One option might be to shoot raw and deliberately underexpose the image to get a higher shutter speed - later fixing the exposure on the computer.
Good point about going down the RAW road, have you any idea how much underexposure you can get away with? I usually shoot RAW in fact but I decided to do this in JPEG just because of the sheer volume of pics.
This is kind of what I'm up against

Ken
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -
Posted 05/09/2007 - 15:45
Link
Quote:
Good point about going down the RAW road, have you any idea how much underexposure you can get away with? I usually shoot RAW in fact but I decided to do this in JPEG just because of the sheer volume of pics.
Depends partly on the RAW converter... the trouble is the more you have to push, the more "mud" you rake up in terms of noise. Most converters have at least 2 stops of adjustment (Silkypix has 3) and then you can always use the curves tool or levels tool in the converter to pull some more!Good point about going down the RAW road, have you any idea how much underexposure you can get away with? I usually shoot RAW in fact but I decided to do this in JPEG just because of the sheer volume of pics.
Probably the darkest thing I did was at the JazzCafe - and that was a nightmare! ISO3200, fully manual, and had to push at least 2 stops The result was noisy, but was the only way to deal with the hotspots of the lights.
A monopod is a definitely good idea in this circumstance and will probably give you a stop or two further... but if the Tv is too slow you'll see movement in the people, unless they're absolutely still.
Failing that you'll need something like the FA*85/1.4
Matt
http://www.mattmatic.co.uk
(For gallery, tips and links)
(For gallery, tips and links)
Posted 05/09/2007 - 16:57
Link
[quote="MattMatic"]
Quote:
A monopod is a definitely good idea in this circumstance and will probably give you a stop or two further... but if the Tv is too slow you'll see movement in the people, unless they're absolutely still.
I'd have thought that was definitely a consideration in this case.A monopod is a definitely good idea in this circumstance and will probably give you a stop or two further... but if the Tv is too slow you'll see movement in the people, unless they're absolutely still.
Quote:
Failing that you'll need something like the FA*85/1.4
That's what I bought mine for.
Failing that you'll need something like the FA*85/1.4
Posted 05/09/2007 - 17:05
Link
FA*85/1.4 added to wish list!
Ken
Ken
Ken
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -
Posted 05/09/2007 - 17:09
Link
Quote:
FA*85/1.4 added to wish list!
There are some cheap/fast options as well - my fastest lens is a old K-mount 55mm F1.2 Porst that cost next to nothing on Ebay. Ok it's not the sharpest wide open but it does work. An Pentax 50mm F1.2 would be nice but those tend to make serious cash 2nd hand - as does the FA* 85mm F1.4.
FA*85/1.4 added to wish list!
Posted 05/09/2007 - 20:27
Link
There is also the new DA*50-135/f2.8. That should give a little extra headroom wide open and is probably easier to get than the 85!
(And not much difference in price either )
Matt
(And not much difference in price either )
Matt
http://www.mattmatic.co.uk
(For gallery, tips and links)
(For gallery, tips and links)
Posted 05/09/2007 - 23:33
Link
Trouble is, chaps, I'm shooting with wider lenses hence my enquiry about the Sigma, for this sort of gig my ideal would be a 20mm f1.2 DA* Limited SMC Distagon were their some such thing.
Ken
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.


6724 posts
20 years
Glasgow,
Scotland
Does anyone have experience of the Sigma 30mm 1.4? I'd rather have the Pentax equivalent but the Sigma is nearly a third of the price.
http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/lenses/dclenses/30mm.htm
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -