Steady hold for a P&S

I've got one of those very small P&S "travel zoom" cameras (Panasonic
ZS-9) with up to 16:1 optical zoom. The big challenge in getting sharp
photos with high zoom is holding the camera steady. It doesn't help
that the camera is small and light with little weight to damp
vibrations, or that it has a strap attachment point on only one side, or
that its only viewing mechanism is the LCD display on the back that must
be held a foot or more from your eyes to see the picture. And of course
being an old guy with shaky hands is probably worst of all.

I'm thinking about buying a walking stick monopod (any suggestions?) but
I also believe that good hand holding technique makes a big difference
in cutting down the vibrations.

The best thing I've come up with so far is to hold up my left hand
limply in front of my face with the palm facing me. Instead of grasping
the camera with my left hand, I rest it on the top. By not actually
holding the camera with my fingers and thumb the small muscles in
fingers and thumb are relaxed and not involved in supporting the camera.
Then I use as little pressure as I can with the right hand to press
the shutter release. The camera is secured from falling by the neck
strap, so there won't be any serious accidents this way and I've gotten
much better results than I did when I tried to hold it tight.

Does anyone have any other suggestions?

Does anyone particularly recommend a monopod that can double as a
walking stick and fold for airline travel?

Thanks.

Alan

On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 15:19:10 -0400, Alan Meyer wrote:

I've got one of those very small P&S "travel zoom" cameras (Panasonic
ZS-9) with up to 16:1 optical zoom. The big challenge in getting sharp
photos with high zoom is holding the camera steady. It doesn't help
that the camera is small and light with little weight to damp
vibrations, or that it has a strap attachment point on only one side, or
that its only viewing mechanism is the LCD display on the back that must
be held a foot or more from your eyes to see the picture. And of course
being an old guy with shaky hands is probably worst of all.

I'm thinking about buying a walking stick monopod (any suggestions?) but
I also believe that good hand holding technique makes a big difference
in cutting down the vibrations.

The best thing I've come up with so far is to hold up my left hand
limply in front of my face with the palm facing me. Instead of grasping
the camera with my left hand, I rest it on the top. By not actually
holding the camera with my fingers and thumb the small muscles in
fingers and thumb are relaxed and not involved in supporting the camera.
Then I use as little pressure as I can with the right hand to press
the shutter release. The camera is secured from falling by the neck
strap, so there won't be any serious accidents this way and I've gotten
much better results than I did when I tried to hold it tight.

Does anyone have any other suggestions?

I use an upward pressing with the left hand and a downward
press with right hand on the shutter, seem to have very little
camera shake this way.


Does anyone particularly recommend a monopod that can double as a
walking stick and fold for airline travel?

I think some hiking sticks are made like that, the secret to using a
monopod is to use it as a third leg of a triangle, your two feet
being the other legs.

On 04/19/2013 04:11 PM, Irwell wrote:

I use an upward pressing with the left hand and a downward
press with right hand on the shutter, seem to have very little
camera shake this way.

That's an interesting idea. I'll experiment with it.

... the secret to using a
monopod is to use it as a third leg of a triangle, your two feet
being the other legs.

Makes sense. Getting a monopod isn't the end of the story. I guess
you've got to practice and experiment with it to get the best stability
you can.

Thanks.

Alan

On 2013.04.19 15:19 , Alan Meyer wrote:
I've got one of those very small P&S "travel zoom" cameras (Panasonic
ZS-9) with up to 16:1 optical zoom. The big challenge in getting sharp
photos with high zoom is holding the camera steady. It doesn't help
that the camera is small and light with little weight to damp
vibrations,

It's a myth that weight dampens vibrations for hand holding. Weight
means your muscles have to work more. And the more you have to hold the
weight away from your body, the more work you have to do to keep it
steady. Lighter is better.

or that it has a strap attachment point on only one side, or
that its only viewing mechanism is the LCD display on the back that must
be held a foot or more from your eyes to see the picture. And of course
being an old guy with shaky hands is probably worst of all.

I'm thinking about buying a walking stick monopod (any suggestions?) but
I also believe that good hand holding technique makes a big difference
in cutting down the vibrations.

Go to a sporting goods store that has lots of hiking/camping gear.

In the meantime, try to:

-increase the ISO setting
-open op the aperture

to force a higher shutter speed - esp. when the zoom is way out there.

The best thing I've come up with so far is to hold up my left hand
limply in front of my face with the palm facing me. Instead of grasping
the camera with my left hand, I rest it on the top. By not actually
holding the camera with my fingers and thumb the small muscles in
fingers and thumb are relaxed and not involved in supporting the camera.
Then I use as little pressure as I can with the right hand to press
the shutter release. The camera is secured from falling by the neck
strap, so there won't be any serious accidents this way and I've gotten
much better results than I did when I tried to hold it tight.

Does anyone have any other suggestions?

Does anyone particularly recommend a monopod that can double as a
walking stick and fold for airline travel?

They all fold (telescope) to a reasonable lengtgh, but I'm not sure
they'll allow a monopod in the cabin.

--
"There were, unfortunately, no great principles on which parties
were divided – politics became a mere struggle for office."
-Sir John A. Macdonald

On 04/19/2013 04:52 PM, Alan Browne wrote:

...
It's a myth that weight dampens vibrations for hand holding. Weight
means your muscles have to work more. And the more you have to hold the
weight away from your body, the more work you have to do to keep it
steady. Lighter is better.
...

I see your point about making the muscles work more. If the camera is
too heavy the muscles are going to twitch.

Technically, of course, I should have used the term "mass" rather than
weight. Mass really does damp vibrations. The amount of energy
required to overcome the inertia of an object with very little mass is
very little, and proportionally more for an object with a lot of mass.
Similarly, the same amount of energy put into a massive object and a
lighter object results in more rapid movement in the light object. It's
a directly inverse relationship based on E = (mv^2)/2.

This is a factor in the solidity of heavy tripods over light ones -
though it's not the only one.

But, as you point out, there is a limit to what can be gained by
increasing the weight.

....
In the meantime, try to:

-increase the ISO setting
-open op the aperture

to force a higher shutter speed - esp. when the zoom is way out there.
....

Yes. Trading off higher noise and lower depth for less camera shake can
often produce a superior image.

Thanks.

Alan

On 2013.04.19 21:10 , Alan Meyer wrote:
On 04/19/2013 04:52 PM, Alan Browne wrote:

...
It's a myth that weight dampens vibrations for hand holding. Weight
means your muscles have to work more. And the more you have to hold the
weight away from your body, the more work you have to do to keep it
steady. Lighter is better.
...

I see your point about making the muscles work more. If the camera is
too heavy the muscles are going to twitch.

Technically, of course, I should have used the term "mass" rather than
weight. Mass really does damp vibrations. The amount of energy
required to overcome the inertia of an object with very little mass is
very little, and proportionally more for an object with a lot of mass.
Similarly, the same amount of energy put into a massive object and a
lighter object results in more rapid movement in the light object. It's
a directly inverse relationship based on E = (mv^2)/2.


High School physics aside, as the mass grows you have to do work to keep
it stable. More mass, more work.

This is a factor in the solidity of heavy tripods over light ones -
though it's not the only one.

What is most needed of a tripod is stiffness.

A tripod is (normally) resting on the ground and the only advantage of
weight is tipping resistance. Ligther tripods (carbon fibre) still
dampen vibrations quite well - possibly better than metal or wood.

But, as you point out, there is a limit to what can be gained by
increasing the weight.

...
In the meantime, try to:

-increase the ISO setting
-open op the aperture

to force a higher shutter speed - esp. when the zoom is way out there.
...

Yes. Trading off higher noise and lower depth for less camera shake can
often produce a superior image.

Thanks.

Alan


--
"There were, unfortunately, no great principles on which parties
were divided – politics became a mere struggle for office."
-Sir John A. Macdonald

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

Does anyone particularly recommend a monopod that can double as a
walking stick and fold for airline travel?

They all fold (telescope) to a reasonable lengtgh, but I'm not sure
they'll allow a monopod in the cabin.

monopods and tripods are not prohibited for carry on.

however, the tsa can always change their mind on a whim, 'out of an
abundance of caution.'

On 2013-04-19 19:56:31 -0700, nospam said:

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

Does anyone particularly recommend a monopod that can double as a
walking stick and fold for airline travel?

They all fold (telescope) to a reasonable lengtgh, but I'm not sure
they'll allow a monopod in the cabin.

monopods and tripods are not prohibited for carry on.

however, the tsa can always change their mind on a whim, 'out of an
abundance of caution.'

....and ignorance in the field.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

nospam wrote:
In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

Does anyone particularly recommend a monopod that can double as a
walking stick and fold for airline travel?

They all fold (telescope) to a reasonable lengtgh, but I'm not sure
they'll allow a monopod in the cabin.

monopods and tripods are not prohibited for carry on.

however, the tsa can always change their mind on a whim, 'out of an
abundance of caution.'

I've read quite a few recent reports of airport security in some
European airports to some destinations X-raying a travel tripod or
monopod in the carry-on bag and insisting that it's a "dangerous
weapon" which must be taken out and consigned to the hold in a
separate labelled transparent bag which they supply. Which then
sometimes doesn't appear at the other end of the flight...

Some travel photogs have taken to freighting their tripod to their
destination in advance, or taking only their head and making
arrangements to borrow legs from local photogs, etc..

--
Chris Malcolm

On 04/28/2013 06:46 AM, Chris Malcolm wrote:

I've read quite a few recent reports of airport security in some
European airports to some destinations X-raying a travel tripod or
monopod in the carry-on bag and insisting that it's a "dangerous
weapon" which must be taken out and consigned to the hold in a
separate labelled transparent bag which they supply. Which then
sometimes doesn't appear at the other end of the flight...

Some travel photogs have taken to freighting their tripod to their
destination in advance, or taking only their head and making
arrangements to borrow legs from local photogs, etc..

If we're checking baggage, it looks like it would be smart to put the
monopod in the checked luggage, not the carryon.

I'll remember that.

Alan