Request views on Nikon 18-200 lens

Chris Malcolm wrote in
:

Sheila wrote:
Stephen Bishop wrote:
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 10:06:32 -0500, Sheila
wrote:

Personally, I think VR is overrated, but it sells lenses. A good
tripod is still your best tool to ensure sharp images when shooting
slow shutter speeds. However, I realize it isn't always practical
to carry one around everywhere.

Even with a monopod my photos are much better, but I have a nice but
heavy monopod, I am getting a much lighter one for our upcoming
cruise so that I can carry it all day during touring. Of course, for
night shots I MUST have a tripod.

I used to carry a light monopod everywhere, often attached to the
camera so that I could just extend it when needed. When I started
using cameras of DSLR weight and quality I found it had two
disadvantages. The first was that when using it as a pole to hoist the
camera into a viewing position I could not reach, the bottom segment
or two weren't quite strong enough to lift the horizontally extended
weight of the camera, so I lost pole length. The second was that like
all monopods it didn't stop swivel-shake about the rotation axis of
the pole.

So now I carry a much bigger heavier monopod everywhere. The extra
strength means I can hold a DSLR horizontally out on the end with the
pole fully extended. Part of the extra weight is a small set of tripod
feet which are normally folded up inside the pole, but when deployed
stop that annoying swivel shake on very long lenses, and also allow it
to be a tripod in stable calm conditions where there's time to allow
it to stabilise, such as inside churches. So although it's a lot
heavier, it has substantially reduced those times when I say "Maybe
I'd better take a tripod just in case". Apart from the gorillapod I
always carry anyway of course :-)

Last but not least, it could probably knock out a camera thief without
being marked or dented in the slightest :-)

But what about getting tired carrying it around all day? I had also
discovered that over the decades I had aged and weakened so that I
could no longer stroll around for hours with a heavy camera in my
hands without getting tired and sometimes strained. I discovered that
a few months of weight training improved my strength to the point
where I can quite happily carry a heavy camera and monopod around for
hours in my hands without being bothered at all by the weight. I can
also carry heavier shopping bags much further which is handy.

So I would say don't buy a light monopod, buy a set of dumb bells and
get stronger :-)


I have been using an older Nikon 70-210 lens on a Nikon D50, for sports
events. Most of the pictures are taken at full extended zoom and I have
yet to see a blurred photo and I don't use a tripod. So what is all
this fuss about VR? As long as you have reasonably steady hands, there
is no problem.

In article , Jack
wrote:

I have been using an older Nikon 70-210 lens on a Nikon D50, for sports
events. Most of the pictures are taken at full extended zoom and I have
yet to see a blurred photo and I don't use a tripod. So what is all
this fuss about VR? As long as you have reasonably steady hands, there
is no problem.

for sports you probably are using a fast enough shutter speed and vr
isn't going to make much of a difference.

try it with a shutter speed around 1/30-1/60th, at 210mm.

Jack wrote:
[]
I have been using an older Nikon 70-210 lens on a Nikon D50, for
sports events. Most of the pictures are taken at full extended zoom
and I have yet to see a blurred photo and I don't use a tripod. So
what is all this fuss about VR? As long as you have reasonably
steady hands, there is no problem.

Outdoor or indoor events? But as nospam said, it you're shooting at
1/200s or faster, that should be enough on a 210mm lens. I can be using
1/50s or slower (non-sporting), and the VR helps me.

David

Chris Malcolm wrote:
Sheila wrote:
Stephen Bishop wrote:
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 10:06:32 -0500, Sheila
wrote:

Personally, I think VR is overrated, but it sells lenses. A good
tripod is still your best tool to ensure sharp images when shooting
slow shutter speeds. However, I realize it isn't always practical to
carry one around everywhere.

Even with a monopod my photos are much better, but I have a nice but
heavy monopod, I am getting a much lighter one for our upcoming cruise
so that I can carry it all day during touring. Of course, for night
shots I MUST have a tripod.

I used to carry a light monopod everywhere, often attached to the
camera so that I could just extend it when needed. When I started
using cameras of DSLR weight and quality I found it had two
disadvantages. The first was that when using it as a pole to hoist the
camera into a viewing position I could not reach, the bottom segment
or two weren't quite strong enough to lift the horizontally extended
weight of the camera, so I lost pole length. The second was that like
all monopods it didn't stop swivel-shake about the rotation axis of
the pole.

So now I carry a much bigger heavier monopod everywhere. The extra
strength means I can hold a DSLR horizontally out on the end with the
pole fully extended. Part of the extra weight is a small set of tripod
feet which are normally folded up inside the pole, but when deployed
stop that annoying swivel shake on very long lenses, and also allow it
to be a tripod in stable calm conditions where there's time to allow
it to stabilise, such as inside churches. So although it's a lot
heavier, it has substantially reduced those times when I say "Maybe
I'd better take a tripod just in case". Apart from the gorillapod I
always carry anyway of course :-)

Last but not least, it could probably knock out a camera thief without
being marked or dented in the slightest :-)

But what about getting tired carrying it around all day? I had also
discovered that over the decades I had aged and weakened so that I
could no longer stroll around for hours with a heavy camera in my
hands without getting tired and sometimes strained. I discovered that
a few months of weight training improved my strength to the point
where I can quite happily carry a heavy camera and monopod around for
hours in my hands without being bothered at all by the weight. I can
also carry heavier shopping bags much further which is handy.

So I would say don't buy a light monopod, buy a set of dumb bells and
get stronger :-)



I don't have a problem carrying a heavier camera, I keep the strap
around my neck, but I tuck the lens under my arm to take the weight off
my neck and it works pretty well.

Now, the monopod is another thing. It's actually the ball head and
quick release that is adding a lot of the weight. This week we were on
vacation and I used the monopod quite a bit, but we were driving so I
wasn't carrying it. It was the last vacation when we were climbing up a
mountain trail that it got so heavy.

Sounds like you really like your monopod that has 'tripod' extensions on
it. I had considered that option and I might take my new one back if
they don't charge a restocking fee and get one of those.

And you are right, I need to get stronger too. Also, I need to start
taking walks so I can walk longer.

--
Sheila
http://swdalton.com

Sheila wrote:
Chris Malcolm wrote:
Sheila wrote:
Stephen Bishop wrote:
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 10:06:32 -0500, Sheila
wrote:

Personally, I think VR is overrated, but it sells lenses. A good
tripod is still your best tool to ensure sharp images when shooting
slow shutter speeds. However, I realize it isn't always practical to
carry one around everywhere.

Even with a monopod my photos are much better, but I have a nice but
heavy monopod, I am getting a much lighter one for our upcoming cruise
so that I can carry it all day during touring. Of course, for night
shots I MUST have a tripod.

I used to carry a light monopod everywhere, often attached to the
camera so that I could just extend it when needed. When I started
using cameras of DSLR weight and quality I found it had two
disadvantages. The first was that when using it as a pole to hoist the
camera into a viewing position I could not reach, the bottom segment
or two weren't quite strong enough to lift the horizontally extended
weight of the camera, so I lost pole length. The second was that like
all monopods it didn't stop swivel-shake about the rotation axis of
the pole.

So now I carry a much bigger heavier monopod everywhere. The extra
strength means I can hold a DSLR horizontally out on the end with the
pole fully extended. Part of the extra weight is a small set of tripod
feet which are normally folded up inside the pole, but when deployed
stop that annoying swivel shake on very long lenses, and also allow it
to be a tripod in stable calm conditions where there's time to allow
it to stabilise, such as inside churches. So although it's a lot
heavier, it has substantially reduced those times when I say "Maybe
I'd better take a tripod just in case". Apart from the gorillapod I
always carry anyway of course :-)

Last but not least, it could probably knock out a camera thief without
being marked or dented in the slightest :-)

But what about getting tired carrying it around all day? I had also
discovered that over the decades I had aged and weakened so that I
could no longer stroll around for hours with a heavy camera in my
hands without getting tired and sometimes strained. I discovered that
a few months of weight training improved my strength to the point
where I can quite happily carry a heavy camera and monopod around for
hours in my hands without being bothered at all by the weight. I can
also carry heavier shopping bags much further which is handy.

So I would say don't buy a light monopod, buy a set of dumb bells and
get stronger :-)

I don't have a problem carrying a heavier camera, I keep the strap
around my neck, but I tuck the lens under my arm to take the weight off
my neck and it works pretty well.

Now, the monopod is another thing. It's actually the ball head and
quick release that is adding a lot of the weight.

I used to use a heavy trigger release ball head on my monopod. It was
very convenient for fast orientation, but it had an annoying
disadvantage apart from weight. I often wanted to use my camera with a
wide lens and perfectly horizontal view. It would have been very easy
to do that if I'd been able to set the ball head perfectly vertically
aligned with the monopod, since it was very easy to hold the monopod
vertical. But there was always a small but important error in the
alignment of the head.

So I tried using the monopod without the head. The advantage was how
easy it then was to get the camera perfectly horizontal, far more
accurately than I can do when just handholding the camera. And it
proved easy enough to get most of the tilts I wanted simply by tilting
the whole pod. Surprisingly the monopod actually proved overall to be
faster and more versatile when used without the head. So I now carry
and use the monopod headless, only sometimes carrying the trigger ball
head for those rare special occasions when I know I'll want it.

--
Chris Malcolm

Chris Malcolm wrote:
Sheila wrote:
Chris Malcolm wrote:
Sheila wrote:
Stephen Bishop wrote:
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 10:06:32 -0500, Sheila
wrote:
Personally, I think VR is overrated, but it sells lenses. A good
tripod is still your best tool to ensure sharp images when shooting
slow shutter speeds. However, I realize it isn't always practical to
carry one around everywhere.
Even with a monopod my photos are much better, but I have a nice but
heavy monopod, I am getting a much lighter one for our upcoming cruise
so that I can carry it all day during touring. Of course, for night
shots I MUST have a tripod.
I used to carry a light monopod everywhere, often attached to the
camera so that I could just extend it when needed. When I started
using cameras of DSLR weight and quality I found it had two
disadvantages. The first was that when using it as a pole to hoist the
camera into a viewing position I could not reach, the bottom segment
or two weren't quite strong enough to lift the horizontally extended
weight of the camera, so I lost pole length. The second was that like
all monopods it didn't stop swivel-shake about the rotation axis of
the pole.

So now I carry a much bigger heavier monopod everywhere. The extra
strength means I can hold a DSLR horizontally out on the end with the
pole fully extended. Part of the extra weight is a small set of tripod
feet which are normally folded up inside the pole, but when deployed
stop that annoying swivel shake on very long lenses, and also allow it
to be a tripod in stable calm conditions where there's time to allow
it to stabilise, such as inside churches. So although it's a lot
heavier, it has substantially reduced those times when I say "Maybe
I'd better take a tripod just in case". Apart from the gorillapod I
always carry anyway of course :-)

Last but not least, it could probably knock out a camera thief without
being marked or dented in the slightest :-)

But what about getting tired carrying it around all day? I had also
discovered that over the decades I had aged and weakened so that I
could no longer stroll around for hours with a heavy camera in my
hands without getting tired and sometimes strained. I discovered that
a few months of weight training improved my strength to the point
where I can quite happily carry a heavy camera and monopod around for
hours in my hands without being bothered at all by the weight. I can
also carry heavier shopping bags much further which is handy.

So I would say don't buy a light monopod, buy a set of dumb bells and
get stronger :-)

I don't have a problem carrying a heavier camera, I keep the strap
around my neck, but I tuck the lens under my arm to take the weight off
my neck and it works pretty well.

Now, the monopod is another thing. It's actually the ball head and
quick release that is adding a lot of the weight.

I used to use a heavy trigger release ball head on my monopod. It was
very convenient for fast orientation, but it had an annoying
disadvantage apart from weight. I often wanted to use my camera with a
wide lens and perfectly horizontal view. It would have been very easy
to do that if I'd been able to set the ball head perfectly vertically
aligned with the monopod, since it was very easy to hold the monopod
vertical. But there was always a small but important error in the
alignment of the head.

So I tried using the monopod without the head. The advantage was how
easy it then was to get the camera perfectly horizontal, far more
accurately than I can do when just handholding the camera. And it
proved easy enough to get most of the tilts I wanted simply by tilting
the whole pod. Surprisingly the monopod actually proved overall to be
faster and more versatile when used without the head. So I now carry
and use the monopod headless, only sometimes carrying the trigger ball
head for those rare special occasions when I know I'll want it.


The only problem with that for me is I would like a quick release. The
quick release on my ball head is hard to release, but easy to attach. I
don't like to carry the monopod around with the camera on it, but maybe
I could get used to it.

--
Sheila
http://swdalton.com

On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 12:51:24 -0500, Sheila wrote:

I don't have a problem carrying a heavier camera, I keep the strap
around my neck, but I tuck the lens under my arm to take the weight off
my neck and it works pretty well.

Now, the monopod is another thing. It's actually the ball head and
quick release that is adding a lot of the weight.

. . .

And you are right, I need to get stronger too. Also, I need to start
taking walks so I can walk longer.

The only problem with that for me is I would like a quick release. The
quick release on my ball head is hard to release, but easy to attach. I
don't like to carry the monopod around with the camera on it, but maybe
I could get used to it.

Here are some suggestions culled from newsgroup messages going
back several years :

[Anabella M.]
" wrote:

I have a Manfrotto 695 monopod and I need a head. What Manfrotto/Bogen
head do you recommend?

Model 486RC2 works well for me. (Manfrotto Monopod 681B and Canon 20D
combination)

YMMV, Anabella M.


[C Wright]
I have a Manfrotto monopod 676B digi and I'm wondering if a manfrotto
ballhead would fit on the screw on top of the monopod so that I can
angle the camera while using the monopod as support.

I'll add to the other replies the specific information that the Manfrotto
3232 head works very well for this purpose. It is not a true ball head but
it allows you to tilt your camera to the vertical which is probably what you
are looking for. Additionally it is light weight so the weight of the thing
is not a hindrance to the light weight that you probably got a monopod for
in the first place.
Chuck


[Randy Berbaum]
Most monopods are built for strength but light weight. The strength they
aim for is to hold a camera steady, not to support the photographer as a
walking stick. Some of the more robust and expensive models might hold up
to being used a hiking staff, but would probably not last very long.

There is a solution. Look at backpacking and outdoors suppliers for a
walking stick or staff. Some of them have a camera thread under the top
knob. This means the walking stick that is made to take the stress of that
use can also be used as a monopod. If you want a pan/tilt head on top you
can get a monopod head that will screw onto the camera thread and give you
the functions you want.

One other thing to watch is to check the maximum and minimum extension of
the stick (if it is an expandable model). The minimum will effect how
useful it will be when trying to take wildlife photos crouched behind a
short bush. And the maximum will be most useful if it allows you to stand
fully upright with the camera eyepiece to your eye. A too short monopod
for you can be a real pain (in the neck and back).


[Bob Salomon]
There is a solution. Look at backpacking and outdoors suppliers for a
walking stick or staff.

The Novoflex BBSTOCK monopod is a LEKI cross country walking stick that
can be used as a monopod or a duopod or a tripod. Can be ordered from
any camera store. Includes carbide spike tip and removable shoe shoe as
well as a removable hardwood top knob to attach the camera.


[Steve Cutchen]
Nikons tend to run an ounce or two more than the equivalent Canon in
this price range, but if you are willing to lug around a 3 lb. lens,
what is an ounce or two one way or the other?

But, since these are generic lenses, you can probably get a Canon 30D
or even a Nikon D80 and still be within your budget.

With that long lens, save a hundred bucks or so for a good
monopod/walking stick combo. Something like a Leki SIERRA AS staff
with a Bogen or Manfroto quick release head that you can put on it when
you need it to be a monopod.


[Chris Malcolm]
I wasn't sure how secure the quick disconnect plate on my monopod was,
so when I was carrying it around upside down I made sure the camera
strap was knotted short and tied to the monpod as security. So when
some passing bushy twiggery unlatched the camera from the monopod it
simply dangled safely a few inches further down on the strap :-)

Since then for rough carry I've switched to plates whose unlocking
lever has a lock :-)


[Buy_Sell]
I bought the professional series Manfrotto 055B tripod and Manfrotto
134 monopod for ten bucks each in a garage sale. Later that week, I
found the Manfrotto 488RC2 ball head for forty bucks in a local
buysell forum.

The ByThom web page is correct. I must have bought at least half a
dozen other tripods and monopods before finally getting something that
works for me, especially with the 80-200mm f2.8 lens. It is fairly
heavy.


[JT's Keeper]
I've been looking for one that is 'beefy' enough for me (6'2", somewhat
above 200Lb) and that has a tripod socket... nothing yet.

Why not try looking at monopods which can be used as walking sticks?
Some of them are extremely beefy, several times tougher (and heavier)
than any walking pole.

Alan, look at a Manfrotto 679B... This might meet your needs. It is the
model *I* bought a few years back. FWIW, the ball head I mounted to it
cost more than the monopod did.

and I have two monopods, one light weight for walking long
distances or with smaller cameras, and a beefier Manfrotto 685B with
a 486RC2 ball head for heavier loads. The 685B, which has several
innovative features was reviewed (with photos) by Michael Reichmann,
who screws Manfrotto's smaller 482 Micro-Ball Head on it when he's
out shooting with his similarly small Canon G10 :

http://luminous-landscape.com/review.../monopod.shtml

ASAAR wrote:
On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 12:51:24 -0500, Sheila wrote:

I don't have a problem carrying a heavier camera, I keep the strap
around my neck, but I tuck the lens under my arm to take the weight off
my neck and it works pretty well.

Now, the monopod is another thing. It's actually the ball head and
quick release that is adding a lot of the weight.

. . .

And you are right, I need to get stronger too. Also, I need to start
taking walks so I can walk longer.

The only problem with that for me is I would like a quick release. The
quick release on my ball head is hard to release, but easy to attach. I
don't like to carry the monopod around with the camera on it, but maybe
I could get used to it.

Here are some suggestions culled from newsgroup messages going
back several years :

[Anabella M.]
" wrote:
I have a Manfrotto 695 monopod and I need a head. What Manfrotto/Bogen
head do you recommend?
Model 486RC2 works well for me. (Manfrotto Monopod 681B and Canon 20D
combination)

YMMV, Anabella M.


[C Wright]
I have a Manfrotto monopod 676B digi and I'm wondering if a manfrotto
ballhead would fit on the screw on top of the monopod so that I can
angle the camera while using the monopod as support.
I'll add to the other replies the specific information that the Manfrotto
3232 head works very well for this purpose. It is not a true ball head but
it allows you to tilt your camera to the vertical which is probably what you
are looking for. Additionally it is light weight so the weight of the thing
is not a hindrance to the light weight that you probably got a monopod for
in the first place.
Chuck


[Randy Berbaum]
Most monopods are built for strength but light weight. The strength they
aim for is to hold a camera steady, not to support the photographer as a
walking stick. Some of the more robust and expensive models might hold up
to being used a hiking staff, but would probably not last very long.

There is a solution. Look at backpacking and outdoors suppliers for a
walking stick or staff. Some of them have a camera thread under the top
knob. This means the walking stick that is made to take the stress of that
use can also be used as a monopod. If you want a pan/tilt head on top you
can get a monopod head that will screw onto the camera thread and give you
the functions you want.

One other thing to watch is to check the maximum and minimum extension of
the stick (if it is an expandable model). The minimum will effect how
useful it will be when trying to take wildlife photos crouched behind a
short bush. And the maximum will be most useful if it allows you to stand
fully upright with the camera eyepiece to your eye. A too short monopod
for you can be a real pain (in the neck and back).


[Bob Salomon]
There is a solution. Look at backpacking and outdoors suppliers for a
walking stick or staff.
The Novoflex BBSTOCK monopod is a LEKI cross country walking stick that
can be used as a monopod or a duopod or a tripod. Can be ordered from
any camera store. Includes carbide spike tip and removable shoe shoe as
well as a removable hardwood top knob to attach the camera.


[Steve Cutchen]
Nikons tend to run an ounce or two more than the equivalent Canon in
this price range, but if you are willing to lug around a 3 lb. lens,
what is an ounce or two one way or the other?

But, since these are generic lenses, you can probably get a Canon 30D
or even a Nikon D80 and still be within your budget.
With that long lens, save a hundred bucks or so for a good
monopod/walking stick combo. Something like a Leki SIERRA AS staff
with a Bogen or Manfroto quick release head that you can put on it when
you need it to be a monopod.


[Chris Malcolm]
I wasn't sure how secure the quick disconnect plate on my monopod was,
so when I was carrying it around upside down I made sure the camera
strap was knotted short and tied to the monpod as security. So when
some passing bushy twiggery unlatched the camera from the monopod it
simply dangled safely a few inches further down on the strap :-)

Since then for rough carry I've switched to plates whose unlocking
lever has a lock :-)


[Buy_Sell]
I bought the professional series Manfrotto 055B tripod and Manfrotto
134 monopod for ten bucks each in a garage sale. Later that week, I
found the Manfrotto 488RC2 ball head for forty bucks in a local
buysell forum.

The ByThom web page is correct. I must have bought at least half a
dozen other tripods and monopods before finally getting something that
works for me, especially with the 80-200mm f2.8 lens. It is fairly
heavy.


[JT's Keeper]
I've been looking for one that is 'beefy' enough for me (6'2", somewhat
above 200Lb) and that has a tripod socket... nothing yet.
Why not try looking at monopods which can be used as walking sticks?
Some of them are extremely beefy, several times tougher (and heavier)
than any walking pole.
Alan, look at a Manfrotto 679B... This might meet your needs. It is the
model *I* bought a few years back. FWIW, the ball head I mounted to it
cost more than the monopod did.

and I have two monopods, one light weight for walking long
distances or with smaller cameras, and a beefier Manfrotto 685B with
a 486RC2 ball head for heavier loads. The 685B, which has several
innovative features was reviewed (with photos) by Michael Reichmann,
who screws Manfrotto's smaller 482 Micro-Ball Head on it when he's
out shooting with his similarly small Canon G10 :

http://luminous-landscape.com/review.../monopod.shtml


Thanks.


That sounds like one nice monopod, I checked and it should be able to
hold my D300 and lens.

--
Sheila
http://swdalton.com

JT's Keeper wrote:
Sheila wrote:

ASAAR wrote:
On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 12:51:24 -0500, Sheila wrote:

I don't have a problem carrying a heavier camera, I keep the strap
around my neck, but I tuck the lens under my arm to take the weight off
my neck and it works pretty well.

Now, the monopod is another thing. It's actually the ball head and
quick release that is adding a lot of the weight.

. . .

And you are right, I need to get stronger too. Also, I need to start
taking walks so I can walk longer.
The only problem with that for me is I would like a quick release. The
quick release on my ball head is hard to release, but easy to attach. I
don't like to carry the monopod around with the camera on it, but maybe
I could get used to it.
Here are some suggestions culled from newsgroup messages going
back several years :

[Anabella M.]
" wrote:
I have a Manfrotto 695 monopod and I need a head. What Manfrotto/Bogen
head do you recommend?
Model 486RC2 works well for me. (Manfrotto Monopod 681B and Canon 20D
combination)

YMMV, Anabella M.

[C Wright]
I have a Manfrotto monopod 676B digi and I'm wondering if a manfrotto
ballhead would fit on the screw on top of the monopod so that I can
angle the camera while using the monopod as support.
I'll add to the other replies the specific information that the Manfrotto
3232 head works very well for this purpose. It is not a true ball head
but
it allows you to tilt your camera to the vertical which is probably what
you
are looking for. Additionally it is light weight so the weight of the
thing
is not a hindrance to the light weight that you probably got a monopod for
in the first place.
Chuck

[Randy Berbaum]
Most monopods are built for strength but light weight. The strength they
aim for is to hold a camera steady, not to support the photographer as a
walking stick. Some of the more robust and expensive models might hold up
to being used a hiking staff, but would probably not last very long.

There is a solution. Look at backpacking and outdoors suppliers for a
walking stick or staff. Some of them have a camera thread under the top
knob. This means the walking stick that is made to take the stress of that
use can also be used as a monopod. If you want a pan/tilt head on top you
can get a monopod head that will screw onto the camera thread and give you
the functions you want.

One other thing to watch is to check the maximum and minimum extension of
the stick (if it is an expandable model). The minimum will effect how
useful it will be when trying to take wildlife photos crouched behind a
short bush. And the maximum will be most useful if it allows you to stand
fully upright with the camera eyepiece to your eye. A too short monopod
for you can be a real pain (in the neck and back).

[Bob Salomon]
There is a solution. Look at backpacking and outdoors suppliers for a
walking stick or staff.
The Novoflex BBSTOCK monopod is a LEKI cross country walking stick that
can be used as a monopod or a duopod or a tripod. Can be ordered from
any camera store. Includes carbide spike tip and removable shoe shoe as
well as a removable hardwood top knob to attach the camera.

[Steve Cutchen]
Nikons tend to run an ounce or two more than the equivalent Canon in
this price range, but if you are willing to lug around a 3 lb. lens,
what is an ounce or two one way or the other?

But, since these are generic lenses, you can probably get a Canon 30D
or even a Nikon D80 and still be within your budget.
With that long lens, save a hundred bucks or so for a good
monopod/walking stick combo. Something like a Leki SIERRA AS staff
with a Bogen or Manfroto quick release head that you can put on it when
you need it to be a monopod.

[Chris Malcolm]
I wasn't sure how secure the quick disconnect plate on my monopod was,
so when I was carrying it around upside down I made sure the camera
strap was knotted short and tied to the monpod as security. So when
some passing bushy twiggery unlatched the camera from the monopod it
simply dangled safely a few inches further down on the strap :-)

Since then for rough carry I've switched to plates whose unlocking
lever has a lock :-)

[Buy_Sell]
I bought the professional series Manfrotto 055B tripod and Manfrotto
134 monopod for ten bucks each in a garage sale. Later that week, I
found the Manfrotto 488RC2 ball head for forty bucks in a local
buysell forum.

The ByThom web page is correct. I must have bought at least half a
dozen other tripods and monopods before finally getting something that
works for me, especially with the 80-200mm f2.8 lens. It is fairly
heavy.

[JT's Keeper]
I've been looking for one that is 'beefy' enough for me (6'2", somewhat
above 200Lb) and that has a tripod socket... nothing yet.
Why not try looking at monopods which can be used as walking sticks?
Some of them are extremely beefy, several times tougher (and heavier)
than any walking pole.
Alan, look at a Manfrotto 679B... This might meet your needs. It is the
model *I* bought a few years back. FWIW, the ball head I mounted to it
cost more than the monopod did.
and I have two monopods, one light weight for walking long
distances or with smaller cameras, and a beefier Manfrotto 685B with
a 486RC2 ball head for heavier loads. The 685B, which has several
innovative features was reviewed (with photos) by Michael Reichmann,
who screws Manfrotto's smaller 482 Micro-Ball Head on it when he's
out shooting with his similarly small Canon G10 :

http://luminous-landscape.com/review.../monopod.shtml

Thanks.


That sounds like one nice monopod, I checked and it should be able to
hold my D300 and lens.


I use a D300 on my 679B with a 70-200 f/2.8 VR... When *I* bought the
679B it was for a D70 (with the above lens) and an SB800 Flash. I don't
have a problem hand holding heavier lenses at low shutter speeds... but
I do with the lighter lenses sigh.


- JT
Happy shopping ;-)



It's just the opposite for me, I can hold small cameras steady but not
the heavier ones.

--
Sheila
http://swdalton.com