Posted by Toby on 02/01/08 05:38

"nobody special" <msu1049321@aol.com> wrote in message
news:4147845f-0e52-499c-b9c5-b0b6a9d95ab0@j78g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
> Frankly, I think a regular monopod would be better for you if you have
> a bad back, since it will take ALL the weight off of you except while
> you move it, but the camera and monopod combo is still easy to mover
> around with. Good choice to shoot things like wedding receptions
> without taking up the space of a tripod or calling too much attention
> to yourself with a steadicam vest and arm.. . Saw a consumer monopod
> at Best Buy last week for around $50, had an acessory attachment that
> turns it into one of those hook-onto-your-belt steadiers you
> mentioned. But you can't really do a good walking shot with that, and
> it's putting the weight further in front of you, instead of onto your
> hips, so that's still going to put strain on your back thru your arms.
>
> See if the monopod will get the camera to your eye line before you buy
> it: your back and neck will still hurt if you have to squat to get
> your eye to the viewfinder. Taller monopods increase dramatically in
> price, but when you have a good one, you'll be pretty happy. You can
> get an accessory fooplate that attaches to the bottom of the monopod
> and flips down; you stand on it with one foot and the monopod and your
> legs all become as stable as a tripod, but not as heavy or bulky or
> slow to pick up and move.

This is good advice generally, but if you need flexibility in movement a
monopod on the ground is much more restrictive than a monopod in a belt. It
really depends on your needs.

Toby

[Back to original message]