I've been frustrated with handholding my 180 mm macro lens with brackets/flashes/etc, so I've been thinking that a monopod would help me find a compromise between maintaining point-anywhere flexibility while improving stability. I don't think a tripod would work for bug shooting. Unfortunately, I am finding the RRS monopod rig selections confusing. There are two monopod heads, MH-01 and MH-02, and I can't see much difference between the two. Plus, there are a variety of clamp permutations to further complicate matters.

I've been a longtime satisfied user of their brackets and ballheads, but I'm finding the monopod set-up confusing. I'll probably give them a ring, but I thought I'd see if others here could share any experience with RRS monopods and the best head/clamp set-up, ideally for walkaround bug shooting as I'll be doing?

Thanks,
Brian

I am not sure why you think a tripod wouldn't work for bug photography. I always use a tripod for macro for maximum stability, even when using a flash. If you use a monopod, it certainly is more stable than handholding, but never as stable as a tripod. The better tripods go low to the ground and are light enough to maneuver relatively easily when you are used to using them. Sorry I can't answer your question about monopods, but I feel you are compromising your stability when using one. This is especially important when shooting macro. If necessary, the legs could be used like a monopod when they are all together.

SFJ

The biggest problem for stability in macro situations is stability of the rig in the direction and away from the direction of the subject resulting in focus misses. A monopod only stabilizes in the up down direction, not in the fore/aft situation that is most critical for macro. A monopod would not help you with stabilizing the rig in the most critical axis.

Interesting. I'm not sure where I'd need the rotating feature of the newer, more expensive MH-02 model. The MH-01 works fine and I prefer the lever version for a smaller packing/travel profile. If using a Gitzo monopod, I recommend adding a Series 4/5 All Terrain Shoe for added stability. This gadget lives on my monopod (GM-5561T). A HoodEye also helps by stabilizing the camera against your face. I agree that a tripod rules. OTOH, a monopod can be faster. Note: I have a post on my blog on how to brace a monopod for sharp images.

Another thought is to try a make-shift shoulder brace. Sometimes, I pull out a Giotto MH-1302-655 QR ballhead (12 oz.) and a Leica tabletop tripod (7 oz.) for this purpose. If the feet are too pokey for you, just tape on a wad of form. The bennie for you is that you could also use the set up on a rock or beanbag, etc.

Hope this helps,

Chris

This is one way to go. I suggest making sure you like shooting this way before dropping a ton on RRS. I find the $30 Manfrotto 234 RC a perfect monopod head for macro. $50 monopods are everywhere and the $400 ones are not much different.

This is a routine image I took yesterday on a tour using a monopod. After years of testing, my conclusion is using nothing, or a monopod is the way to go for a stroll in the park photographing bugs.

Freezing them and taking them into a studio and doing focus stacking and all, well, yes, a tripod would be better. But that's not how I like to shoot. In the field, it is so darn easy to hit the bush with one of the three legs of a tripod and cause the subject to flee, that I find a monopod trumps the tripod.

One way to pull accurate focus off a monopod is to shut down AF, full frame your subject manually focusing, then fine tune focus by rocking back and forth ever so slightly. As the subject gets super sharp, press the shutter at the decisive moment.

Take a bunch of shots and later you'll hopefully find several are killer sharp on your big computer screen.

This bug is what my client was photographing in the previous post above. Those bushes were crawling with all sorts of interesting critters.

Don't get me wrong. In a perfect world, a tripod with focusing rails would be great. That's how I used to shoot product in my studio way back when.

Other monopods to consider as a test are the Bower 57" for only $15.

I use the Gitzo CF GM 3551 because I love the insane length, a whopping 75". I sometimes shoot overhead and need the length. $250.

My wife, who is a complete macro junkie, uses the Manfrotto 685 B. It goes to 67", too short for my tastes. It is $145. The neat thing about it is the easy height adjusting which is done by squeezing the handle. This thing is one cool invention.

When many of us used film, shotgunning to see what happened to be captured was considered to be an amateur technique. With digital it seems to have become an "acceptable" technique, trumping a more deliberate use of skill. I understand it for birds in flight or action shots where no human I know can react to wing position, BG, shutter lag, etc. and still compose the shot. In macro, and other still shots, I still feel that with most subjects, and using care not to bump the perch, the best shots are more carefully composed with a rigid mount for the camera. Handholding, especially, is really your worst choice for macro since DOF and composition(especially avoiding cutting off part of the subject) are extremely critical. I feel that rushing to get the shot in the shortest time possible has taken away from the development of visual skills in analyzing the possibilities in a scene.
Everybody has to choose the technique and equipment they want to use but, I hate to see the "art" taken away from photography by technology! That being said, it is still better to use a monopod than nothing at all.

Joe, while you are still over there setting up your tripod I am already reviewing my card full of ten different species.

Tripods are for wimps.

I have an older Gitzo aluminum monopod I can sell, a with Manfrotto tilt head. It will have to wait until I get home from MI before I can quote a price, as I am not even sure of the model. Contact me at info@shootthelight.com if interested.

If you are using flash(es) a monopod works great for flighty subjects, and handheld is often better. Except for cool mornings many insects will not tolerate close approach and the time necessary to set-up a tripod, etc. Of course focus stacking techniques are out of the question without a tripod, etc. The Art of Compromise.

One of the world's best butterfly photog's has been on a number of trips with me. He uses a 300 f/4 with extension tubes and flash handheld most times. His wife shoots dragonflies the same way.

Chas

You mean images like the one you posted above with the antennae cut off? Is that your best image?:lol:
Glad I'm a wimp!

SFJ

My apologies to Brian Z and moderators. I was not trying to hijack post or get personal! I won't reply on this subject again, as my point was stated clearly already!

SFJ

Sir,
Almost everything has been said, I use a monopod a lot. Some locations I go to, will not allow tripods. So I use a monopod with RRS Hi capacity monopod head (pricey of course) But the head has great strength and control(elevation only) I also shoot hand held alot, gives me a lot of flexibility. What I like about the monopod setup, it allows me to rest my hands and arms, from the weight of my equipment, allowing me to photograph longer. I use a tripod, monopod and handheld, which ever is called for at the time. Your monopod just gives you another option.

Thanks all. Christy, great tip on bracing! I'll try it. I just ordered the RRS monopod with MH-01. Apparently the MH-02 is only needed if you're going from collar to no collar frequently, as Christy mentioned.

Of course I'd prefer the stability of a tripod, but as fellow bug shooters know, many butterflies, moths, etc., only spend 5 seconds in a given spot as they flit around feeding on nectar. And many of them spook easily. So, I think a monopod will make life easier.

Glad to help. BTW, another makeshift gadget that I've used as a brace is the Wimberly macro arm. As mentioned, I tape on form padding for comfort (gaffers tape). It folds up like a tinker toy and packs/weighs less than the Leica tabletop/small ballhead combo. It's not elegant, but the 2 knobs makes it easy to adjust on the fly. Whatever works

You might already have a macro arm in your closet? All you need is the elbow piece. I attach mine to my camera via a 4th Gen bi-directional camera plate. http://stores.4gdphoto.com/-strse-Canon-Accessories-cln-Camera-Plates/Categories.bok

The plate lives on my cameras, weighs nothing, is compatible with BlackRapid straps; and, the Wimberly II and 4th Gen Mongoose (for non-collared lenses), etc.

Chris

Whatever works for you. I've been doing macro, primarily butterflies, for 33 years, and have had them published in a number of butterfly and moth books, including ID guides such as the new Peterson moth field guide. All my photos are taken handheld with flash. I am constantly repositioning myself, as the butterfly or other insect changes it's position, in order to can get the angle I want. If I had to rely on a tripod or monopod I would miss the shot. I gave up on the Canon 180 mm macro because it is heavy and doesn't balance well. And, very uncomfortable to carry around all day. Instead I went with the 150 mm Sigma as a compromise between the Canon 100 mm macro and 180 mm macro. Anyway that's the way I work. As I said, whatever works for you.

Peter

" I gave up on the Canon 180 mm macro because it is heavy and doesn't balance well. And, very uncomfortable to carry around all day. Instead I went with the 150 mm Sigma as a compromise between the Canon 100 mm macro and 180 mm macro."

Peter[/quote]

Interesting. The Sigma weighs 2.6 lbs. while the Canon is 2.4 lbs. I guess it's the balance that's different?

Interesting. The Sigma weighs 2.6 lbs. while the Canon is 2.4 lbs. I guess it's the balance that's different?[/quote]

I think Peter is referring to the old version of the Sigma 150 mm which weighs just under 2 lbs. at 31.6 oz. The reason for the lighter weight is that it does not have OS (or as Canon calls it IS).

Yes, I'm referring to the non-image stabilized version. Please refer to the May 30 post in this forum by Brian Sterling: "Using macro lens for non-macro shots".

Peter

Thanks for the clarification.