Opinions on monopods?

[Chase]

I've noticed some camera shake with various photos I've taken, and I'm considering the use of a monopod. I have a tripod, but it is more difficult to use when hiking and looking for setting up quick shots.

My question is: do you think a monopod would have a noticable impact on my photos in situations like landscapes while hiking?

For those of you that use them (or have used them), what are your thoughts?

Thanks!

 

[Zerstorer]

Personally, I feel that a monopod would only be useful in marginal situations where you cannot take a handheld shot or when you have to shoot for an extended period with a heavy lens. For landscape photography, I believe that it would have little use as in situations that call for a monopod, a tripod would produce much better results and would give you the option to for long exposures as well.

 

[steely]

depending on your situation,
the monopod becomes the better choice when you are on the move constantly, when a tripod becomes to heavy and ungainly to carry, and too much taken to setup and take down, even a 500gm or less tripod has 3 legs to extend and stablise on ground before you make that first click....

Its a tradeoff.

 

[denniskee]

I have used mono-pod on a couple of occasion, find that it is only usefull when used with long lens for below reasons.

1) more stable as the weight of lens now rest directly onto the ground via the mono-pod. So even without IS, can use slower shuttle speed ie. 1/2 - 1 stop than 1/focal length. guide.
2) because mono-pod heads (manfrottos takes 2.5kg) come with only vertical panning option, (unless you mount a ball head = $$) and only long lens comes with tripod collar which enable easy change from landscape to portrait position.