A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

String tripod



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 22nd 18, 02:57 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Johnny[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default String tripod

I have a basic digital compact and use a string tripod to avoid camera
shake.

I usually loop the string round the back of my neck but most advice sites
suggest standing on the string.

Is one of these better than the other for reducing shake?

  #2  
Old July 22nd 18, 09:08 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Scott Schuckert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 368
Default String tripod

In article , Johnny
wrote:

I have a basic digital compact and use a string tripod to avoid camera
shake.

I usually loop the string round the back of my neck but most advice sites
suggest standing on the string.

Is one of these better than the other for reducing shake?


Don't know about better, but what used to be called chain-pods were
once manufactured commercially. I carried one for years; you'd stand on
one end and pull up on the camera. Chain being more rigid than string,
and the floor being steadier than your neck.

Once could also visualize a fantastic dual-purpose device that would
steady the camera against the neck, AND suspend the camera when your
hands are otherwise occupied. Must check with the patent office...
  #3  
Old July 22nd 18, 10:52 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Ken Hart[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 569
Default String tripod

On 07/22/2018 04:08 PM, Scott Schuckert wrote:
In article , Johnny
wrote:

I have a basic digital compact and use a string tripod to avoid camera
shake.

I usually loop the string round the back of my neck but most advice sites
suggest standing on the string.

Is one of these better than the other for reducing shake?


Don't know about better, but what used to be called chain-pods were
once manufactured commercially. I carried one for years; you'd stand on
one end and pull up on the camera. Chain being more rigid than string,
and the floor being steadier than your neck.

Once could also visualize a fantastic dual-purpose device that would
steady the camera against the neck, AND suspend the camera when your
hands are otherwise occupied. Must check with the patent office...


With an SLR, you would have the camera directly in front of your eye.
Wrapping the string around your neck would not likely be as helpful as
standing on the end of the string.

But if you are holding the camera away from your eye and looking at the
screen on the back of the camera, then looping the string around your
neck may work.

Try both methods and pick the one that works best for you.

As for that device that holds the camera hands-free: maybe you could
call it a "SteadiCam".

--
Ken Hart

  #4  
Old July 22nd 18, 11:28 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default String tripod

On Jul 22, 2018, Ken Hart wrote
(in article ):

On 07/22/2018 04:08 PM, Scott Schuckert wrote:
In , Johnny
wrote:

I have a basic digital compact and use a string tripod to avoid camera
shake.

I usually loop the string round the back of my neck but most advice sites
suggest standing on the string.

Is one of these better than the other for reducing shake?


Don't know about better, but what used to be called chain-pods were
once manufactured commercially. I carried one for years; you'd stand on
one end and pull up on the camera. Chain being more rigid than string,
and the floor being steadier than your neck.

Once could also visualize a fantastic dual-purpose device that would
steady the camera against the neck, AND suspend the camera when your
hands are otherwise occupied. Must check with the patent office...


With an SLR, you would have the camera directly in front of your eye.
Wrapping the string around your neck would not likely be as helpful as
standing on the end of the string.

But if you are holding the camera away from your eye and looking at the
screen on the back of the camera, then looping the string around your
neck may work.

Try both methods and pick the one that works best for you.

As for that device that holds the camera hands-free: maybe you could call it a "SteadiCam".


I alway thought the best device to hold a camera hands-free was/is called a
tripod.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

  #5  
Old July 23rd 18, 08:59 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 51
Default String tripod

On Sunday, July 22, 2018 at 9:57:20 AM UTC-4, Johnny wrote:
I have a basic digital compact and use a string tripod to avoid camera
shake.

I usually loop the string round the back of my neck but most advice sites
suggest standing on the string.

Is one of these better than the other for reducing shake?


Hi,

For stationary subjects, use the selftimer and hold the camera with 2 hands.

Mort Linder
  #6  
Old July 23rd 18, 09:54 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
newshound
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 458
Default String tripod

On 22/07/2018 14:57, Johnny wrote:
I have a basic digital compact and use a string tripod to avoid camera
shake.

I usually loop the string round the back of my neck but most advice
sites suggest standing on the string.

Is one of these better than the other for reducing shake?


It's notable how many "sports" pros who need mobility and long (heavy)
lenses simply go for a monopod. I've never used one myself, but think
about getting one from time to time. No reason it should not work fine
on a compact (especially a superzoom) as long as it is not too heavy,
and is quick and easy to "telescope".
  #7  
Old July 23rd 18, 10:41 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default String tripod

On Jul 23, 2018, newshound wrote
(in ) :

On 22/07/2018 14:57, Johnny wrote:
I have a basic digital compact and use a string tripod to avoid camera
shake.

I usually loop the string round the back of my neck but most advice
sites suggest standing on the string.

Is one of these better than the other for reducing shake?


It's notable how many "sports" pros who need mobility and long (heavy)
lenses simply go for a monopod. I've never used one myself, but think
about getting one from time to time. No reason it should not work fine
on a compact (especially a superzoom) as long as it is not too heavy,
and is quick and easy to "telescope".


A monopod works great for sports photography where support is needed for
heavy long lenses, and the lens/camera is mainly used for lateral/horizontal
panning. It is not as useful when it comes to vertical panning, and can be
quite awkward especially if the target is at a higher, or lower elevation
from the horizontal line of sight. With typical lateral/horizontal panning
the pivot point is the grounded foot of the monopod, and panning to track the
action on a sports field, track, or arena becomes natural and simple. Add to
that, panning motion imparts quite a lot of inertial stabilization, and is a
reason to consider not having OIS/VR turned on with lenses which do not
compensate for lateral panning (some do). Most importantly, since the subject
is in motion, IBIS, and most basic OIS/VR is not going to help, fast glass,
and higher ISO will.

IBIS and/or OIS/VR is only going to be helpful for handheld shooting, and
even there shooting technique is still important.

A monopod is a compromise which provides the sports photographer some
stability for heavy lenses along with a degree of mobility. However, the
monopod is not going to provide the same degree of stabilization as a good
tripod, especially if used with a gimbal head (a much better choice for
airshows, or birds in flight). I have seen some photographers using a monopod
with a gimbal head at airshows especially if they are using heavy lenses.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

  #8  
Old July 24th 18, 12:13 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Tony Cooper[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 188
Default String tripod

On Mon, 23 Jul 2018 21:54:57 +0100, newshound
wrote:

On 22/07/2018 14:57, Johnny wrote:
I have a basic digital compact and use a string tripod to avoid camera
shake.

I usually loop the string round the back of my neck but most advice
sites suggest standing on the string.

Is one of these better than the other for reducing shake?


It's notable how many "sports" pros who need mobility and long (heavy)
lenses simply go for a monopod. I've never used one myself, but think
about getting one from time to time. No reason it should not work fine
on a compact (especially a superzoom) as long as it is not too heavy,
and is quick and easy to "telescope".


This guy was photographing a polo match from behind one of the goals.
A polo field is 275meter/300yards in length, so a long lens is
required.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Polo-Cama...3-13-23-X3.jpg


This lady was also shooting from behind the goal:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Polo-Cama...3-13-22-X2.jpg

So was I, but with just a 200m lens I could only catch what was
happening at my end of the field.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Polo-Cama...3-13-30-X2.jpg

Those are golf carts in the background. The match was in The
Villages, a large Florida retirement community.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
  #9  
Old July 24th 18, 12:42 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Davoud
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 639
Default String tripod

newshound:
It's notable how many "sports" pros who need mobility and long (heavy)
lenses simply go for a monopod. I've never used one myself, but think
about getting one from time to time. No reason it should not work fine
on a compact (especially a superzoom) as long as it is not too heavy,
and is quick and easy to "telescope".


Q. How good is a monopod?

A. One third as good as a tripod.

A monopod is useful for holding the weight of a camera, but it does
nothing to steady a camera. So it's good for providing relief to sports
photographers and others who use heavy lenses, so long as they have
steady hands.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
  #10  
Old July 24th 18, 02:02 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default String tripod

On Mon, 23 Jul 2018 21:54:57 +0100, newshound
wrote:

On 22/07/2018 14:57, Johnny wrote:
I have a basic digital compact and use a string tripod to avoid camera
shake.

I usually loop the string round the back of my neck but most advice
sites suggest standing on the string.

Is one of these better than the other for reducing shake?


It's notable how many "sports" pros who need mobility and long (heavy)
lenses simply go for a monopod. I've never used one myself, but think
about getting one from time to time. No reason it should not work fine
on a compact (especially a superzoom) as long as it is not too heavy,
and is quick and easy to "telescope".


I have used a monopod a number of times but I find it most useful for
getting the camera into positions which I could not conveniently
manage without it:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xi1bjcoa1v...4265a.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2hcv4dos88...7_DxO.jpg?dl=0

--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Add just this one string to Agent's Kill-Filter and 98% of all troll posts and replies are gone .... HandyAndy Digital Photography 2 August 23rd 04 06:34 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.