WmPat Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
p.2 #11 · Small cameras/lenses on monopods at football games? | |
Pixel1970 wrote:
What am I supposed to say? All I know is when you have a monopod with a super tele, it makes following the action more difficult especially when the action moves quickly across field rather than coming at you, especially in red zone situations.
I understand back problems and arm fatigue when you're holding a pro body and a 70-200 2.8, happens to me all the time, but my question was regarding the Rebel and 28-200 4.5-5.6 plastic lens that can't weigh more than a pound combined! These people would get much better pictures sans the monopod!
Photographers come in all different sizes and strength levels, as does their equipment. Where one might say that a monopod makes shooting more difficult another might say that the monopod makes the same shooting possible. I have tried handholding my 200 f1.8/MkIIn combo for night HS football and it just doesn't work for me. A monopod makes it possible, and once you get used to it, is not really very restrictive. I still can move up and down the sideline, quickly if I have to, and go around to the end zone when I want to. I have learned how to adjust the monopod's height on the move so that I can go directly to a kneeling position if that's appropriate.
On the same topic but a different sport, I often wonder about posters who say they use big white glass like a 300 f2.8 or 400 f2.8 for basketball. I like to use shorter lenses like the 85 or the 135. To me, the bulkiness of the super-telephotos is too much to move as fast as you need to in keeping up with the fast action on the court. Even my 70-200 slows me down at times. But I have seen some fine basketball photos taken with the big glass so I think it really is a matter of personal preference.
If we all agreed, and all used the same equipment for a given sport, our photos would have less variety, and that would move them toward the boring end of the spectrum.
|