p.1 #1 · Using a trekking pole with a camera mount instead of a tripod?
I've got a trip to Colorado coming up in about 6 weeks and was going to get a carbon fiber tripod that would work for normal use and still be relatively light for hiking, but even the 3lbs that and the ballhead will add have me thinking about other ideas.
I've got bad ankles so i've been considering going with lighter shoes and using trekking poles, all I ever hear is how much better everything is when using trekking poles and my ankles would appreciate the help. I've noticed the pairs of poles don't have camera mounts, but I could possibly buy 2 staffs that have a camera mount in them and end up with a pair anyways.
I know a monopod isn't as steady as a tripod, but I was thinking it'd be a whole lot better than nothing. My budget for gear for the trip isn't too high so the $450 I was going to spend on a ballhead and tripod could get me a nice pair of poles that would help me and my photographs out instead of being a lot of weight on a pack while hiking.
Anyone else here using trekking poles with a mount on them instead of bringing a tripod along?
p.1 #2 · Using a trekking pole with a camera mount instead of a tripod?
I've explored adapting trekking poles to form a tripod and even tried out a prototype my more creative brother worked up. I came to the conclusion that such an arrangement inevitably compromise the values needed in the trekking poles, the tripod, or both. In other words, there isn't a good way to make trekking poles function as a tripod that was worth the extra hassle and/or weight. At best you end up with a rickety, non-adjustable stand that is not very versatile and not very stable. I've learned that if I want a tripod in the field, I have to carry a tripod.
That's not to say that you couldn't make use of a pole as a serviceable monopod, if a monopod is adequate for your needs. It wasn't for mine. However, I wouldn't suggest investing in a good ballhead for the purpose. Rather, a simple but reasonable useful camera mount such as an UltraPod or Gorillapod would make more sense.
p.1 #4 · Using a trekking pole with a camera mount instead of a tripod?
That's another option i've considered, just getting a tabletop tripod like the Manfrotto 209 and using a nice ballhead that I planned on using later when I can afford the carbon fiber tripod, but then I thought about how i'd have to take the ballhead off and keep switching them, which would be a paid.
This little guy has a low weight rating but half the reviews are from DSLR users with heavy lenses! It looks like this might be a viable option and that I should get regular trekking poles?
I hadn't heard of the ultrapod before, it's even lighter and more compact than what i'd been considering. I think i'll end up choosing that over the other options really.
I don't know if i'd really stop to unpack a tripod in the middle of a hike honestly, and carrying it over my shoulder for 3-4 miles wouldn't happen, so a mini one I can easily pull out is probably best. I'm just hoping the brush isn't too tall when I stop to shoot.
Do any of you guys who carry your tripods on your shoulders also use trekking poles? I'm guessing you'd end up putting the poles away for short distances with the tripod on your shoulder.
These are "ultralite" and neither are as durable as something you would buy from REI. I've had the Titanium Goat poles for a year and a half with no issues. Not perfect, but as you say, the monopod mount is better than nothing.
p.1 #6 · Using a trekking pole with a camera mount instead of a tripod?
Hmm, I was considering getting the shock absorbing poles though, they may be heavier but they'd help my bad ankles and not bad yet but why ruin them now knees more than regular poles.
Do you guys find shock absorbing poles to be worth it?
p.1 #7 · Using a trekking pole with a camera mount instead of a tripod?
Jeremy K wrote:
Do you guys find shock absorbing poles to be worth it?
I don't. I have a pair sitting in my closet that I haven't used since I got the non-shock poles. I didn't like the squishy feel from the springs and there really is no "shock" to be absorbed while using trekking poles unless for some reason you are jamming them into the ground.
If you were carrying a huge load all day on a steep downhill, the shock absorbers might make it slightly less miserable. But only for your arms. The absorbers have no impact on ankle and knee comfort since they are already compressed by the time your foot hits the ground.
p.1 #8 · Using a trekking pole with a camera mount instead of a tripod?
I agree with what Lmiller said -- don't bother with shock absorbing poles. They have greater swing weight (which makes your arms work more) and are of little value except on downhills (and of questionable value then).
I always carry a tripod (attached to the back or side of my pack) and I use trekking poles. I wouldn't leave home without either one anymore. But if your hiking and shooting style doesn't anticipate wanting to stop and set up a tripod, then I wouldn't encourage you to carry one. Using a trekking pole with an ultrapod or even just a 1/4-20 screw would give you some stabilization with little additional weight. If in the future you find situations where you wished you had a tripod, or want to start taking pictures where a tripod is essential, the you will have good reason to figure out the best combination of weight/stability/versatility/durability/etc. that best suits you hiking and shooting style.
For its purpose, I think you'll like the Ultrapod. It can be carried strapped to your trekking pole, ready to use, and can either stand on it own or be strapped to any appropriate object, which would be difficult with a ball head. Gorillapods also work, but I think the Ultrapod is preferable for backpacking.
p.1 #9 · Using a trekking pole with a camera mount instead of a tripod?
That's a great point! I didn't even think about strapping the ultra pod to the trekking pole, then I have a monopod no matter which trekking poles I go with.
I've also read up on the regular vs stabilizing debate and you guys echo what everyone else says. I found the Black Diamond Trail Back trekking poles for only $63 on amazon and they're normally $80. A major review said they were nearly as good as $120-140 poles so at $63 they're a steal.
I could definitely see myself using a tripod, and if I get a good and tall tripod that I don't have to hunch over so much to use, I would see myself using it a lot more. Right now I could pull off a tripod, but then I wouldn't be able to get a pair of trekking poles and several other things that will add up to making the hike a lot easier on myself. Having bad ankles and recovering from a nasty muscle pull that's healing just in time for the hikes, i'm going to go with the gear that'll make hiking easier on myself and i'll get a good tripod later when I can afford it.
In the mean time I have an old velbon that weighs a good 5lbs and will be easy enough to throw into the car for the shots from pulloffs and really short walks around a few of the lakes in Rocky Mountain National Park.
Thanks for the help guys, I think i've got it just about figured out now.
p.1 #10 · Using a trekking pole with a camera mount instead of a tripod?
You don't need to attach the camera to the pole(s) - use your poles as a "bipod" - set the tips of your poles about 3-4 feet apart then cross the poles up by the handles and cross the wrist straps from one pole to the other - it creates a sturdy "Y" - place the bottom of your lens in the pocket of the "Y" and shoot away. Way more stable than a monopod.
Monopods - bipods work OK for good daylight and with higher ISO settings but for low light - sunrise / sunset / setting GND's - nothing beats a tripod - I use a Gitzo 0541 with a small ballhead that weights in just a squeak over 2lbs - you can modify and drop out the center tube for a few less ounces.
p.1 #11 · Using a trekking pole with a camera mount instead of a tripod?
That's a good idea!! I'll have to try that one.
There will definitely be some sunrises and sunsets, which is why i'll bring the ultrapod, that can hopefully strap to something or sit on the group or a flat object. I realize the trekking pole and mini tripod combo won't work for everything, but they'll help me get through the park a little easier and save me the burden of spending $450 on a tripod/ballhead right now.
p.1 #12 · Using a trekking pole with a camera mount instead of a tripod?
Shock absorbing poles suck when you put a camera on top of them. They flex and move, when you don't want them to. At least, my Loki pole does. I use it for snowshoeing, and it's OK with a small P&S on top, but that's about it.
p.1 #13 · Using a trekking pole with a camera mount instead of a tripod?
mco_970 wrote:
Shock absorbing poles suck when you put a camera on top of them. They flex and move, when you don't want them to. At least, my Loki pole does. I use it for snowshoeing, and it's OK with a small P&S on top, but that's about it.
That's a fantastic point I didn't even think of! I'm going without shock absorbers for sure now.
