Steady stick at DVinfo.net

Stelios Christofides · May 29th, 2007, 01:40 AM

Hi
I would like to know if its better to buy a Steady Stick or a monopod. Which one do you guys use more often (besides the tripod i mean) Is it a good buy to get a Steady stick, like this one:
http://www.tiffen.com/SteadyStick.htm

Stelios

Ervin Farkas · May 29th, 2007, 06:45 AM

There are pros and cons to both; it depends on what you need it for. The monopod is better if you don't move around a lot and you just need something to support the camera weight for long shots. The Steady Stick is better if you have to move around. For a light camera personally I prefer a light tripod that I can fold and use as a monopod if needed; and I take the camera off the tripod and roam around if needed, then back on the tripod.

Harold Schreiber · May 29th, 2007, 11:39 AM

Hi Stelios,

I've made up my own "Steady Stick" type units, one for my Mono-Pod and the other for a Mono-Pod with handles. Also set up a Chest-Pod with handles and remote. Easy and very cheap to make.

Pics included, and also see my post of "Hows about a MonoPod with handle & Articulating Head Mount".

Harold

Cole McDonald · May 29th, 2007, 02:12 PM

I don't use my steady stick...I keep pinching my hand on the head, can't have a piece of equipment on set that I have to think about that much.

I've also found I can get steadier shots hand held than I can with the steadi stick...could just be practice too, but it feels clunky to me.

Stelios Christofides · May 30th, 2007, 06:21 AM

Cole you are right. I borrowed one to use but at the end my hand is much more steadier. So I will stick with my tripod and my hand.

Stelios

Jonathan Jones · May 30th, 2007, 03:26 PM

Your choice between a Steady Stick or a monopod might depend upon a few factors, including your shooting environment, shooting technique, and the camera you are using.

I have both a monopod as well as a Steady Stick. I find both of them to be priceless if used appropriately and in the right settings.

My monopod really helps in getting lengthy, very solid shots in a fixed location while offering some limited ability of freedom in moving shot locations very quickly.

In many situations, even the monopod is too cumbersome to move around with, most specifically when I am moving through an event packed full of folks, including little kids whose heads I don't want to smack by the tail end of my monopod when trying to carfully manuveur around anyone to set up my next shot spot.

With the SteadyStick, I am afforded a great deal of freedom of movement in carrying around my camera and shooting for long periods with little fatigue. In my case, I shoot with an XL2, and when it is loaded up with extra sound gear, batteries, and a light kit, it gets extremely awkward to carry and shoot with for any length of time going just handheld. With a SteadyStick, I can do this for 6 or more hours at at time with no problems at all.

Keep in mind that the SteadyStick is not really intended to be a SteadyCam replacement, so if you are using a smaller camera, it is likely that effective smoothness in your shots might not be all that different than if you just went handheld. The SteadyStick doesn't use counterbalance weights. It anchors against your waist, so most body movements are transferred through the unit and are evident in your footage if you are not careful in your camera and hand control. It is most useful for keeping your shots relatively sturdy for longer periods especially if your camera comes with a bit of heft. I also get much smoother 'body rotation' pans using the SteadyStick than I could ever get just handheld (although in this case, the monopod is much more effective.)

Thats just my 2 cents, but I love the SteadyStick for what I use it for.

-Jon

Cole McDonald · May 30th, 2007, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonathan Jones

Keep in mind that the SteadyStick is not really intended to be a SteadyCam replacement, so if you are using a smaller camera, it is likely that effective smoothness in your shots might not be all that different than if you just went handheld.

The steady stick transfers my breathing to the camera which I've trained my arm to isolate...no option to isolate that with the stick.

Chris Colin Swanson · June 2nd, 2007, 01:14 AM

I always have the belt low to my hips and still breath high in my chest to keep the steadystick, well, steady. However, if I hold it for a low shot I find its much better than handheld. Its also great for holding the camera higher than eye level.

May 29th, 2007, 01:40 AM	#1
Stelios Christofides Trustee Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Nicosia, CYPRUS Posts: 1,080	Steady stick Hi I would like to know if its better to buy a Steady Stick or a monopod. Which one do you guys use more often (besides the tripod i mean) Is it a good buy to get a Steady stick, like this one: http://www.tiffen.com/SteadyStick.htm Stelios __________________ My Blog: http://steliosc.blogspot.com "I hope for nothing, I fear nothing, I am free" Nikos Kazantzakis

May 29th, 2007, 06:45 AM	#2
Ervin Farkas Inner Circle Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Atlanta/USA Posts: 2,515	It depends... There are pros and cons to both; it depends on what you need it for. The monopod is better if you don't move around a lot and you just need something to support the camera weight for long shots. The Steady Stick is better if you have to move around. For a light camera personally I prefer a light tripod that I can fold and use as a monopod if needed; and I take the camera off the tripod and roam around if needed, then back on the tripod. __________________ Ervin Farkas www.AtlantaLegalVideo.com

May 29th, 2007, 11:39 AM	#3
Harold Schreiber Major Player Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Olathe, Kansas Posts: 309	Hi Stelios, I've made up my own "Steady Stick" type units, one for my Mono-Pod and the other for a Mono-Pod with handles. Also set up a Chest-Pod with handles and remote. Easy and very cheap to make. Pics included, and also see my post of "Hows about a MonoPod with handle & Articulating Head Mount". Harold Attached Thumbnails Last edited by Harold Schreiber; May 29th, 2007 at 04:10 PM.

May 29th, 2007, 02:12 PM	#4
Cole McDonald Trustee Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Sauk Rapids, MN, USA Posts: 1,675	I don't use my steady stick...I keep pinching my hand on the head, can't have a piece of equipment on set that I have to think about that much. I've also found I can get steadier shots hand held than I can with the steadi stick...could just be practice too, but it feels clunky to me. __________________ Web Youtube Facebook

May 30th, 2007, 06:21 AM	#5
Stelios Christofides Trustee Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Nicosia, CYPRUS Posts: 1,080	Cole you are right. I borrowed one to use but at the end my hand is much more steadier. So I will stick with my tripod and my hand. Stelios __________________ My Blog: http://steliosc.blogspot.com "I hope for nothing, I fear nothing, I am free" Nikos Kazantzakis

May 30th, 2007, 03:26 PM	#6
Jonathan Jones Trustee Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Healdsburg, California Posts: 1,138	Your choice between a Steady Stick or a monopod might depend upon a few factors, including your shooting environment, shooting technique, and the camera you are using. I have both a monopod as well as a Steady Stick. I find both of them to be priceless if used appropriately and in the right settings. My monopod really helps in getting lengthy, very solid shots in a fixed location while offering some limited ability of freedom in moving shot locations very quickly. In many situations, even the monopod is too cumbersome to move around with, most specifically when I am moving through an event packed full of folks, including little kids whose heads I don't want to smack by the tail end of my monopod when trying to carfully manuveur around anyone to set up my next shot spot. With the SteadyStick, I am afforded a great deal of freedom of movement in carrying around my camera and shooting for long periods with little fatigue. In my case, I shoot with an XL2, and when it is loaded up with extra sound gear, batteries, and a light kit, it gets extremely awkward to carry and shoot with for any length of time going just handheld. With a SteadyStick, I can do this for 6 or more hours at at time with no problems at all. Keep in mind that the SteadyStick is not really intended to be a SteadyCam replacement, so if you are using a smaller camera, it is likely that effective smoothness in your shots might not be all that different than if you just went handheld. The SteadyStick doesn't use counterbalance weights. It anchors against your waist, so most body movements are transferred through the unit and are evident in your footage if you are not careful in your camera and hand control. It is most useful for keeping your shots relatively sturdy for longer periods especially if your camera comes with a bit of heft. I also get much smoother 'body rotation' pans using the SteadyStick than I could ever get just handheld (although in this case, the monopod is much more effective.) Thats just my 2 cents, but I love the SteadyStick for what I use it for. -Jon __________________ "Are we to go on record, sir, with our assertion that the 'pink hearts, yellow moons, orange stars, and green clovers' are, in point of fact', magically delicious?" - Walter Hollarhan before the House Subcommittee on Integrity in Advertising - May, 1974

June 2nd, 2007, 01:14 AM	#8
Chris Colin Swanson Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 76	I always have the belt low to my hips and still breath high in my chest to keep the steadystick, well, steady. However, if I hold it for a low shot I find its much better than handheld. Its also great for holding the camera higher than eye level.