I have a monopod, but even that isn't really good enough. I definitely use a tripod whenever I can, but sometimes you just can't. Especially during a festival with huge crowds like that. I hadn't even brought that as it was too crowded for using one.

Not sure how well your camera goes with one of these:
http://www.pacificgeek.com/productimages/xl/MULTI-MINI-TRIPOD-3.jpg

I've seen people use that on their compact cameras, seems to hold pretty well, it's versatile and easily bendable too.

That thing is called a GorillaPod. Not correcting you or anything here, just noticed that the name name wasn't given anywhere, (it's certainly not called a "multi-mini-tripod-3",) so figured I'd pitch in in case someone actually wants to get it. :)

They're light, they're more than strong enough for a P&S (the biggest one can hold a decent-sized DSLR), and in addition to function as a regular tripod they can also be wrapped around things (like lamp posts or fences, etc). Some of them are magnetic, too.
However, you're constantly going to be looking for surfaces to put them on or things to wrap them around to get the required height for your desired framing.

Sorry, I got a bit carried away... I used to work at a camera store and have discussed the pros and cons of these a million times. :)


EDIT:
I forgot to mention - bug\insect macro will be nearly impossible with this thing (unless the bug\insect is dead), because you're going to be so close they'll fly away before you even have a chance to properly place the tripod.

EDIT: another one.

Wish I could get higher quality, but I can only upload jpg's and png's are too big. :-|

I like it, it's nice to see photos with good color unity from time to time.

Did you take the 1st picture during the night ?

Err..... while I would like them not to be, they are actually CGI. :-|

EDIT: Although, just curious, why did you consider I had taken them at night?

Not sure if I wanna get one of those for my DSLR. The tripod I have atm weighs a few kgs and it's a pain to lug around.

I have a really nice tripod at home, but these days I tend to use one of these http://www.outdoorphotogear.com/store/induro-am24-alloy-8m-am-series-aluminum-4-section-monopod.html monopods when I'm out and about. Whenever possible I brace it up against something for added stability.

Well, if you think your current tripod is too heavy, then that's a reason to look into the GorillaPod. If weight is the most important factor for you, then GorillaPods should be way up on your list, unless you have hundreds of dollars to spend on carbon fiber tripods.

My experience from working as a professional photographer, being a photography student, and having worked in a photography store is that one should spend as much time choosing a tripod as one does when choosing a new camera body. Tripods that do not suit one's needs will only become a huge hassle, and subsequently, one will leave them home more often than not because they're too heavy or too clunky or to flimsy or whatever. Experience has taught me that a tripod (for those who look for one) should be one's second highest priority after good lenses, but people in general tend to view it as just another accessory, like a filter or a camera bag. Many people will spend less money on a tripod in favor of something else, like a new body.

I remember having a customer come in and complain about the noise levels at higher ISO settings. I told her that a good tripod would solve that. She wound up purchasing the crappiest tripod she could find because it was cheap, and then bought a new body at the same time because she had heard that that body was better at handling high ISO settings then her current body was. She came back a little later to ask why her noise levels were still fairly high, and then commented on how she never used her tripod because she felt it was too flimsy.

Another thing to remember about tripods is that the perfect one simply doesn't exist. Tripods are all about compromises, and picking a tripod is simply about choosing which compromises you are willing to make. I own a Slik 924 CF with a Manfrotto 496rc2 head. The Slik is tiny when folded which is perfect for me, but four joints makes it less stable than a tripod with three joints. Also, carbon fiber is a very strong and very light material, but its lightness makes long exposures more prone to camera shake (by wind, for example). As for the head - the only thing I'm missing is one of those little green things with a bubble in them (can't remember what they're called) to see when the head is level with the ground. I would have gotten that with the 498rc2 (, the next model up), but it was too big for my tripod bag and could hold much more weight than I needed it to. It would have been a waste of money for me.

I know you didn't ask for tips regarding tripods, but this is my passion, and once I start it's hard to stop, hehe. That's why I'm in photography - I can blabber on and on all day, and all my fellow students are interested and equally invested.

On the 1st picture only, the light seemed artificial to me. Sometimes you obtain a similar light on long exposure during night time (like pictures of the sea with a clear sky for instance).

Ah, right. I know that wasn't one of my best ones, I should have had a different light angle to get it to look more realistic.

That and the geometry of the terrain model is really visible ;) Also clouds...

Good stuff. I had to leave my good tripod at home along with other tripod heads. It gets even worse when you get a larger lens. My big lens is the Canon 70-200mm F2.8L IS mk I, and that thing absolutely demands a proper Gymbol, so I got a good one and it works out well. The challenge there is that then you're talking about 20lbs., of weight before you start packing things like snacks and rain gear.

Which for somebody my size isn't that big of a deal, and ultimately the IQ is totally worth it, but you're looking at probably $4k worth of gear, and that can be rather uncomfortable in some places.

WIthout the tripod, that dSLR and lens would be just about useless, which is why I switched to a P&S as I don't need to have the tripod as much as the lens length is shorter and it has built in IS. But, I'd use a tripod if I had room for it in my bag.

Props to you for bothering. I find the 70-200mm f\2.8's to be some of the least usable lenses Canon has. They're big, bulky, heavy, zooms, (primes are sharper,) and much more expensive than their prime counterparts.
Most people tend to use their zooms either completely zoomed out, or completely zoomed in. I never understood why they just don't go ahead and get the prime of the focal length they use the most. The argument is usually "but zooms are more versatile", but then why do they only use them zoomed completely in or completely out? Someone in Canon's marketing department is checking in huge bonuses.


So you got a huge lens, got a tripod to support it, find the lens to be useless without the tripod (which you have had to leave at home), and bought a P&S to remedy the situation? Seems to me like your equipment isn't meeting your needs. :)

I have a gripped 5D MkII with a 17-40mm, a 50mm f\1.4, and an 85mm f\1.8, and I'd bring them all to every event to make sure I had all my equipment available in case I needed it. Then I became a student at a college that requires the students to shoot analog during their freshman year. I had to buy new equipment - I got a Canon F1 and a 28mm f\2, and never bothered getting more lenses because I thought I wouldn't use the F1 after my freshman year anyway.

What I realized when I started using the F1 with my one lens was how much time I had spent worrying about equipment before, and how incredibly destructive that was to my progress as a photographer. Instead of thinking "which lens should I use to best capture this situation?" I started thinking "how can I best capture this situation with the equipment I have?", and my pictures became much better.

Now, I plan on selling all my lenses and use the money I make to buy a 24mm f\1.4L II. Alternately, I'd throw out Canon altogether and go for the Leica M9 system. The size of the F1 and the M9 are about the same, and I love it and find it way better than the bulky, gripped full-frame I'm currently using. However, neither are within reach of my wallet yet, so for the time being I'll use the 5D for actual work, and my F1 for school stuff.

I have a feeling I haven't really answered your post so much as I have gone off on a rant about Canon and the hassles of too much equipment, but I hope you'll excuse me. It's 3:00am and I should sleep. :)