I like mine. Yes, it is a compromise, but sometimes it is a reasonable one to make.
Some places won't allow tripods, citing public safety. But they will allow a monopod.
You can move faster from place to place with a monopod than with a tripod.
It stabilizes in more than one direction. It stops up-down motion, it stops lateral torsion of the camera (lens 'bobbing' up and down or 'dipping' with body of camera as axis), and it resists side-to-side motion bettern than a camera supported only by hand.
You can create a hasty tripod of a monopod by considering it a 'third leg' if you will. It is not a substitute for a tripod, but it is better than nothing.
A monopod can often also be used as a hiking staff, which can be nice, depending on where you are. There are even some walking staffs that serve dual purpose as a monopod.
A monopod makes a handy improvised weapon. Not that I've ever done that. I'm just saying.
You can also make some expedient camera-stabilizers by the old rope-and-bolt trick. You get a bolt that fits in your tripod bush on your camera, and you attach it to some thin rope or twine, something like that. Make a loop long enough so that you can step on one end of the loop and hold the camera at the other end at eye level. You lift up, the slack is taken out, and the camera is somewhat stable. Not as good as a monopod, way not better than a tripod, but better than nothing.
I don't use mine much - but I do use it.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
