MicrostockGroup

A $500 monopod.  Wow!

So does that mean the tripod equivalent is $1500?

I use a monopod for most shots, too. I'm surprised that Yuri prefers using (and wearing out/breaking) many cheap ones instead of getting a more durable model that can stand up to (pun intended) regular use with heavy equipment.

It won't be much use in a studio using flash.  The flash exposure is so fast, there should be no possibility of visible camera shake.

i'm sure yuri gets all his equipment free, for endorsement . like bjorn bork with his tennis many years ago,even his mercedez. any tennis fans remember the great one?

This is not true. If you have strobes with head generators (for locational lighting) they still can't offer more speed then than the flash syncron of your camera. Practicly it is around 1/160s. If you use a telephoto lens and a camera with high mpix sensor you will need the support a monopod offers.

you are incorrect.

The sync speed has nothing to do with how fast the strobes are firing.  It is simply the minimum amount of time the shutter can be open while allowing the strobe to send a burst of light.  The light comes at a speed of about 1/1000 second.  This freezes basically any movement there is, so in most settings a monopod or tripod is not necessary.  You could easily be shooting with a 200mm lens and still get very sharp images.

Perhaps if you are shooting at 100 or 200mm and holding a hasselblad with a digital back and 45 megapixels things could start getting heavy and wobbly and a TINY TINY bit out of focus..... but for 35mm DSLR shooting at 100mm or less your are not going to see any motion blur.

at the risk of being wrong... I have to kindly disagree although I feel I am stepping out on a limb here everything considered.. but....

strobes fire at 1/1000 second so it doesn't matter if you set your sync speed at 1/160 or 1/10 you are are going to get the exact same exposure and both are going to be sharp - even if you are using a long 180mm lens (granted you are not using ambient light at 1/10 shutterspeed).  If you were shooting in a completely dark room except for the strobes (no ambient light at all) you could shoot with a 5 second shutter speed and still hand hold it and get sharp images with a long lens.

Since the flash fires for only 1/1000 second all it has to do is flash while the shutter is open, the max shutter speed simply states how fast the two can be synced and only has any determination on the final photo when ambient light is starting to be used.  The only time a high sync speed is useful is when trying to balance bright sunlight with flash.  If the sun is bright enough you might have a hard time getting an exposure with such a slow shutterspeed at 1/160, which is why most DSLR cameras have a high speed sync option when using a speedlight.
anyhow.... a clear example...

shutter 1/160 aperature f/16 iso 100    and
shutter 1/10 aperature f/16  iso 100

will give me the EXACT same picture if strobe lighting is my only light source, and both will be sharp, even with a 180mm lens, this is because the image will be exposed at 1/1000 which is the length of time the strobes are giving light to the scene.

 I shoot all my studio work hand held I am not sure why Yuri worries about getting a sharp image at 1/200 of a second. Our studio isn't dark we have a few daylight balance flourescents on the ceiling so we can see what we are doing, it's quite bright in there. But when I shoot a frame under that light at F4 at 1/200 without the flash turned on my file is pitch black. The only light that my sensor picks up in studio at 1/200th is the strobes. I Hand hold all day in studio anything else would slow me down. Location is a different beast and then I rely on a tripod.
  I do like the idea of a camera that syncs at 1/800th and I have thought about the new Blad. The price is down from what they use to be, still spendy but what a file. I just hate how slow the frame rate is when you're shooting lifestyle. Plus the lack of depth of field you get with the larger size means slower shutter speeds in ambient settings.

Best,
AVAVA

I am wondering if a monopod might be necessary to get sharp images at 45 megapixels. Mistakes are magnified that much more at 100% crop, true/false??? Not that you can't get sharp images handheld but your normal percentage might drop a bit which could be frustrating. With that said, I hate using the monopod 

I'm talking about the difference between shooting with 8mp vs. 45mp.  All things being equal it would be much harder to get a sharp image at 45mp or perceived sharpness..no?? all problems being magnified that much more.

Then again, if you downsized from 45mp back to 8mp things would be equal again.

I only say that because I noticed a difference going from 13 mp to 21mp. I would imagine going to 45mp would be quite a jump in magnification. Same reason you need better glass with the larger cameras because they look like sh***t at 100% 

Its the same thing with audio and extremely high sample rates. Not much margin for error because you can hear everything.