Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | General Gear-talk | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2014 · Gimbal Heads

  
 
Bsmooth
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Gimbal Heads


I'm really starting to get into Bird Photography. The Swallows still make fun of me but hey I'm trying.
I have a velbon Carbon Fiber tripod, with a simple pan head. I've looked at this site:
http://www.carolinawildphoto.com/gimbal_list.htm
and the Manfrotto 393 and Lensmaster RH-2 look like great tripods for the money.
The biggest lens I'll probably ever use is either the Canon 100-400 or the Canon 400 5.6.
Love to go bigger, but If it came down to replacing my 15 year old truck and a 500 or 600 lens, I think you know what the priority would be.
The other question of course is, would the new head actually be any improvement over handholding the lenses I have ?



Jul 21, 2014 at 08:54 AM
howardm4
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Gimbal Heads


You're obviously not really committed if you'd get a new truck in lieu of an aweseome lens


Jul 21, 2014 at 10:58 AM
C Parish
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Gimbal Heads


I have a 400 5.6 and a winberley sidekick.

I find hand holding to work better for me, especially on quick birds.

I found I was dancing around too much with the lense on the tripod, so now I only hand hold, unless the bird is really slow or stationary.

Hope that helps.

Cheers



Jul 21, 2014 at 11:01 AM
Bsmooth
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Gimbal Heads


Just wasn't sure If you needed one for a smaller lens.But these two I mentioned seemed really well designed.


Jul 21, 2014 at 11:54 AM
C Parish
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Gimbal Heads


I think you start to need the tripod and head as the weight of the lense goes up.

I find the 400 f5.6 very easy to hand hold for quite a long time, but everyone has different strengths, so you may feel the need for the gimbal.

Any way you can try any kind of gimbal head before buying, to be sure it fits your shooting style?

Cheers



Jul 21, 2014 at 12:03 PM
trenchmonkey
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Gimbal Heads


Try BEFORE you buy!! Mounting and BALANCING the light lenses you list
is often a problem. One will usually need a l_o_n_g plate to find a point
that it'll be happy (ie: loosened AND level) I'd suggest a Sidekick if you
must have mono/tri support until you acquire bigger/heavier glass. Used
one when teaching noobs BIF but they eventually learned to handhold or
in the case of the 400 f5.6L...mount it on a BushHawk. GL



Jul 21, 2014 at 12:53 PM
Bsmooth
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Gimbal Heads


I shoot the 100-400 all the time handheld with 1DMKII, Its just I wasn't sure If that last bit of sharpness lacking or otherwise may be due to me handholding.


Jul 21, 2014 at 01:58 PM
Andrew J
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Gimbal Heads


https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1105558


Jul 21, 2014 at 01:58 PM
jaybrams
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Gimbal Heads


I use 4th Generation Designs' Mongoose 2.3 which I purchased used. I have a 400/5.6 and it keeps that lens really steady which I can't do when I handhold. Unfortunately, that model is no longer produced but the larger 3.6 is still made. Arthur Morris recommends it. There is a wide variety of gimbals available and its worth taking the time to pick one that works for you now and in the future.


Jul 23, 2014 at 02:58 PM
dgdg
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Gimbal Heads


I think these lenses are light and small enough that hand holding is the way to go. Having had minimal practice, I find hand holding easier for BIF if the lens can be physically managed. It's simply a more natural motion. With a tripod head, you have to push the camera down to look up, and the rotation point is in front of you instead of your head. Forget about tracking at high angles and then behind/beside you unless you are a gymnast. After being forced to hand hold in a boat on several occasions, I now preferably hand hold my 600mm for BIF until my arms get tired.

Conversely, a tripod and sturdy head is a wonderful tool for still shots with a telephoto in low light. These are the moments when you also have wonderful light and colors for your subject.
Use the 100-400mm's IS to reduce your shutter speed for very clean ISOs, and take the shot with a cable release. It's wonderful. A cheap bieke or equivalent off brand gimbal can be had for a song ( < $100) and will work just fine for your lenses. They are light and portable for travel. For airplane travel on family vacations, I will pack the bieke instead of my wimberly for the reduced weight and size. It works fine for occasional use. If I had a dream trip to Haines AK for week long eagle photography, I'd pack the wimberly or make it into a necklace if I had to.

David

Edited on Jul 24, 2014 at 08:41 AM · View previous versions



Jul 24, 2014 at 08:19 AM
Bsmooth
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Gimbal Heads


As far as mounting the head, is one gimbal easier than another ? Never heard of a Bieke. So for a 400mm lens hand holding gives the best results?
If you were going to mount a head on your tripod, and use it for both say wildlife, landscapes and Birds in flight and static, which would you choose ?



Jul 24, 2014 at 08:39 AM
dgdg
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Gimbal Heads


All gimbals are going to screw onto your tripod base like a standard ballhead would. Nothing fancy about that.
For your camera/lens attachment most, if not all, gimbals should have an arca-swiss compatible thumb screw (not quick release lever) plate that works with any arca-swiss compatible lens or camera plate/foot.
You can google Bieke. Works fine for me, just not as buttery smooth which some may prefer.
Once you practice with hand holding a 400mm, you probably will find hand holding for BIF is better for you. YMMV

Gimbals do have more joints, so you can have more vibration which is not desirable for the discerning landscape photographer who uses long shutter speeds in all kinds of weather/wind. Also, it mounts the camera 'sideways', so you'd have to have an adapter to point your lens forward for landscape photos.

Assuming you don't sell your truck, if I were you, I'd have to get two heads:
1) A cheap gimbal that allows both panning and still photography for wildlife. (beike gimbal)
2) A sturdy ballhead for landscapes (BH-50 or BH-40 equivalent)

If you do sell your truck, some prolific wildlife photographers would probably opt for a sturdier gimbal 'brand' for their 600mm or 800mm. These posts go on for pages. Not needed in your case.

You may be able to get by with a heavy duty ballhead for all your uses, but a ballhead with a telephoto does run the risk of 'flop'. This happens when you have your ballhead set loosely for BIF, you forget this, let go of your camera, and the weight of your lens tilts your camera/lens forward. With enough momentum, your gear topples to the ground crashing the lens and breaking the camera's lens mount. A gimbal avoids this. Alternately, some will buy a wimberly sidekick to mount onto their ballhead. A sidekick has its own pros/cons.

David

Edited on Jul 24, 2014 at 09:02 AM · View previous versions



Jul 24, 2014 at 08:49 AM
Bsmooth
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Gimbal Heads


Its funny I don't see any responses as far as the Lensmaster heads go, they seem lighter, well built, and not bad for the price.


Jul 24, 2014 at 09:01 AM
dgdg
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Gimbal Heads


The Lensmaster site photos show that their gimbals do not have vertical adjustments for the lens. You can only slide the lens forward/backward along the mounting plate. You cannot raise or lower your gear along the mount's arm with the mount plate underneath the lens. Side mounting a lens at the vertical pivot point becomes more difficult with increasing weight and decreasing agility which risks dropping gear onto the ground or in the water.

You need both vertical and horizontal adjustments to perfectly balance the lens. By perfectly balanced, I mean you can point your camera anywhere, and it stays there even though your tension knobs are loose. With only a lens plate adjustment, then lens will always return to the neutral position. This of course assumes your gimbal has very low friction when the tension knobs are set loose. Balancing in the neutral position with a gimbal is better than a using a ballhead which can shockingly 'flop' towards the ground when the person next to you says, "hey look at this one!" and you politely let go of your gear. You then turn back to see your gear crashed onto the rocks or into the water.
Some do not like it when the tension knob is directly under the lens plate mount. It is more awkward for the large handed person compared to a side knob.

The Bieke has a vertical lens adjustment and side knob tensioner, for less. This may not matter for a small lens like it will for a 6 pounder, but why spend more for less features?

David



Jul 24, 2014 at 09:07 AM
mogud
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Gimbal Heads


I used the Sidekick style attachment on a sturdy ballhead with a 400 5.6 when I began photographing birds. I have since graduated to a gimbal and so has my birding lens. I have also used the 100-400 with the Sidekick.

I had no difficulties with this setup and balancing the 400 5.6 on the Sidekick. I used a Wimberley P30 plate which is a relatively long plate. To use the Sidekick, make sure the ballhead it will be attached to can handle the weight and has a separate panning adjustment. This setup worked well for me and a full gimbal for the 400 5.6 is a bit overkill. IMHO



Jul 24, 2014 at 09:25 AM
dgdg
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Gimbal Heads


A cheap gimbal like the Bieke is convenient luxury for the 400mm lenses (esp for still shots with cable release), but some will prefer the lower cost and weight of a high quality sidekick compared to a high quality gimbal. I found a gimbal nice for all day shooting with a 400mm f/4. If one ever rents a heavier lens for a vacation, the cheap gimbal will still work well, whereas, I'd prefer not to use a sidekick for multiple reasons.

Nice to have choices.

The sidekick does avoid the dreaded 'flop' which makes it a no-brainer for me compared to a ballhead alone for any lens of substance.

David



Jul 24, 2014 at 09:28 AM
Bsmooth
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Gimbal Heads


Thats for side mounting, which I don't think I would use anyways, Which is why I like the RH-2 or go with Manfrotto's 393 instead.
I guess I don't understand why the back and forth wouldn't balance out the lens



Jul 24, 2014 at 11:47 AM
dgdg
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Gimbal Heads


Wimberly has a little video that shows how to balance a lens on a Gimbal which answers your question as they do it. There are two aspects to balancing. One to keep it in neutral position (adjust horizontally along the lens plate), the second (adjust vertical positioning of the lens) to additionally keep it in place regardless of where you point the lens. Worth a look. The rest is physics and it has been too long for me to explain it properly.

http://www.tripodheadinfo.com/wimberley-head-ii/video-balancing-the-wimberley-head/




Jul 24, 2014 at 11:55 AM
Vancouver47
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Gimbal Heads


I would not recommend a gimbal for BIF. Possibly for slow flying birds like herons and pelicans, but anything slightly more erratic, hand held is far better.


Jul 27, 2014 at 12:55 AM





FM Forums | General Gear-talk | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.