Archive 2012 · $99 or $500 Gimbal
p.8 #1$99 or $500 Gimbal
Oh, like that. Very cool! Does it get in the way of your face when you use the EVF/OVF ?
May 06, 2012 at 02:22 PM
p.8 #2$99 or $500 Gimbal
Cool! Thanks for the reply!
I might make one out of wood. If I do I'll attache it to it's own arca-swiss clamp and then just attache that to the back end of the plate.
Cool idea tho... thanks man! We're gonna have to call it a Sjjindra Knock-off after that I suppose tho.
I might make one out of wood. If I do I'll attache it to it's own arca-swiss clamp and then just attache that to the back end of the plate.
Cool idea tho... thanks man! We're gonna have to call it a Sjjindra Knock-off after that I suppose tho.
May 06, 2012 at 08:26 PM
p.8 #3$99 or $500 Gimbal
Bifurcator wrote:
Cool! Thanks for the reply!
I might make one out of wood. If I do I'll attache it to it's own arca-swiss clamp and then just attache that to the back end of the plate.
Cool idea tho... thanks man! We're gonna have to call it a Sjjindra Knock-off after that I suppose tho.
Be sure to post a photo of what you come up with.
As excited as some of these knock-off dicussions get, I may not want my name on one (just as soon stay under the radar).
But thanks though.
Cool! Thanks for the reply!
I might make one out of wood. If I do I'll attache it to it's own arca-swiss clamp and then just attache that to the back end of the plate.
Cool idea tho... thanks man! We're gonna have to call it a Sjjindra Knock-off after that I suppose tho.
Be sure to post a photo of what you come up with.
As excited as some of these knock-off dicussions get, I may not want my name on one (just as soon stay under the radar).
But thanks though.
May 06, 2012 at 09:32 PM
p.8 #4$99 or $500 Gimbal
Hehe... I hear ya about the "excitement" levels here. 
If I ever do make something I'll post up the images. I probably won't tho... I'm pretty lazy about those kinds of things.
If I ever do make something I'll post up the images. I probably won't tho... I'm pretty lazy about those kinds of things.
May 07, 2012 at 01:55 PM
p.8 #5$99 or $500 Gimbal
Over 40 years ago I worked with Bob Steadman-a Hollywood cameraman. Together wilh another cameramam they made the "Weaver/Steadman" gymbal head for cinema cameras. It was a unique design and very useful for action and especially tilting.
Fade in fade out some 40 years and I begin digital photography-looking for a nice head. I see this Wimberly thing-a small version of the Weaver/Steadman! I have to have it becaise I already know how well it works-forget a ballhead or fluid head. Not sure about who's patent applies but likely that the Chinese "reverse engineered" the Wimberly head but unlikeky that the good folks at Wimberly "invented" the Weaver/Steadman gimbal head.
Fade in fade out some 40 years and I begin digital photography-looking for a nice head. I see this Wimberly thing-a small version of the Weaver/Steadman! I have to have it becaise I already know how well it works-forget a ballhead or fluid head. Not sure about who's patent applies but likely that the Chinese "reverse engineered" the Wimberly head but unlikeky that the good folks at Wimberly "invented" the Weaver/Steadman gimbal head.
May 08, 2012 at 07:11 AM
p.8 #6$99 or $500 Gimbal
Good to know. And it sounds like you had some fun working with Bob!
May 08, 2012 at 01:08 PM
p.8 #7$99 or $500 Gimbal
Purchased one of the original Wimberly Gimbal Heads.Still works fine after all these years.Have never felt the need to upgrade to the new version.
May 09, 2012 at 07:58 AM
p.8 #8$99 or $500 Gimbal
Hehe, here's a guy using a gimbal on a monopod - and liking it too.
http://www.everymilesamemory.com/cinecity_gimball_head_review.htm
I'm going to have to try that! He's using a cheap-o knock-off too.
http://www.everymilesamemory.com/cinecity_gimball_head_review.htm
I'm going to have to try that! He's using a cheap-o knock-off too.
May 09, 2012 at 05:06 PM
p.8 #9$99 or $500 Gimbal
I can't really see the benefits of using that or any gimbal like that on a monopod. Especially when there are monopod heads that are small, light, cheap and works better. It's not the panning action that can be difficult with a monopod like he write. If you have any problem it will be tilting the lens up and down very much. Why and what does he gain
I get the impression he have bought a new gimbal and think it's fun to use it. So he like to use it all the time even if it's not needed
I get the impression he have bought a new gimbal and think it's fun to use it. So he like to use it all the time even if it's not needed
May 09, 2012 at 11:09 PM
p.8 #10$99 or $500 Gimbal
I mostly concur. I thought it odd at first too. But then I thought of an image of a sports shooter at a football game I saw (here I think). I think he was shooting the EF 500L - it was massive and heavy looking whatever it was. So with a lens like that and if one was attempting BIFs with that then I could imagine a ball head loose enough to pitch, wanting to allow the lens to flop over to one side or another. Or are there mono-heads commonly available which restrict yaw tilt to vertical pitch rotation?
I still mostly agree tho. It just seems a little odd and he was probably just having fun using a new toy.
I still mostly agree tho. It just seems a little odd and he was probably just having fun using a new toy.
May 10, 2012 at 08:38 AM
p.8 #11$99 or $500 Gimbal
Yes ballheads are not really good either. There are a few commonly available mono-heads. Cheap one from Manfrotto and expensive one from RRS. And a few knock-offs from Benro and others also.
You can see the RRS head in one of my pics before in this thread. On top of the gimbal head. It's a very good and strong head that I often use with Canons 800mm lens
You can see the RRS head in one of my pics before in this thread. On top of the gimbal head. It's a very good and strong head that I often use with Canons 800mm lens
May 10, 2012 at 10:05 AM
p.8 #13$99 or $500 Gimbal
A friend has a Wimberley II and since purchasing a 500/4.5, I've been after one myself. Before parting with $600, and being the curious sort that I am, I decided to try the $100 Beike BK-45 WII knockoff.
After waiting an eternity for the direct-from-China free shipping, the thing finally arrived. It came in a box, wrapped in plastic with no instructions whatsoever. Good thing none are needed. I was skeptical.
After mounting the thing on my tripod and working it a bit by hand, I noticed that everything was a little stiff but nevertheless it felt solid and smooth enough. I mounted the big 500 and 7D on it and, after getting everything balanced, found that the setup is rock solid. My skepticism was turning to wonder about how this would hold up in the field.
The next day, I hiked with the thing all day slung it over my shoulder, etc., and not a single problem. All the stiffness worked its way out of it after a couple of hours of use and now everything is quite smooth. I shot over 1,000 images that day including birds in flight involving a lot of panning and tilting. I am quite impressed with the performance. Panning, tilting, etc., is quite smooth with no grabby or loose spots. When you lock everything down, nothing moves. My Wimberley-owning friend is a bit envious. This was all a few weeks ago and after a few more trips to the field, I have had no problems. The thing is still rock solid and smooth and seems to handle the weight of the 500 and camera quite well.
The differences I've observed between the real thing and knockoff:
1. $400+
2. Wimberley smooth out of the box, knockoff took some break-in.
3. Finish on Wimberley a bit better. Fit is excellent on both.
4. The Wimberley seems smoother and more fluid. Not $400 smoother, IMHO.
5. If I get lost in the woods, the knockoff has TWO -- not one, but TWO compasses. (
) You'd think for $500+, the Wimberley could have at least one. Seriously, I have no idea why they chose compasses to cover up bolt holes.
6. $400+
As for the moral issue... there is none for me. Mr Wimberley makes an excellent product at a premium price. If money were no object, I would buy his products. That said, he did not invent the "gimbal" concept nor does he own any rights to it. The first time I saw something like this was in a museum decades ago. It was a Portuguese cooking gimbal for use on ships; it was centuries old. Sorry, Mr Wimberley..... capitalism is capitalism. I respect your choice to be and remain the Rolls Royce of gimbal mounts. As it happens, money matters to me. I don't mind spending thousands when it will result in better images. I don't see this advantage with the real Wimberley. I bought a Chevy and for me, it works well enough.
Of course, if this thing eventually falls apart and dumps my $10,000 rig in a pond, I will be back here to eat my words. I would also buy a real Wimberley with the insurance money. In fact, I'd buy two...... to make up for the one I should have bought in the first place. Time will tell.
After waiting an eternity for the direct-from-China free shipping, the thing finally arrived. It came in a box, wrapped in plastic with no instructions whatsoever. Good thing none are needed. I was skeptical.
After mounting the thing on my tripod and working it a bit by hand, I noticed that everything was a little stiff but nevertheless it felt solid and smooth enough. I mounted the big 500 and 7D on it and, after getting everything balanced, found that the setup is rock solid. My skepticism was turning to wonder about how this would hold up in the field.
The next day, I hiked with the thing all day slung it over my shoulder, etc., and not a single problem. All the stiffness worked its way out of it after a couple of hours of use and now everything is quite smooth. I shot over 1,000 images that day including birds in flight involving a lot of panning and tilting. I am quite impressed with the performance. Panning, tilting, etc., is quite smooth with no grabby or loose spots. When you lock everything down, nothing moves. My Wimberley-owning friend is a bit envious. This was all a few weeks ago and after a few more trips to the field, I have had no problems. The thing is still rock solid and smooth and seems to handle the weight of the 500 and camera quite well.
The differences I've observed between the real thing and knockoff:
1. $400+
2. Wimberley smooth out of the box, knockoff took some break-in.
3. Finish on Wimberley a bit better. Fit is excellent on both.
4. The Wimberley seems smoother and more fluid. Not $400 smoother, IMHO.
5. If I get lost in the woods, the knockoff has TWO -- not one, but TWO compasses. (
) You'd think for $500+, the Wimberley could have at least one. Seriously, I have no idea why they chose compasses to cover up bolt holes.6. $400+
As for the moral issue... there is none for me. Mr Wimberley makes an excellent product at a premium price. If money were no object, I would buy his products. That said, he did not invent the "gimbal" concept nor does he own any rights to it. The first time I saw something like this was in a museum decades ago. It was a Portuguese cooking gimbal for use on ships; it was centuries old. Sorry, Mr Wimberley..... capitalism is capitalism. I respect your choice to be and remain the Rolls Royce of gimbal mounts. As it happens, money matters to me. I don't mind spending thousands when it will result in better images. I don't see this advantage with the real Wimberley. I bought a Chevy and for me, it works well enough.
Of course, if this thing eventually falls apart and dumps my $10,000 rig in a pond, I will be back here to eat my words. I would also buy a real Wimberley with the insurance money. In fact, I'd buy two...... to make up for the one I should have bought in the first place. Time will tell.
May 14, 2012 at 04:30 PM
p.8 #14$99 or $500 Gimbal
Make sure you use the catch studs on the plate and it won't dump. 
Your review jives with my experience as well but with two minor detail modifications.
When both are loosened all the way only then is the Wimberley "more fluid". But unless you're intending to use your rig as a weathervane it probably shouldn't be loosened all the way like that. Dampened ever so slightly so that it tracks incredibly smoothly but isn't jolted out of frame by your trigger finger or the wind, they both have the same syrupy smoothness.
"The finish" may be a personal thing but as I see it the rubber on the rubberized parts of the Beike is superior to the Wimberley while the metal exposed surface areas on the Wimberley is superior to the Beike. The rubber coated areas on the Beike are thick and it seems like that substance would prevent scratches and dings to both the mount and the camera/lens better than the Wimberley. The Wimberley's metal (painted?) surfaces are using a high quality paints as well as polished-like metal under-surfaces - overall a tad more refined - which make adjustments slightly more smooth. I set it up once and stay with that (or only switch lens setups once or twice during a shoot) thus I don't see any added value advantage/disadvantage between the two in that specific regard really. I think the rubber is more important thus my initial critique favored the Beike.
Your review jives with my experience as well but with two minor detail modifications.
When both are loosened all the way only then is the Wimberley "more fluid". But unless you're intending to use your rig as a weathervane it probably shouldn't be loosened all the way like that. Dampened ever so slightly so that it tracks incredibly smoothly but isn't jolted out of frame by your trigger finger or the wind
, they both have the same syrupy smoothness. "The finish" may be a personal thing but as I see it the rubber on the rubberized parts of the Beike is superior to the Wimberley while the metal exposed surface areas on the Wimberley is superior to the Beike. The rubber coated areas on the Beike are thick and it seems like that substance would prevent scratches and dings to both the mount and the camera/lens better than the Wimberley. The Wimberley's metal (painted?) surfaces are using a high quality paints as well as polished-like metal under-surfaces - overall a tad more refined - which make adjustments slightly more smooth. I set it up once and stay with that (or only switch lens setups once or twice during a shoot) thus I don't see any added value advantage/disadvantage between the two in that specific regard really. I think the rubber is more important thus my initial critique favored the Beike.
May 15, 2012 at 10:51 PM
p.8 #15$99 or $500 Gimbal
There is also a big difference in size, weight and load capacity between them
May 15, 2012 at 11:07 PM
p.8 #16$99 or $500 Gimbal
I don't really see any meaningful differences there. Wanna elaborate a little?
May 15, 2012 at 11:37 PM
p.8 #17$99 or $500 Gimbal
The gimbal also works well for shooting no-parallax panorama images. Just add a macro rail.
(Edit: The screw of the quick release plate does not line up perfectly with the point of rotation of the gimbal, so that should be taken into account. I thought about drilling a hole on the base of the macro rail plate to correct for this.)
Just to test the concept, I took a 2-row, 6-shot stitched image with the Samyang (quick visual assessment of the no-parallax point). The images lined up beautifully in Hugin, and I couldn't find any evident parallax errors in the final stitched image.
Here's the setup
And here's the test image
Jaakko
(Edit: The screw of the quick release plate does not line up perfectly with the point of rotation of the gimbal, so that should be taken into account. I thought about drilling a hole on the base of the macro rail plate to correct for this.)
Just to test the concept, I took a 2-row, 6-shot stitched image with the Samyang (quick visual assessment of the no-parallax point). The images lined up beautifully in Hugin, and I couldn't find any evident parallax errors in the final stitched image.
Here's the setup
And here's the test image
Jaakko
May 16, 2012 at 02:04 AM
p.8 #18$99 or $500 Gimbal
Bifurcator wrote:
I don't really see any meaningful differences there. Wanna elaborate a little?
Just read the specs. The weight, size and load capacity is rather different when comparing those two Gimbal heads. The wimberley is higher/larger. Weight about 300 gr more. And have many times as much load capacity according to the two brands spec.
I don't really see any meaningful differences there. Wanna elaborate a little?
Just read the specs. The weight, size and load capacity is rather different when comparing those two Gimbal heads. The wimberley is higher/larger. Weight about 300 gr more. And have many times as much load capacity according to the two brands spec.
May 16, 2012 at 11:19 AM
p.8 #19$99 or $500 Gimbal
Yeah, here's what I wrote in my original post:
I think I also wrote somewhere on page one that I think the load max spec on the Beike (and probably the Wimberley too?) is just made up and that I think I could lift the front end of a 1972 VW Bug with the thing and not have to worry about it. Clay Wimberley said on-line somewhere that if you use his heads at or near max much you'll be sending it in for warrantee repairs rather quickly. I guess he would know by the number of RMAs he hands out but I don't get how myself. I'm pretty sure I could mount a seat to this thing (or the Wimberley) and use it as a swivel stool at the dinning room table and it would last longer than a $100 stool designed just for that. So what goes wrong? In any case I'd bet good money that the Beike company never stress tested anything on theirs! I doubt there's any QC procedures either. For a $100 there certainly can't be much. Or I dunno, maybe they's got Ching and Wong the homeless twins, in the back room going gangbusters for a hamburger a day?
- Me Wrote:
It's slightly smaller in two important dimensions. From the inner surface of the vertical slide bracket (height adjustment) to the arca-swiss plate's center screw is 58mm while this distance on the WH-200 is 74mm. If that becomes an issue I suppose you can order the Wimberley plate holder and regain the extra extension. I've tried it with a few fast 300mm a few fast 400mm and a few fast 500mm lenses and this difference doesn't seem to matter at all. All of the tested lenses balance perfectly with the GH1 without coming too close to that arm. With a...Show more →
I think I also wrote somewhere on page one that I think the load max spec on the Beike (and probably the Wimberley too?) is just made up and that I think I could lift the front end of a 1972 VW Bug with the thing and not have to worry about it. Clay Wimberley said on-line somewhere that if you use his heads at or near max much you'll be sending it in for warrantee repairs rather quickly. I guess he would know by the number of RMAs he hands out but I don't get how myself. I'm pretty sure I could mount a seat to this thing (or the Wimberley) and use it as a swivel stool at the dinning room table and it would last longer than a $100 stool designed just for that. So what goes wrong? In any case I'd bet good money that the Beike company never stress tested anything on theirs! I doubt there's any QC procedures either.
For a $100 there certainly can't be much. Or I dunno, maybe they's got Ching and Wong the homeless twins, in the back room going gangbusters for a hamburger a day? May 16, 2012 at 12:27 PM
p.8 #20$99 or $500 Gimbal
My 500/4 with 1.4x, 7D with grip and 2 batteries tilts the scales right at 14 lbs. I don't see any obvious signs of stress... i.e. bending, binding, noise, etc....... The ad for the Beike said its rated for 8kg, which from the feel of it, is pretty conservative. In a very cursory look, I couldn't find on the Wimberley site any rating for theirs... As for Chinese QC.... it wouldn't take much of a QC department to hang 16 kilos of sand from the thing and if its still standing a week later, rate it for 8.
Time will tell as far as durability goes.
One thing I've noticed about Chinese knockoff makers over the past couple of decades.... and this includes ALL knockoffs, not just photo gear.... Most have figure out that you can copy a $500 item for $20, profit $10, and its 100% garbage. You'll get one wave of sales and then the word is out and noone buys any more. Now you have to go and make your next one under a different name, etc..... OR...... you can copy a $500 item for $150 and it can be pretty damn good. You might even profit $20 and its still a bargain if well made. You can build up a reputation (i.e. Benro, Induro, etc...) and a following that results in repeat sales and word-of-mouth. I've seen this with flash triggers, remotes, strobes, tripods... you name it. In the 1990s, all the knockoffs were junk.... now, I'd say many of them are as or almost as good as the brand-name product they emulate... This is specially true with lower-tech items like triggers, heads, brackets, etc.... not so much with optics or too-fancy electronics. Although strobes from Yongnuo and Oloong are pretty decent. I just picked up an Oloong 690 to replace a fried 580EXII. It does E-TTL2 perfectly and almost everything else as good as the Canon. It even has a longer zoom range -- 180mm and a metal foot. It is a tad slower in recycle time than the 580EX and it won't function as a wireless TTL slave. Neither of these shortcomings mean anything for what I do. $165 delivered VS $500 for another 580. I have about 1,000 shots through it with zero issues.
If someone wants to pony up some donations, I'll buy another Beike gimbal and torture-test it to death. If enough money comes in, I'll buy a Wimberley too and do a side by side. I'll write and publish a complete illustrated review of what exactly it took to break them.. I'll kick in the first $20. Anyone want my PayPal account?
Time will tell as far as durability goes.
One thing I've noticed about Chinese knockoff makers over the past couple of decades.... and this includes ALL knockoffs, not just photo gear.... Most have figure out that you can copy a $500 item for $20, profit $10, and its 100% garbage. You'll get one wave of sales and then the word is out and noone buys any more. Now you have to go and make your next one under a different name, etc..... OR...... you can copy a $500 item for $150 and it can be pretty damn good. You might even profit $20 and its still a bargain if well made. You can build up a reputation (i.e. Benro, Induro, etc...) and a following that results in repeat sales and word-of-mouth. I've seen this with flash triggers, remotes, strobes, tripods... you name it. In the 1990s, all the knockoffs were junk.... now, I'd say many of them are as or almost as good as the brand-name product they emulate... This is specially true with lower-tech items like triggers, heads, brackets, etc.... not so much with optics or too-fancy electronics. Although strobes from Yongnuo and Oloong are pretty decent. I just picked up an Oloong 690 to replace a fried 580EXII. It does E-TTL2 perfectly and almost everything else as good as the Canon. It even has a longer zoom range -- 180mm and a metal foot. It is a tad slower in recycle time than the 580EX and it won't function as a wireless TTL slave. Neither of these shortcomings mean anything for what I do. $165 delivered VS $500 for another 580. I have about 1,000 shots through it with zero issues.
If someone wants to pony up some donations, I'll buy another Beike gimbal and torture-test it to death. If enough money comes in, I'll buy a Wimberley too and do a side by side. I'll write and publish a complete illustrated review of what exactly it took to break them.. I'll kick in the first $20. Anyone want my PayPal account?
May 16, 2012 at 02:10 PM