Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 1, 2012, 7:09 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
gjtoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisville, KY, USA
Posts: 6,931
Default Gimbal head

Anyone here using a Gimbal head for their long glass? I just picked one up at a REALLY good price (of course ).
__________________
Gary ---- "The best camera is the one you have with you."
<><~~~~~~~~~~~
Pentax K-70 ~ Panasonic FZ1000
My Gallery

--
Hebrews 13:3
gjtoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 1, 2012, 8:15 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

IIRC northern Greg (fldspringer) does, and Zig may also.

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2012, 8:35 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
gjtoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisville, KY, USA
Posts: 6,931
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tkurkowski View Post
IIRC northern Greg (fldspringer) does, and Zig may also.

Ted
Thanks, Ted. 'preciate it!
__________________
Gary ---- "The best camera is the one you have with you."
<><~~~~~~~~~~~
Pentax K-70 ~ Panasonic FZ1000
My Gallery

--
Hebrews 13:3
gjtoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2012, 9:27 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Lordje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Harelbeke, Belgium
Posts: 760
Default

Never heard about a gimbal head, did check it out and not for my budget it seems.
Can't you do the same with a Ball Head?
__________________
One photo out of focus is a mistake, ten photo out of focus are an experimentation, one hundred photo out of focus are a style.

Nikon D800, Olympus E-500
Lordje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2012, 9:33 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
gjtoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisville, KY, USA
Posts: 6,931
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lordje View Post
Never heard about a gimbal head, did check it out and not for my budget it seems.
Can't you do the same with a Ball Head?
Not with the same stability, Lordje. They are pricey but I picked up a knock-off for $110. It's line-for-line a copy of the Wimberly.
__________________
Gary ---- "The best camera is the one you have with you."
<><~~~~~~~~~~~
Pentax K-70 ~ Panasonic FZ1000
My Gallery

--
Hebrews 13:3
gjtoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2012, 11:59 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Wingman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Hebron, Kentucky (northern Kentucky/Greater Cincinnati):KCVG
Posts: 4,322
Default

I purchased a Manfrotto Gimbal head for use with teh Sigma 150-500. Significantly less expensive than the Wimberly's. Very functional, solidly built. Mounting plate is included in the price.
Wingman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2012, 12:07 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

Lordje, they're for heavy rigs - specifically a camera with a long heavy telephoto lens. You can pan and move one around more smoothly with a gimbal head. Also, with a heavy telephoto a ball head can be dangerous for the lens - if you're loosening it enough to move the lens around and go too far, unless the rig is perfectly balanced, when you let go of the camera the lens can swing down and whack itself on the tripod. With a gimbal that could happen but it's much less likely.

The two people I told Gary to check with are two who use long telephotos.

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2012, 12:49 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Hi Gary,

I have been using a Manfrotto model 393 Gimbal Head mounted to a carbon fibre tripod for about a year now and find it an invaluable tool. A tripod makes an enormous difference in the pursuit of eliminating blur. I've also added a remote shutter actuation switch - which also eliminates the shake created by activating the shutter by hand.

I bought the Manfrotto 393 because of price as it cost $170.00. For those on a budget, it is a really sturdy head and does the job.

I find that I can easily shoot birds in flight with it and it is also easier to pan the camera.

I'll be posting a few BIF shots taken at the Venice Rookery yesterday and this morning. They will b

Hope this helps. They will be posted on the Nikon lenses forum.

Feel free to ask any questions wish.

regards,

Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2012, 6:46 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,241
Default

Hi Gary,

I run the Jobu Design BWG-LW2 (which has been replaced with the LW3). It made in Canada yea dere hey.

Its a side mount (light weight) and I've always got along with it fine. The 600 f4 handles fine, but it might be better off with a horizontal mount, so I may be buying that arm soon. Its not for handling the big lens, but I wonder how well the collar of the big lens will behave long term with a side load.

A pic with the 300 f2.8/EC-20/E-3.



As to a ball head, there is a point where a gimbal makes all the difference. Then there is a point where hanging a really heavy lens on a ball head is just foolish. A ball head holding a lens like this that slips can send the outfit, tripod and all, to the ground. The heaviest end usuall takes the blow and that would be the $5000 300 f2.8 in this case.

Gary, you did good at that price. I spent more than three times that amount.
__________________
Greg

https://dogsportphoto.smugmug.com/

Last edited by fldspringer; Mar 1, 2012 at 6:48 PM.
fldspringer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2012, 7:56 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
gjtoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisville, KY, USA
Posts: 6,931
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fldspringer View Post
Hi Gary,

I run the Jobu Design BWG-LW2 (which has been replaced with the LW3). It made in Canada yea dere hey.

Its a side mount (light weight) and I've always got along with it fine. The 600 f4 handles fine, but it might be better off with a horizontal mount, so I may be buying that arm soon. Its not for handling the big lens, but I wonder how well the collar of the big lens will behave long term with a side load.

As to a ball head, there is a point where a gimbal makes all the difference. Then there is a point where hanging a really heavy lens on a ball head is just foolish. A ball head holding a lens like this that slips can send the outfit, tripod and all, to the ground. The heaviest end usuall takes the blow and that would be the $5000 300 f2.8 in this case.

Gary, you did good at that price. I spent more than three times that amount.
Thanks, Greg! I thought so. Here's the rig I got http://tinyw.in/YiM6 I don't anticipate getting something bigger than my 50-200mm but I am still interest in a more stable platform that's easier to use for wildlife than this Manfrotto pan & tilt.
__________________
Gary ---- "The best camera is the one you have with you."
<><~~~~~~~~~~~
Pentax K-70 ~ Panasonic FZ1000
My Gallery

--
Hebrews 13:3

Last edited by gjtoth; Mar 1, 2012 at 7:59 PM.
gjtoth is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:56 PM.