Gimbal head - Balance/position changed with new camera/lens (need advice)

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

KurtH

KurtH

Active member
Supporting Member
Marketplace
Member's gallery
Hello all. I recently transitioned from a Z7ii and Sigma 60-600 lens on my Oben gimbal head to a Z9 and 600pf on that same gimbal head. I was able to balance the new setup fine but in doing so, the new rig had to be pushed forward quite a bit from the old setup because the 600pf is a lighter lens. This, in turn, pressed the camera up against the gimbal head to the point of being uncomfortable and unable to swing vertical (with my hand on it) in some cases. And I crunch my hand on the gimbal head knob when moving between horizontal and vertical orientation.

I went into Tempe camera in AZ as they seem to have a good selection of camera equipment to see if I could find a solution, new gimbal head, or something...but the small selection they had in the store all have the same dimensions and would not change/fix my issue. Their only advice was to push the rig backwards and put weights on the lens hood to rebalance....and I really didn't like that workaround as I like the option of taking the rig off and on the gimbal for hand shooting and don't want the extra weight. And hanging weights off the lens hood seems kind of wonky.

Anyone else run into this type of issue? I'm guessing this would happen with any heavy camera/light lens combo on a gimbal so I'm curious if anyone had to solve this issue with their setup.

My workaround, until I find the right solution, is to keep the rig unbalanced (rig pushed backwards) and let it softly flop backwards/upwards when my hand is not holding it. But since I sit for long periods I'd love to be able to keep it balanced so I'm not having to reframe shots from a resting animal to one in motion. And tightening the knobs to keep it in place doesn't seem to be an option as the same hand used for loosening and tightening is the same hand I need for the camera. Ohh the humanity....

Any advice is very much appreciated!

1000000368.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
I'd try the suggestion above to put the upright arm on the gimbal on the left.

If that doesn't work and you find yourself in the market for a new action head you might consider the Flexshooter Mini which works a lot like a gimbal head and avoids ball head flop but doesn't require the same kind of fine balancing act as a full gimbal.
 
Member's gallery
DRwyoming said:
I'd try the suggestion above to put the upright arm on the gimbal on the left.

If that doesn't work and you find yourself in the market for a new action head you might consider the Flexshooter Mini which works a lot like a gimbal head and avoids ball head flop but doesn't require the same kind of fine balancing act as a full gimbal.
Click to expand...
he says that he uses the same hand for gimbal adjustment as he uses to operate camera, i replied before i read all
 
Member's gallery
If placed as far forward as possible on the lens hood it takes very little weight to allow you to move the camera back half an inch or so. You can use something like wighted tape on the lens hood. If you have a lenscoat on the lens it can go over the top of the tape and you'll never know it's there.
 
Member's gallery
andrewluke said:
you say that you need to use the same hand to tighten gimbal as you use to operate camera:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Correct, right-handed shooter so I peek/view on the left. I could put the knobs on the left to solve the hand crunch issue (which I've tried) but peeking through/over the knobs or on the right doesn't seem/feel right. Maybe I use it for a while to see it will feel better after time, get use to it kinda thing. But the lens orientation knob gets buried behind the knobs, tough to manipulate...although that would be the one thing I'd use the least in this scenario so least of my worries.
 
Member's gallery
DRwyoming said:
you might consider the Flexshooter Mini which works a lot like a gimbal head and avoids ball head flop but doesn't require the same kind of fine balancing act as a full gimbal.
Click to expand...
How does it avoid the ball head flop? It looks like it functions like a ball head, tightening, etc.
 
Member's gallery
I have run into that problem with both a Sidekick and a Jobu Jr gimbal where the Z9 camera and lens must situated so far forward on the clamp for balance that the Sidekick or gimbal frame left very little space so I could barely get my fingers around the camera grip. And I don’t like the clamping the lens foot so the Sidekick or gimbal is on the left which prevents me from resting my left hand comfortably on top of the lens or easily reaching the lens function buttons.
I went with Hudson Henry’s advice and use a Manfrotto fluid head (MVH500) and Kirk Arca-Swiss conversion bridge system (MVH500-BQRV2) so I can easily clamp any camera body lens combo, balance it, and not have anything impeding my left or right hands. I also like the head’s dampening action which helps so I don’t have to make so many minute movements to get the lens on target.
 
Member's gallery
PKW said:
I went with Hudson Henry’s advice and use a Manfrotto fluid head (MVH500) and Kirk Arca-Swiss conversion bridge system (MVH500-BQRV2) so I can easily clamp any camera body lens combo, balance it, and not have anything impeding my left or right hands. I also like the head’s dampening action which helps so I don’t have to make so many minute movements to get the lens on target.
Click to expand...
I was just about to suggest that (y)
 
Member's gallery
andrewluke said:
how about a sidekick type gimbal head,the one in the photo is a Movo gh400, may give you more room (y)

View attachment 76229
Click to expand...

GH400 is discontinued but I found the Wimberly version. What ball head are you using, and does it rotate easily? I have several ball heads but none have the Arca-type connection...and they dont rotate easily (as I would expect with a swinging gimbal). I'm definitely going to use the ball-to-gimbal style head (vs full side gimbal) so I can use it for other configurations as well. Thanks!
 
Member's gallery
PKW said:
I went with Hudson Henry’s advice and use a Manfrotto fluid head (MVH500) and Kirk Arca-Swiss conversion bridge system (MVH500-BQRV2) so I can easily clamp any camera body lens combo, balance it, and not have anything impeding my left or right hands. I also like the head’s dampening action which helps so I don’t have to make so many minute movements to get the lens on target.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info! Are these the adaptors you're talking about? Thats the MVH500AH. It swivels like a gimbal head?

1473961579_IMG_686552.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
1563891688_1494833.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
kurtholz said:
Thanks for the info! Are these the adaptors you're talking about? Thats the MVH500AH. It swivels like a gimbal head?

View attachment 76251 View attachment 76252
Click to expand...
These are great! You’ll also be pleased to know that the plate on top can be quickly adjusted (loosen screw/rotate/re-tighten) to rotate 90 degrees, so it offers real flexibility. Telephoto lens foot perpendicular to body or parallel to body for wide angle/landscape type lenses!
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
kurtholz said:
Thanks for the info! Are these the adaptors you're talking about? Thats the MVH500AH. It swivels like a gimbal head?

View attachment 76251 View attachment 76252
Click to expand...
Yes, that’s correct. The negatives are it’s heavy and rather bulky and takes up a bit of room in a camera backpack when removed from from the tripod. But the functionality of it overcomes any of those negatives. I don’t use that handle though, I can easily move the camera and lens with my hand on the camera grip and the other hand on top of the lens.
 
Member's gallery
PKW said:
Yes, that’s correct. The negatives are it’s heavy and rather bulky and takes up a bit of room in a camera backpack when removed from from the tripod. But the functionality of it overcomes any of those negatives. I don’t use that handle though, I can easily move the camera and lens with my hand on the camera grip and the other hand on top of the lens.
Click to expand...
I have my tripod in a case w/strap, so I leave it on. I have a 32l bataflae back pack and although I haven’t tried it, am fairly sure I could strap to backpack when hiking. When we take off on a hike (mustangs on Salt Riverin AZ), my wife usually carries case over her shoulder, while I have my backpack with two bodies and three lenses. 😱
 
Member's gallery
PKW said:
The negatives are it’s heavy and rather bulky and takes up a bit of room in a camera backpack when removed from from the tripod.
Click to expand...
And more expensive. The ball head and adaptor plate are around $350, then add the ball-to-gimbal side mound and we're talking about $550. Verses an all in one Wimberley side mount gimbal head for $450 (or cheaper knockoff for less).

I think I'm still opting for the MVH500 with the Kirk plate as it allows me much more versatility, less swapping heads, etc. And I can dump all my other heads that have different mounts and stick with the arca-swiss plate for everything.

I only have 3 tripods, tried to keep 2 fitted for purpose and one spare. I can go down to 2 tripods and use this setup for pretty much everything I use it for. This helps simplify my life too :)

Thanks again for the info, ideas, pictures, etc!
 
  • Like
Reactions: PKW
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top