ScubaChuck
Member
Now that I have my R6 MKii and 100-500mm RF I am looking for a gimbal head.
Any recommendations? Try not to break my bank. Thanks
Any recommendations? Try not to break my bank. Thanks
Gimbal head
- Thread starter ScubaChuck
- Start date
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).
In full gimbal mounts it's really hard to beat the quality of a Wimberly WH-200 but they're not cheap. These days there are a lot of decent full sized gimbals from companies like Mono, Neewer, Benro and others. I've used several of those during workshops and they all get the job done, are stable, secure but may not have as much fine adjustability or the production quality of the Wimberley mounts. I'd comfortably use any of these if budget is a concern.
That said, the 100-500mm RF isn't a huge lens, if you already have a good tripod and sturdy ball head I'd take a good look at a Wimberly Sidekick or similar side mount arm to convert your ball head into a gimbal. I find these work great on lighter and smaller lens setups and you basically always have a ball head for things like landscape work when you want it and a gimbal for action wildlife and sports work when you want that without breaking the bank.
Calson
Well-known member
A gimbal head is great with a heavy lens weighing more than 5 lbs (plus the weight of the attached camera) but for lighter lenses a tilt head is worth considering. With the tilt head it is easier to access the camera and lens controls and smoother panning for tracking subjects and for shooting video.
An advantage of the Wimberley Sidekick is that in seconds you can go from having a ball head for landscapes and macro to a gimbal head. Easy to store the Sidekick in a backpack or shoulder bag until it is needed. It does place a leveraged load on the ball head so something like the Kirk BH-1 or RRS BH-40 is a good match.
An advantage of the Wimberley Sidekick is that in seconds you can go from having a ball head for landscapes and macro to a gimbal head. Easy to store the Sidekick in a backpack or shoulder bag until it is needed. It does place a leveraged load on the ball head so something like the Kirk BH-1 or RRS BH-40 is a good match.
ajrmd
Well-known member
I really don’t see the utility of placing the lightweight 100-500 on a gimbal. It largely defeats the purpose of this compact lens. Additionally, the telescoping design means you’ll need to be constantly adjusting the balance point as you zoom.
ScubaChuck
Member
I really don’t see the validity of your opinion because you dont know my age. I am 80 years old and light weight to you may not be light weight to me.
I have tried several options and have seen a lot of reviews. The Wimberley 200 is the most widely respected brand and I am very happy with it. This is a very substantial gimbal and very easy to control. Once mounted on the gimbal the camera/lens moves quite fluidly. I am someone not far behind you in age and I really like how camera movement on the gimbal is effortless and smooth.
I have also used the Gitzo fluid head, it is also fine but it tends to dampen the movement which is a good idea for video but not needed for stills.
I would not want to go cheap here. The thing i fear the most is something coming loose and causing the camera to fall. I want the gimbal to be strong and reliable.
I like gimbal types with the mount located on the bottom. Easier to get the lens into position for attachment. Maybe it is my paranoia but side mounting feels less save to me. But that is just me.
The one thing I wish I had with the Wimberly is a quick release clamp for the lens foot attachment instead of the more common screw clamp. In the past Really Right Stuff had a quick release clamp that could be substituted for the stock Wiomberley. That has not been available for some time. Really Right Stuff makes a gimbal with a quick release clamp, but you are going to pay a lot more.
There is a reason so many pro sports photographers use Wimberley. It is reliable, solid. Easy too adjust and bullet proof.
I have also used the Gitzo fluid head, it is also fine but it tends to dampen the movement which is a good idea for video but not needed for stills.
I would not want to go cheap here. The thing i fear the most is something coming loose and causing the camera to fall. I want the gimbal to be strong and reliable.
I like gimbal types with the mount located on the bottom. Easier to get the lens into position for attachment. Maybe it is my paranoia but side mounting feels less save to me. But that is just me.
The one thing I wish I had with the Wimberly is a quick release clamp for the lens foot attachment instead of the more common screw clamp. In the past Really Right Stuff had a quick release clamp that could be substituted for the stock Wiomberley. That has not been available for some time. Really Right Stuff makes a gimbal with a quick release clamp, but you are going to pay a lot more.
There is a reason so many pro sports photographers use Wimberley. It is reliable, solid. Easy too adjust and bullet proof.
ricardo00
Well-known member
There are tons of cheap one's but I have the Jobu Jr. and have used it for many years. Much lighter, smaller and cheaper than the Wimberly though more expensive than some others:
Jobu Jr.3 | Jobu Design
The Jobu Jr.3 gimbal (BWG-J3K) is smaller, lighter, smoother and more compact than our earlier BWG-J2K head. Needle roller bearings allow smoother tilting under heavy loads and better adjustment of friction. Lockout force has been improved 200%, and overall durability has been improved in all...
www.jobu-design.com
I also have the Jobo JR and it is A+. Made in Canada too!
ScubaChuck
Member
I fear the camera and lens could easily fall free. To go on the cheap with a gimbal which is only a few hundred and possibly drop a several thousand dollar camera and lens is a little foolish.
‘you make a lot of sense. Thanks
‘you make a lot of sense. Thanks
I have the Wimberley 200 and it works very well. Although it is heavy, it allows even a big lens to balance perfectly and feel nearly weightless. tightening the knobs to lock in position is precise and solid. It would be most beneficial when using your 1-5 at the full 500mm end of its travel. I also have a FlexShooter Pro, which is lighter. If I need to hike more I use my FlexShooter. But locking it into position is not as easy as with the Wimberley. For shorter hikes and moving less often I prefer the Wimberley for its ease of use and stability.
I've had both the full Wimberley and the Sidekick. Nothing beats the WH200 but I found the Sidekick more to my liking with my 500/4. As stated above it's nice to have the convenience of a ball head but the option of a 'gimbal' when you need it - It's there when you want it and not there when you don't.
There is a technique to get them to balance correctly. It is important with the bottom mount gimbals to get the lens height high enough where the center of gravity Is positioned at the right height. When done correctly the lens will stay where you point it which is important because you may be waiting a long time for something to happen.
The other thing about gimbals is getting the tripod at the correct height for comfort. Pretty easy to find the comfort spot when shooting more or less level but if you point up in the trees you might have to readjust the legs. WIth the Z8/9 you have a nice adjustable back screen but it can be harder to see in bright daylight so I use the viewfinder a lot.
Tree height is more of an issue for us out here. I live in the Pacific Northwest which is temperate rain forest territory. Everything grows big out here and we have some of the biggest tress in the world. So we look up a lot more.
The other thing about gimbals is getting the tripod at the correct height for comfort. Pretty easy to find the comfort spot when shooting more or less level but if you point up in the trees you might have to readjust the legs. WIth the Z8/9 you have a nice adjustable back screen but it can be harder to see in bright daylight so I use the viewfinder a lot.
Tree height is more of an issue for us out here. I live in the Pacific Northwest which is temperate rain forest territory. Everything grows big out here and we have some of the biggest tress in the world. So we look up a lot more.
ajrmd
Well-known member
In spite of your churlish response, I’ll afford you a pass though the issues with a changing center of gravity remain with a telescoping lens. If you’re planning on using the zoom, then you’ll be rebalancing a fair amount. However, if your intent is to balance at the long end, a gimbal could work though you should plan on adding an arca Swiss plate or replacement foot. A flexshooter mini is more forgiving than a gimbal and you likely wouldn’t have to adjust with zooming. Of note, it’s extremely pricey and will set you back as much as a WH-200. A Benro GH-2 is a solid option though if you have a ball head already, the WH sidekick might be a more affordable and compact solution. Unfortunately I can’t comment on the Neewer, K&F, or other inexpensive gimbals.
My photo buddy uses the jobu and reports it works well for him. The Jobu is significantly smaller than the Wimberley.
ScubaChuck
Member
I apologize.. I was in a foul mood yesterday.
Thank you for this advice. I find that I almost always use the 500mm when out for birds.
Vincent_VdB
Well-known member
I have both the Wimberley and Benro (carbon edition) and both do the job but as here stated before is the Wimberley a class on it's own. That gimbal allows for much finer adjustment then any other brand I worked with, for sure a valid option.
Lets make things perhaps a bit more difficult and let you consider a fluid head:
bcgforums.com
Lets make things perhaps a bit more difficult and let you consider a fluid head:
Fluid head or Gimbal?
I am looking to spend much more time in the outdoors as work permits and I need some advice on whether I should purchase a fluid head or a gimbal head for use when photographing wildlife and birds. I currently shoot a Z9 and have recently purchased a 600 z 6.3. Brand recommendations welcomed...
bcgforums.com
arbitrage
Well-known member
Jobu Jr 3 Deluxe. Smallest, lightest proper gimbal. I use it for 600/4 lens so it will handle your setup no problem. Don't waste money on a larger one.
Since you are using a lighter setup (than I typically use) you could go with the Wimberley MH-100 mono gimbal. I have one, I don't like it for the bigger lenses as you are always having to counterbalance the side pull on a monopod.
Link to Jobu: https://www.jobu-design.com/product-page/jobu-jr-3-deluxe-kit-1
They also often have Factory 2nds in stock (although the Deluxe is out of stock right now) to save some $$.
Since you are using a lighter setup (than I typically use) you could go with the Wimberley MH-100 mono gimbal. I have one, I don't like it for the bigger lenses as you are always having to counterbalance the side pull on a monopod.
Link to Jobu: https://www.jobu-design.com/product-page/jobu-jr-3-deluxe-kit-1
They also often have Factory 2nds in stock (although the Deluxe is out of stock right now) to save some $$.
I have a couple of the Wimberley 200II and will not use anything else. I bought both used, but were as new in box.
Wimberly warranty is forever to whom ever owns in the extremally unlikely event it should fail.
Wimberly warranty is forever to whom ever owns in the extremally unlikely event it should fail.
Bottom line for all around best performance smoothest operation solid performer Wimberly 200. Want small size and cost but works well the Jobu.
Fluid heads are used to dampen and smooth movement which is important for video work. For stills some like fluid heads others not so much.
k
Fluid heads are used to dampen and smooth movement which is important for video work. For stills some like fluid heads others not so much.
k
The Jobu Jr 3 Deluxe sounds like a nice replacement for my WH 200 when flying to destinations. Did you get the recommended replacement foot from Jobu ? I have the 600mm TC..... Looks like the Z8 and 600mm TC would be at the max weight limit...
I like the RRS Pano-Gimbal. Mk II was recently introduced but I don't plan to update; the Mk I is perfect for me.
arbitrage
Well-known member
I don't have any of their feet. Currently I use Kirk replacement feet on my 400GM and 600GM and 100-400GM Sony lenses (although I don't use 100-400 on a gimbal ever).
I owned their larger HD-4 (still have it) but even for the 600/4 the Jr 3 is nice and smooth so I don't see any reason for the larger one anymore. Unless one was trying to totally lock down and shoot slow shutter speed landscape with their 600/4 then maybe the the big gimbal is useful.
fcotterill
Well-known member
Jobu works certainly but it cannot finetune the balance of a rig on the vertical spindle. I use a modified FotoPro for lighter rigs on a monopod, or the Leofoto for heavier lenses. Otherwise Gimpro is the best IME
bcgforums.com
Best travel tripod/gimbal setup?
I'm going on some bird trips this year and need help choosing the best travel tripod with lightweight gimbal head set up for my Sony A1 with 200-600. Closer to home I use a monopod and Wimberly head. I have a fine RRS tripod with gimbal head - but it's too heavy to carry more than a short...
bcgforums.com
Last edited:
arbitrage
Well-known member
Also wouldn't worry about the weight limit. My friend used Jr 3 with his Canon 600II which is much heavier.
Jobu says this about the weight specs:
"Lens and camera recommended under 12lb total. Everyone asks if this means the Jr.3 DLX is weak and inferior to a $50 imported gimbal with a weight capacity of 50lbs. No, of course not! The Jr.3 is a superior product with REAL specifications, not made-up, meaningless weight capacity numbers. Our 12-lb recommendation is meant to steer you to choose the correct cameras and lenses for best fit, clearance and balance."
Thank you! Seems like as I get older there is an inverse relationship between the cost of reducing the weight of my gear and the weight of the gear itself! High cost to reduce a bit of weight.....
