Gimbal Head

[andy153]

Does anyone need a gimbal head? Does anyone out there use such a device or need one? My position is that with increasing arthritis I added a 500mm f4 and a 1000mm reflex to my arsenal. I've already got a Sigma 50-500 and a Nikon 80-400 and while great on a tripod I decided to go for more flexibility. The ideal? A Wimberley Gimbal head. The cost - astronomical - £500-600. The solution? On eBay if you search for a Gimbal Head you will come across an Indian firm who make a head that is almost identical for about £140. Well it has arrived and it is excellent. The finnish is not as good but it is acceptable - you may have to spend a little time freeing the joints - I took mine apart and used a teflon spray to lubricate it - now it is truly fluid in its movement in every direction and rock solid on the tripod. By the way it is shipped as a sample of no commercial value. So if anyone out there needs one but has been put off by the price - I can recommend this device.

[gordon g]

I have seen other reviews of these which said much the same Andy - they seem to be reasonably good, certainly worth what they cost.
I wondered about one when I bought my 500mm, but after a trial with the manfrotto stirrup design head (which I still use for the spotting scope) in the end went for a heavy duty ball head, as I could use that for other types of photography as well. I have found that using the ball set at 90 degrees in the groove in the head, and with the panning lock undone, it functions very well as a 'gimbal'. It is considerably cheaper than a proper gimball from the big names, and has the advantage over the Indian gimballs that it can be used in general photography too.

[andy153]

Hi Gordon, I considered the Manfrotto stirrup as well but all my bodies, tripod heads and lens plates are Arca Swiss variants. It's my only gripe with Manfrotto - all my tripod legs and monopod are Manfrotto but I could never get to grips with their different variants of quick release plate.

[Roy C]

I have recently bought a Jobu Jr Gimbal with an optional horizontal mount. Without the horizontal mount it is a sidekick and by fixing the horizontal mount it becomes a full Gimbal. Superbly made piece of kit and only weighs 0.63 KG. The Jobu Jr comes in at £149 exc the optional horizontal mount (just noticed it has gone up to £179).
I did try a friends Indian knock-off Gimbal but for my lightweight set-up (400/5.6 + 1.4tc) it was an overkill. I find the Sidekick much better at tracking birds than a ballhead.

[sassan]

Andy I did both. The Indian version is definitely a good bang for the buck. But don't forget it is the older Wimberley I version copy not the new Wimberley II that has some little more advantage. As for quality, no it is not even close but the good news is that if you use one of those monster lenses (My first experience was on 600mm F4.5 and then on 800mm F5.6) you really see a significant and I mean a significantly significant improvement. Well Before this gimbal design, I could not control the weight of lens and had one occasion close to letting the whole glass fall that would be a disaster, but gamble design make handling of these lenses really just a piece of cake. Center of gravity is right, motion is perfect, fine movement is just right and it is solid. Solid is the key word though. Why? for eg you are picturing moon with TC added so moon is like a flying dove in the sky and at that magnification you have a 15 second of so window of opportunity to take a various crop of moon. Now you zoom in, leave your pressure off the camera/lens, and it moves downward... You must learn the compensation factor, i.e. to fix it higher, so that when in neutral position, it is rightly pointing to target. But by the time you are ready to shoot, bird is out of field and problem list goes on & on, so I really got disappointed on the pre gimbal days to use the heavy glasses at all. But what a pleasure to use them on rightly desingned gimbal head.
The black color on Indian version will fad soon to bronze, not a big deal especially if you are a Nikon fan. The quick release at times turn into hassle. You see a bit decrease in steadiness over time. None happens with real Wimberley. Well you pay for what you pay for and if you have a 7 or 8 thousand dollar (Pound) lens, you must have these heads to keep them as they deserve on a very solid tripod.
Side kick is good only for lighter stuff.
If you don't try the best to break you back and herniate all those discs out with the big glasses, you really don't need to spend and arm and leg for these heads.
On the other hand, all of the good and steady heads or tripods are coming at price but realizing that you can only buy one good tripod for your life time use, you may want to consider to invest really right instead of trying to save on multiple useless tools that at the end will cost you probably more.
One head that I recommend to everyone for every day use with usual camera/lens is the RRS (Really Right Stuff) quick release clamp.

LINK

That is with arca swiss design plate and ball head combo.
This could be your best photoaccessory you ever bought and once use this one, you will never ever use another system. Really recommended to all.
If you need a bit larger, just plate to be used on your already owned solid ball head, then this is my recommendation:

LINK

Well don't forget that still after all these, you need the right Arca Swiss plate for the camera or lens (A $ 50-200) extra charge, apart from the surly needed tripod.
Well no one said photography is a cheap affair. Good for a light camera user of most point and shoot users when they can be very happy with a $20-50 Gorilla tripod that has it all

To complete the talk; For anyone in need of simply the best Ball Head, the two equally good recommendations are:

Kirk BH-1 Though if you look for lighter, more hiking friendly, you may want to look at BH-3. and then the second choice:
Markins such as M20 or M10.
The Indian equivalent of Gimbal head, is Benro, I believe from far east.

Last as for tripod, well I leave that to you and your own choice as long as we are agree to chose between Bogen Manfrotto or GITZO.

I hope everyone is as bad as me in math as if you put these numbers so far together, you might have already given up on photography.

Andy, sorry to bring it up here, but not totally unrelated. On question you asked me before about long mirror lenses, this is one reference site you must have a look, if not gone throught it before:

LINK

[andy153]

Hi Sassan, Thanks for the very detailed reply and the attached links - I have now settled my tripods etc. I have 3 sets of Manfrotto legs - 055V with Acratech GV2 gimbal ballhead; Manfrotto 058 with Arca Swiss B1 ball head; Manfrotto 055 MF4 Magfibre legs with Markins M20 ball head and a Manfrotto 679 Monopod with Markins M10 ballhead. I've also got a Wimberley Sidekick (£45 on eBay) and the Indian Wimberley MkI copy. All I now need is a Sherpa to carry them for me!

[gordon g]

That's an interesting strategy Andy - so many different legs with a head for each. I do now own 2 sets - aluminium manfrotto 055 3 section, which is pretty old and battered, but still functional, and a new carbon fibre 055 4 section. I have 3 centre columns of different lengths with a head on each, and I interchange the centre column/head combo depending on the needs of the trip. My 3 heads are the manfrotto stirrup head, a manfrotto heavy duty ball head, and I have recently acquired a heavy duty geared head.
The stirrup is on a long centre column, that I can mount on the shelf of a hide if needed using a hide clamp, and these days, I tend just to use it for the spotting scope or digiscoping. If I am birding away from hides, it gets mounted on the aluminium legs.
The ballhead was my mainstay, being able to cope with any type of photography (although a bit fiddly to get set right for macro), until I bought the geared head. I still use the ball head, on the carbon legs, when I want a more compact and lightweight set-up for long walks or mountain trips. I generally dont use really big glass on these trips, so the lighter legs arent a problem. I still use the ballhead for the 500mm, as it copes well with the weight and size of the lens, but would use the heavier legs for preference with this lens.
The geared head usually goes with the aluminium legs, although I do use it on the carbon ones sometimes to reduce the weight a bit. This is usually for general/landscape/macro photography when I dont have to walk miles! I chose this head after trying a friend's one and finding it very easy to use, and less bulky than I had feared.
All tripod/head combos are a compromise - I'd be interested in how other people do things.

[andy153]

The beauty of the Acratech GV2 is that it is very light - less than 1lb (.45kg) yet is rated up to 25lbs load. With the ultra light Magfibre legs it is an ideal trecking/walking combination. The other two are for easily accessible locations such as Disabled friendly bird hides etc.

[Don Hoey]

Originally Posted by gordon g

..........All tripod/head combos are a compromise - I'd be interested in how other people do things.

Well Andys wallet is in a different league to mine - ( Acratech GV2, Arca Swiss B1, Markins M20, Markins M10, Wimberley Sidekick, Indian Wimberley MkI ).

For monopod use I finally replaced my well worn 1980's Benbo ballhead with a lightweight ballhead in the shape of a Manfrotto 486.
For home/studio I use the 405 geared head which is a really nice bit of kit. Never take it out and about now though after a costly accident ( mounted on a tripod it slipped out of the car head first and wrecked some gear teeth ).
The longest lens I have is a 400mm so I am able to get by in the make do and mend camp, albeit with a not so cheap Manfrotto 501 head.
Origionally bought for scope use only, I have done a few mods to allow an easy change over from scope to camera.
The 4 x 40 riflescope with fine crosshairs is used as an aiming device - Works brilliantly with an angled scope particularly when targeting specific stars/birds or anything small and tricky to get on to quickly. Line up the riflescope and the star or whatever is dead centre in the spotting scope. Great when trying to find and track the moon with the camera too ( 400mm plus stacked tc's ).

I turned the side cheeks round to allow viewing of vertical stars. Before this it would not achieve particularly high angles without fouling the rotational lock. This also gave me an easy mounting point for a threaded spigot, so I can add screw in counterweights for use with the camera when dealing with high elevations. I also added the Manfrotto long sliding plate 357 to allow for better balance with the camera mounted.

Modified 501 pics attatched so everyone can have a good laugh.

Don

[andy153]

Interesting setup Don, never thought of using a rifle scope for sighting - thanks for the idea.