Whassup With The Wimberley?

[CoolToolGuy]

I'm looking for an education here. I understand that the Wimberly head centers the lens and the pivot point, but I don't understand why all the fuss when a fluid head can do essentially the same thing. I will be looking for another tripod head by the end of the year, and would like to understand what I might get out of a Wimberly. My longest lenses will be used primarily for motorsports, but I have visions of searching out some birds and wildlife as well. I have a Manfrotto 501 Fluid head, and it works as smoothly as I can imagine. Help me understand why I should spring for a $500 tripod head when a $150 seems to do the job adequately.

Thanks in advance.

Have Fun,

[Scottes]

The Wimberley really balances the center of gravity of the lens/body and makes the lens virtually weightless. It's now very easy to move the lens around, yet the weight of the lens still keeps it fairly steady (though not as steady as a tripod). But it's much faster than a tripod, even a fluid head.

But if your fluid head works well then I can't argue with the $500 versus $150 thing. $150 is certainly a lot easier to deal with!

[Belmondo]

I'm sitting in my hotel room with my 500 f/4 pointing out the window sitting on a Wimberly. With just the slightest friction dialed in, I can point the lens anywhere I want with little or no effort, and it will stay where pointed. It works the same with any lens I own that has a tripod ring on it. It's stout, heavy, and stable. There are other gimbal-mount heads, but IMHO, this is far and away the best

It's a mechanically simple device, and is likely to work forever just the way it does right now. Fluid heads may not.

[TammieO]

belmondo, what hotel are you at and are you planning to leave your tripod and Wimberly head?

[Belmondo]

belmondo, what hotel are you at and are you planning to leave your tripod and Wimberly head?

I'm at the....

I'm at the....

You know? I'm not sure.

I'm not worried about forgetting the tripod, though. I've tied it to my leg.


Or was it my wife's leg.

Hmmmmm.

Who am I?

[DocFrankenstein]

You can ask the same question about the sound blimp... or why a collar for 70-200 costs a 100 bucks.

[Belmondo]

Here's where old Belmondo shows his ignorance.

What's a sound blimp?

[CoolToolGuy]

Interesting - a little background:

When I got my 600mm (thank you, Belmondo), I put it on my 3-way head and it was a disaster. I was getting chattering from the lens when I panned, and by the time it stopped the shot was gone. Trying to solve that, I stumbled onto a fluid head. I gave it a try, and I was amazed. The one I tried wouldn't handle the weight, so I moved up to the Manfrotto 501. While looking around Manfrotto's Web site, I noticed that they recommend the 501 with long lenses and spotting scopes. Hmmmm.

I just wish the price differential wasn't so high - I can wear out three 501 fluid heads for less than the price of one Wimberly. Maybe I'll stumble on the world's greatest deal on a Wimberly before I commit to another 501.

Any more enlightenment out there for me?

Have Fun,

[DocFrankenstein]

Here's where old Belmondo shows his ignorance.

What's a sound blimp?
http://www.soundblimp.com/canon.htm

That [blimp] costs 900USD

[.lf.]

http://www.soundblimp.com/canon.htm

That [blimp] costs 900USD

oh yea them, they use them on film sets so you cant hear the camera... some price.

[.lf.]

anyone used the wimberley sidekick, and how does it compair to it's big brother?

[SolPics]

The Wimberely looks ideal, but at a cost. I was looking at the Bogen 3421 head as an alternative. Anyone have experience with this head.

[CoolToolGuy]

The Wimberely looks ideal, but at a cost. I was looking at the Bogen 3421 head as an alternative. Anyone have experience with this head.

I have heard the 3421 mentioned on POTN, but I haven't used it. Even that head is more expensive than the Manfrotto 501, and so far I haven't heard anything that these heads do that a good fluid head doesn't do. I can do the one-finger thing with it, and adjust the drag in two planes.

The only possible thing I see is that the pivot point of up and down movement is centered on the gimbal heads, where with the fluid heads the lens sits on top of the pivot point, so the lens travels through an arc rather than pivoting on its center. But I don't see where that would be a big deal.

Maybe I need to go out and use one side-by-side with my 501. Perhaps there will be a profound revelation.

Have Fun,

[jimtfoto]

I'm sitting in my hotel room with my 500 f/4 pointing out the window sitting on a Wimberly. With just the slightest friction dialed in, I can point the lens anywhere I want with little or no effort, and it will stay where pointed. It works the same with any lens I own that has a tripod ring on it. It's stout, heavy, and stable. There are other gimbal-mount heads, but IMHO, this is far and away the best

It's a mechanically simple device, and is likely to work forever just the way it does right now. Fluid heads may not.

Agree totally (although I'm sitting in a different hotel room) ...

cheers,
jim

[KennyG]

I have a full Wimberley and it has only been used a couple of times for shooting racing boats at sea shot from the cliff top. It, and a tripod, for motorsports are simply useless. You will never correctly follow the action and the same applies to even the best fluid head. The only use for a tripod at a motor racing circuit is by film camera crews where the tripods they use cost more than a couple of new 1 series bodies. Also, they are a danger trackside and are banned at most UK circuits. The answer is a good monopod, straight mount onto the lens collar, no head.

[CoolToolGuy]

I have a full Wimberley and it has only been used a couple of times for shooting racing boats at sea shot from the cliff top. It, and a tripod, for motorsports are simply useless. You will never correctly follow the action and the same applies to even the best fluid head. The only use for a tripod at a motor racing circuit is by film camera crews where the tripods they use cost more than a couple of new 1 series bodies. Also, they are a danger trackside and are banned at most UK circuits. The answer is a good monopod, straight mount onto the lens collar, no head.

You have a valid point when trackside - but I am outside the fences, and your assessment is simply incorrect in that context. :p Stop by the next time you are in the States, and I will be happy to demonstrate for you how I plan to use two different long focal lengths at the same time - and OBTW, when I do use my monopod, I wouldn't be caught dead without a ballhead on it. . .

So, enough of trying to tell me how to undo what I am already doing successfully, and back to helping me understand what makes the Wimberley something I can't live without. ;)

Have Fun,

[CyberDyneSystems]

I can't compare it to the Fluid heads,. but it would seem to me that with the fluid head you would still be faced with the issue of preventing the lens form dumping over fron to back.. or if not you would be fighting some strong friction preventing the flop over? (again I don't know how fluid heads work so correct me if I am wrong)

with the gimble heads, once centered and balanced,. there is no possibility of the flop over,. and thus no effort on the part of the user to keep it upright. While still having the ability to aim the lens very high upwards and downwards. In fact there is no effort at all ever other than getting from poit A to point B on your back :)

Trying one would certainly be a help,. and I doubt you would need to do it side by side with the 501,. as you should know right off if the motion is improved.

As you may recall from previous posts on the subject,. no not consider any of the myriad sidemount options with lenses that size (Sidekick, Kirk, Mongoose etc..) Formerly there were only three bottom mount gimbles availble, the "full wimberly" and the afor mentioned Manfrotto 3421 (really reasonable IMHO @ about $160.00 WITH sliding QR and plate...)

But now there is a third option.. but for the life of me I can't remember it's name. Still it's another $500.00 plus option like the Wimberly.

[CoolToolGuy]

CDS, I fully understand how the gimbal puts the balance point at the pivot point, and that seems to be a cool thing. With the fluid head, I can balance it front to back, but as I mentioned, the lens is sitting on top of the center axis, and it will travel through an arc when moving it up and down, not pivoting on the center. For my application I think I can deal with that with the fluid head. The drag control lets you handle it with one finger if desired, or make it a little more stiff if that's what you prefer. With typical motorsports use I wouldn't be swinging it that much up or down to have to worry about it dumping, as I usually keep it somewhat level and it is balanced.

I know the wildlife crowd is crazy for the Wimberley, I'm trying to figure out whether I should catch the fever.

Have Fun,