Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos Video and Sound Editing 
Thread started 05 Nov 2012 (Monday) 10:52
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Best Glidecam for 5D Mark II (again)

 
TheEngineer
Member
45 posts
Joined Oct 2012
     
Nov 05, 2012 10:52 |  #1

This topic has come up before in the past, but I was wondering if anyone could lend any new insight or experiences.

Based on weight alone, even when shooting with a monitor and light, it seems that the total weight of a 5D Mark II would fall within the 2-6 lb range of the Glidecam 2000 HD. However, I have seen numerous videos from guys flying a 5D on a Glidecam 4000 HD without any additional attachments. I'm just wondering if perhaps the 4000 HD works better even though it would be very difficult to reach its minimum weight of 4lbs.

Perhaps the larger weight of 4000 HD allows helps keep it less susceptible to wind during action shots?

Here's a great looking example of the 5D on a 4000 HD: http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=3Ger9exVd2I (external link)


Cinéma Pure Tampa
http://www.cinemapuret​ampa.com
https://vimeo.com/cine​mapure

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Darryll
Member
Avatar
93 posts
Joined Oct 2012
     
Nov 06, 2012 07:55 |  #2

Wish Devin would go back to making vids like those again instead of his new direction. I've seen him blog about using a 2000 more recently and finds it a bit easier than the 4000. He doesn't use a monitor etc though




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheEngineer
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
45 posts
Joined Oct 2012
     
Nov 06, 2012 08:21 |  #3

Darryll wrote in post #15213323 (external link)
Wish Devin would go back to making vids like those again instead of his new direction. I've seen him blog about using a 2000 more recently and finds it a bit easier than the 4000. He doesn't use a monitor etc though

I agree...It's sad that his gimick videos get exponentially more views than his majestic scenic videos.

He actually responded to me yesterday so I will share the information here for future readers. As I had suspected, he prefers to use the 4000 HD when shooting outdoors or in windy conditions. The extra weight helps keep the the stabilizer from being affected by a breeze. Otherwise he prefers the use of the 2000 HD.

In my case, since most of my shots will be outdoors and on boats, I chose to order the 4000 HD. I previously had a Flycam Nano and it was useless even at a low speed on board a boat.


Cinéma Pure Tampa
http://www.cinemapuret​ampa.com
https://vimeo.com/cine​mapure

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Orguss
Member
132 posts
Joined Jul 2009
     
Nov 06, 2012 11:29 |  #4

I have the flycam 5000, then the Glidecam HD4000 modified like a sled (steadicam sled) used it with steadicam pilot vest and arm. Pic one was early mod and the hdmi cable was not running thru the post, but it was pretty steady and got the shot we wanted. Pic 2 was my final mod and after a while using it at wedding I got tired not from the rig but taking it off and on. I sold it and picked up flycam C5 (would not recommend) but there is a bit of friction, I mgmt to fly it ok...mod it with hdmi running thru the post. A few days ago, I picked up Glidecam HD2000, let me tell you, it's smaller, much easier for me to be mobile, I can put it down and run up to another camera quick. And if you run into a seller that want to sell a used HD2000 for $500, tell him to go pound sand, might as buy it brand new it's only $549 new. Sorry I run into a guy who want to sell a sort of beat up with scratches for $500. I ended picking one up for $300 and in new condition then the other guy.

IMAGE: http://jerryphim.smugmug.com/photos/i-dNgvXdC/0/L/i-dNgvXdC-L.jpg
IMAGE: http://jerryphim.smugmug.com/photos/i-jqH7K6B/0/XL/i-jqH7K6B-XL.jpg



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dqfilms
Hatchling
4 posts
Joined Nov 2012
     
Nov 10, 2012 19:55 |  #5

I film with a markiii but don't have alot of additions to my rig. I would recommend getting the glidecam 4000 and not the 2000. Due to weight. Ive maxed out my 2000s weight without alot of additions.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

8,585 views & 0 likes for this thread, 4 members have posted to it.
Best Glidecam for 5D Mark II (again)
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos Video and Sound Editing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such!
2787 guests, 109 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.