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
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Accessories 
Thread started 23 Nov 2012 (Friday) 20:23
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Ballhead or Gimbal? small 400 5.6

 
Tanglefoot47
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,413 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Tulalip WA about 40 miles north of Seattle
     
Nov 24, 2012 19:20 |  #16

Well it's done I just bought the Jobu design bwg j3k looks awesome




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
sudipto_roy
Senior Member
Avatar
508 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Calcutta, India
     
Nov 25, 2012 00:20 |  #17

A Gimbal for a 400 5.6 is an overkill unless you are a birds in flight photographer. I used to use a Manfrotto 486 RC2 for birds on a perch. It worked fairly well but not for BIF. I moved on to Arcatech GV2 but soon realised that I don't really need a tripod for using my 400 unless the shutter speed is below 1/100. That's the irony of life. I am not too sure if the GV2 can quite be a replacement for a proper Gimbal.
I would agree with the others not to buy $100 gimbals off ebay. The Manfrotto gimbal is a little too heavy for me.


7D with 400 F 5.6 for birds
5D Mk II with 24-70 for everything else

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tanglefoot47
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,413 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Tulalip WA about 40 miles north of Seattle
     
Nov 25, 2012 00:30 |  #18

sudipto_roy wrote in post #15285628 (external link)
A Gimbal for a 400 5.6 is an overkill unless you are a birds in flight photographer. I used to use a Manfrotto 486 RC2 for birds on a perch. It worked fairly well but not for BIF. I moved on to Arcatech GV2 but soon realised that I don't really need a tripod for using my 400 unless the shutter speed is below 1/100. That's the irony of life. I am not too sure if the GV2 can quite be a replacement for a proper Gimbal.
I would agree with the others not to buy $100 gimbals off ebay. The Manfrotto gimbal is a little too heavy for me.

I got the 400 for BIF I am getting old and my hand is not steady hence the gimbal. I need much more shutter speed than what you have mentioned sad as it is I need a tripod




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnf3f
Goldmember
Avatar
3,999 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 617
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wales
     
Nov 25, 2012 12:15 |  #19

Tanglefoot47 wrote in post #15284740 (external link)
Well it's done I just bought the Jobu design bwg j3k looks awesome

I think that will fit your needs very nicely - enjoy!


Life is for living, cameras are to capture it (one day I will learn how!).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Nov 25, 2012 17:22 |  #20

Tanglefoot47 wrote in post #15284192 (external link)
Don't think the 234RC2 would be the same as a gimbal it's just a tilt head

I was looking for a head that would be good for birds in flight. The Manfrotto looked like a good option.

It looks like it works exactly the same as any other gimbal head (though with two sides to it as opposed to one side). Could you please explain how it would work any differently?


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
69,628 posts
Likes: 221
Joined Jun 2004
Location: Bethesda, MD USA
     
Nov 25, 2012 17:26 |  #21

It doesn't pan, but you'd probably be happier with a monopod for birds, anyhow (which is what it's made for).


Jon
----------
Cocker Spaniels
Maryland and Virginia activities
Image Posting Rules and Image Posting FAQ
Report SPAM, Don't Answer It! (link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.
PAYPAL GIFT NO LONGER ALLOWED HERE

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Nov 25, 2012 20:39 |  #22

Opps, my bad. When I quoted Tanglefoot -

Tanglefoot47 wrote in post #15284192 (external link)
Don't think the 234RC2 would be the same as a gimbal it's just a tilt head

Then wrote the following -

jimewall wrote in post #15288176 (external link)
I was looking for a head that would be good for birds in flight. The Manfrotto looked like a good option.

It looks like it works exactly the same as any other gimbal head (though with two sides to it as opposed to one side). Could you please explain how it would work any differently?

I thought he was still talking about this Manfrotto head mentioned by RPCrowe here -

RPCrowe wrote in post #15281385 (external link)
I don't really like following moving subjects using a ball head. Instead, I use a Manfrotto Gimbal Head...

http://www.nikonians.o​rg …/manfrotto_393/​393_1.html (external link)

Somehow I missed that the topic of the Manfrotto head changed here -

Jon wrote in post #15284159 (external link)
For the 400 f/5.6, the Manfrotto 234RC2 or the RRS MH-01 would be ample, depending on whether you're an RC-2 or A/S QR plate user.

So again my bad! Which brings me back to here -

Jon wrote in post #15288192 (external link)
It doesn't pan, but you'd probably be happier with a monopod for birds, anyhow (which is what it's made for).

What is really bad as I have a modified 234 on my monopod so I should have recognized the number. This or handheld is what I do now. And no, I would never put that on a tripod (I realize that no panning on a tripod could happen with this head). I thought (incorrectly) I was referring to the Manfrotto 393.

I just wondered if at times I would be happier with a gimbal head on a tripod! The Manfrotto 393 looks like a good (and not super expensive option) to try.


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 84
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Nov 26, 2012 06:30 |  #23

jimewall wrote in post #15288176 (external link)
I was looking for a head that would be good for birds in flight. The Manfrotto looked like a good option.

It looks like it works exactly the same as any other gimbal head (though with two sides to it as opposed to one side). Could you please explain how it would work any differently?

How does the Manfrotto 393 head differ from a proper gimbal?

Well, a proper gimbal head allows vertical and horizontal adjustments so that the up/down pivot axis passes through the centre of gravity (CoG) of the camera/lens combination. That means you can loosen the friction and tilt the lens to any angle - and it will stay there. This is why a gimbal is great for shooting flying things, it's easy to track such things with the lightest of touches.

If the pivot axis is below the CoG then tilting the lens will make it want to droop. So you need to increase the friction. The greater the angle of tilt, the greater the amount of friction needed to stop it drooping.

If the pivot axis is above the CoG then tilting the lens will make it want to swing back down to the horizontal, again requiring more and more friction to keep it in place at steeper angles.

With the 393 there is no horizontal adjustment possible - so it's all a matter of luck as to the positioning of your pivot axis.
Here's an example (external link) where the pivot axis is below the CoG. And one where (external link) it's above the CoG.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nordwil57
Senior Member
582 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 84
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Massachusetts
     
Nov 26, 2012 06:51 |  #24

FWIW, I ordered the Manfrotto 393 head for use with my 100-400 with the hopes of eventually getting a larger prime. When it arrived I was amazed at the size and weight, the pics didn't do it justice in that regard.
That said, it was more than I needed (or wanted to carry) at that time, so I returned it and continued hand holding or using the monopod with a ball head. When I finally bought the 300/2.8 IS, I took a gamble with the Opteka I mentioned earlier and am very satisfied.

That Jobu looks perfect tho, I'm sure you'll love it.


Rick

Gear List

Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Nov 26, 2012 17:01 |  #25

hollis_f wrote in post #15290256 (external link)
How does the Manfrotto 393 head differ from a proper gimbal?

Well, a proper gimbal head allows vertical and horizontal adjustments so that the up/down pivot axis passes through the centre of gravity (CoG) of the camera/lens combination. That means you can loosen the friction and tilt the lens to any angle - and it will stay there. This is why a gimbal is great for shooting flying things, it's easy to track such things with the lightest of touches.

If the pivot axis is below the CoG then tilting the lens will make it want to droop. So you need to increase the friction. The greater the angle of tilt, the greater the amount of friction needed to stop it drooping.

If the pivot axis is above the CoG then tilting the lens will make it want to swing back down to the horizontal, again requiring more and more friction to keep it in place at steeper angles.

With the 393 there is no horizontal adjustment possible - so it's all a matter of luck as to the positioning of your pivot axis.
Here's an example (external link) where the pivot axis is below the CoG. And one where (external link) it's above the CoG.

Thanks Frank, but I figured all that out, you missed my response directly above your reply. I misunderstood which head was being talked about.


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tanglefoot47
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,413 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Tulalip WA about 40 miles north of Seattle
     
Nov 29, 2012 18:21 |  #26

Got my Jobu Jr. 3 gimbal head today and it's awesome but I have only one issue, it will work better without my grip not enough height. When I swivel the lens up I am restricted by the grip so I can work around this by removing it. Can't wait to get out and give a go. Oh yes with the grip on I can't get a level point to much weight with the grip and two batteries




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sliceotime
Senior Member
Avatar
582 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Williamsburg, Virginia
     
Nov 29, 2012 21:13 as a reply to  @ Tanglefoot47's post |  #27

Hi Tanglefoot47, you can adjust the height of the L-bracket with two screws that mount it to the upper pinion.

With my 7D I had to reverse mount the Wimberley plate because the balance point was a few inches behind the tripod foot.

http://www.wildscapeim​ages.biz/blog/?p=630 (external link)


-Slice
So many birds so little time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tanglefoot47
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,413 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Tulalip WA about 40 miles north of Seattle
     
Nov 29, 2012 23:53 |  #28

sliceotime wrote in post #15306498 (external link)
Hi Tanglefoot47, you can adjust the height of the L-bracket with two screws that mount it to the upper pinion.

With my 7D I had to reverse mount the Wimberley plate because the balance point was a few inches behind the tripod foot.

http://www.wildscapeim​ages.biz/blog/?p=630 (external link)

That right's silly me LOL




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sliceotime
Senior Member
Avatar
582 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Williamsburg, Virginia
     
Nov 30, 2012 06:21 as a reply to  @ Tanglefoot47's post |  #29

Here's a link to Wimberley's balancing instructions, very similar to the Jobu. But with the Jobu you only have three vertical height settings, I usually set the height were the center of the lens is even with or just above the tilt axis. You can set it one notch higher if you need more clearance for steeper angles, but this can make your balance a little top heavy.

http://www.tripodhead.​com …s/Instructions-WH-200.pdf (external link)


-Slice
So many birds so little time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tanglefoot47
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,413 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Tulalip WA about 40 miles north of Seattle
     
Dec 01, 2012 17:16 |  #30

sliceotime wrote in post #15307592 (external link)
Here's a link to Wimberley's balancing instructions, very similar to the Jobu. But with the Jobu you only have three vertical height settings, I usually set the height were the center of the lens is even with or just above the tilt axis. You can set it one notch higher if you need more clearance for steeper angles, but this can make your balance a little top heavy.

http://www.tripodhead.​com …s/Instructions-WH-200.pdf (external link)

Thank you I have looked at a couple Utube videos showing how to level it up




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

6,018 views & 0 likes for this thread
Ballhead or Gimbal? small 400 5.6
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Accessories 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

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

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 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is astrobalcony
931 guests, 305 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, 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.