Gimbal for still camera - anybody uses ?

[Hassasin]

How many are using a gimbal head for a still camera?

Seems like a typical MF SLR will fit nicely and with a longer Arca plate, can probably be fine tuned for zero balance with most lenses.

But looking at some gimbals, am not sure how rigid they are and is their locking strong enough to hold a position with heavier set up.

 

[Kino]

As a general purpose head, it may be more irritating than helpful. These heads were designed for large telephoto lenses; to place the lens at approximately the nodal point with the camera body having full access hanging off the back of the lens.

Placing a camera with a typical normal lens on the mount, impedes access to which ever side you have toward the head

If this is what you are looking to do, I don't see why it wouldn't work. This head is rated to 30 lbs and most manufacturers are conservative with weight limits to insure the head doesn't prematurely wear out and get returned.

 

[Ian C]

This is usually used for long, heavy telephoto lenses. The lens is placed onto the mount. Then the camera is attached to the back of the lens. Then the position of the camera and lens assembly is adjusted forward or rearward until the lens is balanced from front to rear. The center of mass of the camera and lens is now centered as close as possible to the pivot.

Then, when the lens is pivoted upward or downward, the entire camera and lens assembly stays centered over the vertical axis of the tripod. It has no propensity to fall over forward or rearward and the lens tends to stay pointed at the same vertically referenced angle.

This isn’t intended as a camera mount for general photography. It is a special mount for long, heavy lenses. My Manfrotto gimbal mount is rated by the maker for up to 44 pounds (about 20 Kg).

 

[Two23]

These are a mainstay for wildlife photographers, particularly those who photo birds with long lenses. I consider them to be specialized gear.


Kent in SD

 

[Hassasin]

Yes, should have said that, long lenses with tripod mount (like Variogon for Hass, or Canon 300-400 etc.) Just reading up on these things as I have never paid much attention.

 

[Hassasin]

If this is what you are looking to do, I don't see why it wouldn't work.

Actually it was just to show example of what I was asking about. I see lots of choices and will choose what balances need/price/quality. It won't be used on every occasion, but starts to make more and more sense to consider owning one.

 

[Hassasin]

This one looks interesting

 

[Kino]

If you do a lot of wildlife or telephoto work, it certainly would be much more convenient to use than a typical tripod head.

 

[guangong]

These are a mainstay for wildlife photographers, particularly those who photo birds with long lenses. I consider them to be specialized gear.


Kent in SD

Yes, birds. My friend concentrates on birds as uses a Gimbal along with long lenses for birds high in trees.

 

[loccdor]

Thread's a bit old, but there's not a lot of discussion on gimbals on this site and I recently got one.

Before, I was trying a 600mm focal length on a little compact travel Manfrotto with small ballhead. This tripod is great for travel, but my keeper rate while using it not in self-timer mode with the T90 was about 50% at 1/125. So a 2 stop improvement over handholding. When using in self-timer mode, there's some pretty visible shaking of the camera from the mirror vibration. It also makes focusing harder if the viewfinder image is jerky.

Now, I'm trying the same setup on a much sturdier Tiltall aluminum tripod with 3-way head, and a Neewer gimbal on top. It took some adjusting and tightening, but I can already see looking through the viewfinder what is probably an extra 3 stops improvement in handholding vs the flimsy tripod and ballhead. I leave the 3-way head completely tightened and pan and tilt with the gimbal, it's extremely smooth in the movement and I don't see any of the jerkiness in the viewfinder that I was getting with my previous setup. Can't wait to go take it out into the field. The extra height from the gimbal means I can only use 2 of the 3 leg extensions of the Tiltall and it suits me as a 6 foot person. The Tiltall's central column at full height still stays pretty well locked in as far as vibration goes and with less leg spread it's usable in tighter areas.

 

[_T_]

There's no reason why what you're intending to do wouldn't work. It's what the products are designed for. But what is the weight of the gear you intend to put on the gimbal? These setups are usually designed for digital cameras with long lenses, which weigh quite a bit, but it's possible your choice of mf camera and lens could necessitate spending a bit more on a particularly sturdy gimbal.

I would compare the weight of your setup to the weight of a typical full frame setup and see if you're in the right ballpark.

 

[loccdor]

Camera, lens, and teleconverter are 2kg or 4.4 lbs. The gimbal has a rating of 30 lbs. Not sure about the tripod, but I've read of people shooting 4x5 on this model.

The compact travel tripod I was using was only rated for 4.4 lbs.