[borno]

That looks like a decent head Gulfer, jobu makes some too a bit cheaper than the wimberly. I may try one of those myself as I'm about to get a 300mm f2.8 hopefully. Here's a bunch of wimberly's and what-not from conowingo this am for the heck of it.

[snostorm]

I've decided that the largest lens I'll practically use is the FA*300/2.8 with TCs -- just can't deal with the size and weight of the really big glass on a regular basis. For me, the Wimberley Sidekick is the ideal solution for a number of reasons.

I like dealing with Wimberley. The CS people that I've talked to are very knowledgeable, and for a pre-gimbal user, there are a lot of details to sort out, especially like what plates are needed to balance specific lens/camera combos. Wimberley CS had answers for at least some Pentax-related questions, where some of the other mfgs seem to have little experience with Pentax (not an unreasonable situation, considering Pentax's market share, especially with sports/wildlife shooters, but this was a nice surprise for me -- and I also like the idea of supporting US companies in this economy, if possible). After the first e-mail communication with them, I knew I'd like dealing with this company.

Wimberley has a free test ride program where you can order and use the head, plates, and any other accessories you might fancy, and return anything that doesn't suit your needs, no ?s asked. (You do have to pay for the return shipping). They hold charging you for the order until you've decided what you're going to keep, and your warranty period starts only when you've finalized what you're keeping -- then you still have a return/exchange period that starts at this time. . . Outstanding CS and company policies count for something IMO.
. . .Add the availability of accessories, like the flash bracket, and you can have a pretty sophisticated gimbal system.

The Sidekick attaches to a ballhead via an Arca Swiss style clamp, and has another A/S clamp to attach your lens to on the gimbal. This has a number of advantages:

If you want to change lenses (to something smaller) and want to use the tripod, you just dismount the Sidekick (as easy as removing a camera from the QR clamp) and use the ballhead as normal. With a full gimbal, you must dismount the head, then mount a ballhead for use (and you'd have to carry the ballhead separately). I always have a plate attached to each of my bodies anyway. . .

The Sidekick only weighs @ 1 lb, and is MUCH more compact than a full gimbal, and thus a lot easier to carry and store -- I use an orphan tube sock -- not elegant by effective.

With the Sidekick, you are not as limited in the vertical angles that you can shoot. The ballhead allows you to easily tilt the Sidekick back so you can shoot straight up which is not possible with any of the full gimbals, unless you use different leg angles and lengths to tilt the center column (and setting that up isn't easy with a heavy cam/lens combo attached, unless you're using a tripod with a tiltable center column. . . even then, it's always a lot easier to adjust the ballhead. You do need to be careful when using the Sidekick like this as the weight can get offset quite a bit -- proper leg orientation can become very important.

There are some caveats:

You need to get an A/S style plate that will allow the cam/lens to balance (but you'd have to do that with any gimbal).

You need a quality ballhead with good panning action, even while supporting an offset weight. It also has to have an A/S style clamp (or be capable of being converted to one), and the ball has to lock solidly.

If the lenses that you can envision owning weigh significantly over 7-8 lbs, you should probably consider a full gimbal -- this isn't from experience, but rather from reading testimonials. For physically really large lenses or if you plan to use multiple lenses with a large variance in size, the extra adjust-ability of the full Wimberley Head would be an asset, but with the lenses I have (Tamron, Sigma, and Pentax 300/2.8, and occasionally the Tokina 150-500/5.6 SD) the Sidekick is fine. Anything smaller, I usually tend to shoot handheld.


I use a Manfrotto 468 MG RC2 as my ballhead base, and Wimberley had a conversion clamp that fits perfectly. This ballhead works great with the Sidekick as the panning action is very smooth, not effected by the offset weight, and the hydraulic ball lock mechanism is very solid, not requiring a whole lot of force on the knob. The Wimberley clamps and plates are very good -- no lever style clamps, but they do allow top mounting the plates and have optional safety stops that should be compatible with just about any clamp.

I know I was completely lost when I was trying to determine the best gimbal for my use. There's not a whole lot of info about them that's aimed at the gimbal newbie. Hopefully I've added some info rather than confusing the issue further.

. . . and no, I'm not connected to Wimberley in any way except for being a very satisfied customer. . .

Scott

[dadipentak]

Thanks, Ben--quite clear and very helpful.

@ Mickey: "dis" (as in "disrespect") is in contemporary usage by folks generally younger than you and I as a verb, meaning (more or less) "to dismiss in an arrogant manner."

[dadipentak]

Here's a bunch of wimberly's and what-not from conowingo this am for the heck of it. ]

How funny Tom--I almost headed up to Conowingo this morning but decided to avoid holiday traffic. I can see were the jam was! I take it the eagles are around, then?

[borno]

Hey Dave,
I went to the dam for a while this am and it was real windy so the Eagles seemed to just enjoy soaring around. I didn't get any good shots of them except a couple flight shots. Too much going on a home to stay long.

[24X36NOW]

I always though a Gimbal allowed fore and aft as well as side to side rocking movements such as with a ship's compass. Thus the camera or compass is always level.
The FPGH seems to only allow fore and aft. There does not seem to be any provision for tilting from side to side. So, to level the horizon. I suppose one would have to adjust the tripod's legs.
How is the camera balanced if it can not be slid back and forth to adjust for the weights of different lenses? With a heavy lens or, indeed, any lens it will flop forward. It looks as if it can be balanced properly with only the camera and no lens.
The two pictures show two different items.
I don't think this should be called a gimbal. Rather than gim-bal perhaps gimm-ick would be more appropriate.
What can it do that a ball and socket or a pan/tilt head, both of which are smaller, less complex and more versatile, cannot do better?
Mickey

Mickey:

A Gimbal head is intended to be used with large/heavy lenses that have a tripod mount; the camera body is not what you attach to it, the lens is. To level your horizon, you simply use the tripod mount to rotate the lens barrel. What the Gimbal head does that a ball and socket or pan and tilt head do not is provide the ability to put a big/heavy lens into almost perfect balance, so that adjusting its position can be done with a finger. Loosen such a big heavy lens/camera combo on a ball and socket or pan and tilt head, and you've got an unpleasant wrestling match on your hands, not to mention a lot of frustration trying to position it exactly as you want it given the weight making the head move in unwanted directions and/or moving just enough to change its position when tightening the head down.

The second shot in the ad for the Flashpoint head is the Wimberly, whose control knobs look a lot better. I've got one and wouldn't trade it for any of the competitors, but any Gimbal head is a much better big glass solution than a ball head or pan head of any variety.

[mickeyobe]

"Try using one before you dis them.
Pretty much everything in your post is incorrect."
(Wheatfield)

I did try one about 16 years ago in a dealer's shop. It bore little resemblance to those pictured. It was crudely made and roughly finished. The back and forth adjustment was very small and not of much use. I see that I jumped to a conclusion unjustly. Didn't I, Wheatfield?
Jumping to conclusions is a rather useless form of exercise.

Thanks to everyone who brought me up to date about the features of today's models. And my apologies to any gimbals that I offended with my "dis".

Mickey

[Fl_Gulfer]

I see INDURO has a Gimbal Head now. Has anyone tried this one yet?
Induro GHBA GH-Series Aluminum Gimbal Head for Arca-Swiss QR Clamp

485000 Induro GHBA GH-Series Aluminum Gimbal Head for Arca-Swiss QR Clamp

[Entropy]

I see INDURO has a Gimbal Head now. Has anyone tried this one yet?
Induro GHBA GH-Series Aluminum Gimbal Head for Arca-Swiss QR Clamp

485000 Induro GHBA GH-Series Aluminum Gimbal Head for Arca-Swiss QR Clamp

Given the choice between that (a Wimberley Sidekick-style unit, pretty much a "gimbal converter" for an existing ballhead) and the Flashpoint head, I'd go for the Flashpoint.