Lens Gimbal/Ball Head

Started 6 months ago | Discussions thread
just Tony
just Tony Senior Member • Posts: 2,202
Re: Lens Gimbal/Ball Head

T O Shooter wrote:

davidjt wrote:

T O Shooter wrote:

lokatz wrote:

larrywilson wrote:

If you have ever mounted a large heavy lens such as the Nikon 500 or 600 lenses on a ball head, the knob control is much less stable then with the two control knobs on the gimbal. You can loosen the knobs on a gimbal just a little and have a freely swinging camera and lens easy to align the focus bracket on your subject. With a ball head it is so awkward to align the focus bracket on your subject and much less stable for protecting your equipment. A good gimbal head is necessary for a good safe platform for your equipment.


Ok, I agree with that, too, but then, the question was about the 200-500, which is not quite in that weight league.

This is what he needs - nothing else, nothing bigger. 5 star reviews


And knock yourself out using any long lens on a ball head. Sure you can do it. I put my 500 f4VR with TC on my BH-55. But don't have a memory lapse.

Or much cheaper if he has a good ball head:


Strange looking setup. Extra places to add a lost of stability too.

You get over the looks after 2 seconds. The Wimberly Sidekick (the inspiration for Induro's knock-off) is fantastically stable for a 300mm/2.8 + 2XTC when used on an RRS BH-55. I used that setup when giving a rented 200-500 a try, with my 300 as a referee. It was as stable as needed. The only annoyance was the shifting center of gravity when zooming the 200-500, an issue for any gimbal arrangement of course.

The Induro version will stand or fall based on their particular execution of the concept, not the concept itself.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow