$7 Gimbal
Jan 22, 2013 09:39:20 #
GW wrote:
Well it's not the most atractive , but it works ,what do you think? Made from a piece of steel stock , bent via my PU hitch and addition of 2 bolts and a piece of scrape leather.
Looks like a good start but I think you will go farther before your done to perfect it. I built one last year for my 400mm 2.8, couldn't see spending 500.00= for it. Here is a couple pics of mine.
Jan 22, 2013 09:41:49 #
jerryc41 wrote:
Is the purpose of your device to work with the nodal point? I see that thay sell expensive devices to adjust for that, but I'm satisfied with my hand held shots. Nothing for publication, just my own amusement.
Bamboo wrote:
I give you credit. My motto is no supplies improvise. A few years ago I needed a pano head so I made one. It doesnt have to support a large lens but it works very well with a Canon 7D and a 24-70 lens.
Is the purpose of your device to work with the nodal point? I see that thay sell expensive devices to adjust for that, but I'm satisfied with my hand held shots. Nothing for publication, just my own amusement.
Yes, I adjust it for the nodal point to enable exact stitching. You can buy one for about $500, this one I have less than $15 in to and it works great.
Jan 22, 2013 09:45:45 #
GW wrote:
Well it's not the most atractive , but it works ,what do you think? Made from a piece of steel stock , bent via my PU hitch and addition of 2 bolts and a piece of scrape leather.
Might be OK for a point & shoot camera but I sure wouldn't put my DSLR on it.
The big advantage of a gimbal is stability and easier panning with a larger camera and long lenses. This would never work for them.
Jim D
Jan 22, 2013 09:58:36 #
clicktime wrote:
Looks like a good start but I think you will go farther before your done to perfect it. I built one last year for my 400mm 2.8, couldn't see spending 500.00= for it. Here is a couple pics of mine.
GW wrote:
Well it's not the most atractive , but it works ,what do you think? Made from a piece of steel stock , bent via my PU hitch and addition of 2 bolts and a piece of scrape leather.
Looks like a good start but I think you will go farther before your done to perfect it. I built one last year for my 400mm 2.8, couldn't see spending 500.00= for it. Here is a couple pics of mine.
Reminds me of this gimbal.
http://www.adorama.com/BG3421.html
I own this one and it works very well for me. I mainly use this head with my 7D and a 400mm prime lens.
I also own and use this gimbal head.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0071BIQZC/ref=oh_details_o01_s00_i00
I had to loosen the one bearing on this one but it now works great! For the average photographer there is no need to spend $500.00 to get a nice functional gimbal head. Unless you are just trying to "keep up with the Jones".
Jim D
Jan 22, 2013 11:37:13 #
Croce wrote:
quote=flyguy quote=GW Well it's not the most atr... (show quote)
I kind of thought this is how new inventions were made!
Jan 22, 2013 12:06:06 #
GW wrote:
Well it's not the most atractive , but it works ,what do you think? Made from a piece of steel stock , bent via my PU hitch and addition of 2 bolts and a piece of scrape leather.
As long as you are comfortable putting a $10,000 lens on it then go for it. Personally I am not going to put my $10k lens on a $7 gimbal nor would I tow a $20k trailer with a $5 hitch.
Jan 22, 2013 12:12:45 #
jeep_daddy wrote:
As long as you are comfortable putting a $10,000 lens on it then go for it. Personally I am not going to put my $10k lens on a $7 gimbal nor would I tow a $20k trailer with a $5 hitch.
GW wrote:
Well it's not the most atractive , but it works ,what do you think? Made from a piece of steel stock , bent via my PU hitch and addition of 2 bolts and a piece of scrape leather.
As long as you are comfortable putting a $10,000 lens on it then go for it. Personally I am not going to put my $10k lens on a $7 gimbal nor would I tow a $20k trailer with a $5 hitch.
I imagine if one had $10,000 to spend on a lens they wouldn't take the time to build a gimbal, they would buy one.
Jan 22, 2013 12:20:51 #
Great work everybody. I would like to see the Jones' become extinct, but don't think it will happen anytime soon. I think they are interbreeding.
In life I am often reminded of my favorite anecdote, Teddy Roosevelt's,"The Man In the Arena". Too many today are those "timid souls". It's never too late to get out of the comfort zone.
In life I am often reminded of my favorite anecdote, Teddy Roosevelt's,"The Man In the Arena". Too many today are those "timid souls". It's never too late to get out of the comfort zone.
Jan 22, 2013 12:21:01 #
Sweet Willie
Loc: Texas
What do you mean by grade 6 steel? Looks like low carbon bar stock
Sweet Willie
Sweet Willie
Jan 22, 2013 12:29:00 #
Sweet Willie wrote:
What do you mean by grade 6 steel? Looks like low carbon bar stock
Sweet Willie
Sweet Willie
Willie, hot rolled steel looks cheap, cold rolled steel looks expesive, when in actuality they may be identical. But if your asking, you already know that.
Jan 22, 2013 12:50:32 #
Gee....give a guy credit for working with what he has! He gets my vote for the saying that "necessity is the mother of invention".
I think that what matters most is if it works for him. No-one else has to like it!
I think that what matters most is if it works for him. No-one else has to like it!
Jan 22, 2013 12:56:11 #
SharpShooter wrote:
Great work everybody. I would like to see the Jones' become extinct, but don't think it will happen anytime soon. I think they are interbreeding.
In life I am often reminded of my favorite anecdote, Teddy Roosevelt's,"The Man In the Arena". Too many today are those "timid souls". It's never too late to get out of the comfort zone.
In life I am often reminded of my favorite anecdote, Teddy Roosevelt's,"The Man In the Arena". Too many today are those "timid souls". It's never too late to get out of the comfort zone.
:thumbup: Read my favorite quote at the bottom of my posts.
Jim D
Jan 22, 2013 16:19:39 #
Looks pretty good to me, nice job! I enjoy working with metal, fabricating, welding, machining it's a lot of fum for sure. That setup ought to give you very precise control, keep up the good work! :-)
Jan 22, 2013 19:16:37 #
JR1 wrote:
I wouldn't put MY 500mm and D7000 on it
Well JR1 no one asked you to! During my many years of innovative problem solving engineering, there was always a nay say-er who put down innovation. I regret that you do not have an explanation that explains why you would not put your camera and lens on it... do you have a concept of the shear strength of even a 1/4 inch bolt or that steel strapping? if the shape is the problem,,, then give a suggestion.
Strength of a 1/4" 20 tpi is 720 pound clamp load... how much does your camera weight.... ???
http://www.derose.net/steve/resources/engtables/bolts.html
SCIENCE AND NUMBERS AND CRITICAL THINKING ARE CRUCIAL !!!
Innovation does not need cold water just for the sake of being a hard line conservative get with the new innovative world....
Now some may think I am being harsh in my comments, but they must realize that you were harsh and UN-justified in yours,,, i was justified.... you just bragged on your expensive equipment.... bad!
Jan 22, 2013 20:46:14 #
Thanks Dpullum, for posting the link. I generally know the torque values in my line of work, but prefer to be precise in the application of the bolts. This will make an excellent reference sheet in the feild.
dpullum wrote:
quote=JR1 I wouldn't put MY 500mm and D7000 on it... (show quote)
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.