jackpinoh Loc: Kettering, OH 45419

With long lenses, tripod damping and head rigidity are very important as very small movements will cause motion blur. Both the Wimberley WH-200 and the Sirui PH-20 appear to be good solutions for you. I recommend reviewing Steve Perry's video on stabilizing long lenses on a tripod.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EI7BCMZaxE

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

The very FIRST thing you should look at is a stabilizing bracket - https://www.ebay.com/itm/Telephoto-Long-Lens-Support-Holder-Bracket-Quick-Release-Plate-For-Arca-Standard/383144170435?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l9372

The next thing you should think about is using a monopod or bodypod for subjects other than night sky ......

Gimbal comparissons - http://www.carolinawildphoto.com/gimbal_list.htm
.

TylerDurdensReel Loc: Fresno Ca.

Of course you could always do the simplest thing and not over think it. If BIF is what you do most of the time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgj8bMviZOw

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Neither. See below.



If your ballhead has a reasonably high weight capacity (say, 30 lb. or higher) AND an Arca-Swiss compatible quick release platform...

Get a Wimberley Sidekick, Induro GHBA or Movo GH400.

These are gimbal adapters that work in conjunction with a ballhead, instead of entirely replacing it the way a "full size" gimbal does. The adapter allows you to quickly switch the tripod back to "normal" use without need for any tools. You can just as quickly and easily re-install the adapter when you again want to work with a large telephoto on the gimbal.

Wimberley pretty much invented using gimbals for still photography with big, heavy lenses. Their WH-100 was one of the very first made especially for that purpose and the WH-200, with some minor tweaks, is still one of the best. It's also one of the most expensive.

Alongside their full size gimbal and accessories, Wimberley has also been offering their SK-100 Sidekick adapter, which serves similar purpose with some minor restrictions.

Rather than dedicate my tripod to "big lenses only" with a full size gimbal, I bought the Sidekick over 15 years ago. I've been using it ever since with a Gitzo Series 3 Systematic G1325 Mk II tripod (33 lb. rated) and Kirk BH-1 ball head (50 lb. weight rated). Any time I want to mount the camera directly, with a shorter lens that lacks any tripod collar, I simply remove the Sidekick. When I want the gimbal action for use with my 8 lb. 500mm f/4, 2 lb. of DSLR and some other accessories such as a teleconverters and a flashes with extender, I simply reinstall the Sidekick. It provides the tilt movement, while the ballhead provides the panning movement. Works great! With a light touch I can smoothly swing the large lens and camera to following moving subjects.

I've also used it with a variety of other lenses with tripod collars, including 300mm f/4, 70-200mm f/2.8, 100-400mm, 300mm f/2.8 and 180mm f/3.5 Macro.

Originally Wimberley recommended no heavier than 500mm f/4 lens on the Sidekick.... suggested that it wasn't up to heavier 400mm f/2.8 and 600mm f/4. However, they seem to have backed off that concern and I've seen people using Sidekicks with bigger lenses than mine, with no problems. So I'm sure it can easily handle your zoom and camera, which are probably little more than half the weight of rigs I've used on my Sidekick. In fact, the capacity of your tripod and ballhead might be a bigger concern.

A bonus, the Sidekick costs nearly half what the WH-200 does.

Plus, the combined weight of a ballhead and the gimbal adapter is about the same as most full size gimbals. So there's no weight penalty either. (In fact, if you end up carrying a ballhead around to swap out with a full size gimbal, plus any tools that might be needed to make that swap, you will end up carrying quite a bit more weight.)

Highly recommended!

Just as Wimberley's original WH-100 full size gimbal ($250) has been widely copied by other manufacturers, there are now some copies of the Sidekick, too. Two that appear nearly identical are the Induro GHBA ($200) and Movo GH400 ($129).

Here's a web site that nicely illustrates and lists a lot of info about the various types of gimbals: http://www.carolinawildphoto.com/gimbal_list.htm

P.S. Because the Sidekick is a "side mount" type of gimbal, I've been able to avoid buying expensive, bulky L-brackets for use on my cameras too. I have an Arca-compatible camera plate on them and that can be directly fitted to the Sidekick, too, when I want to use the camera in vertical/portrait orientation.

Also, a handy accessory with any type of gimbal is a leveling platform that goes between the head and the tripod. Working with gimbal, it's often best to have the tripod pretty well leveled. Each time the tripod is moves, that's likely to need to be redone. While it can be done with individual leg adjustments, it's faster and safer with a leveling platform.

I also have a cheap, WH-200 "clone" on a second tripod. It only cost $100, but works pretty darned well. I sort of regret not getting something a bit better, though I can't point to any real problems using the cheapie full size gimbal. Still, I'm trusting it with some pretty expensive lenses and cameras! OTOH, since that tripod & head is dedicated to "big lenses only" it doesn't get near as much use as my more versatile tripod with the ballhead and Sidekick, as described above.

Properframe Loc: US Virginia

I have a WH-200 and it sees 95% of my tripod time. Cannot think of a single negative thing to say. I would not hesitate to note any shortcomings. I recommend if ANY monetary restraint to make certain you have the best tripod you can afford first.

TBPJr Loc: South Carolina

I researched a long time before I decided to go with the MediaProGear Katana Jr. It was a little less than the Wimberley, I liked its looks better, and it came with an 8-inch arca plate that I ended up needing to balance my 100-400mm lens with 5D-series bodies and an extender. I am really pleased with the head and how it works. I don't think you could go wrong with it.

niteman3d Loc: South Central Pennsylvania, USA

Have you ever used it with a monopod? It looks like all the Manfrotto plates mounted on my cameras would work with that and it will give me monopod/tripod flexibility... or am I missing something? I thought the Wimberly monopod gimbal looked like a good solution for the monopod but if this Manfrotto would work on both it's a definite plus and is even a few bucks cheaper, assuming it will work on both?

Sidwalkastronomy Loc: New Jersey Shore

Thank everyone for their advice. I went to the B & H store looked at the wimberly WH 200 gimbal and
sirui ph 20 and bought the wimberly.
It was $200 more and made in America. honestly was going to buy it based on reviews anyway but at the store I really liked the Sirui a lot. the sirui had markings on the sides so if you change lens you can record your position. On the demo model didn't notice any of the things the negative reviews mention. I had the money but I would not hesitate in recommending the sirui.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

I bought this assembly to use on my mono. It allows me to switch a lens from the gimbal on my tripod to the mono (No gimbal.)

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1457640-REG/manfrotto_357_1_rapid_connect_adapter.html

niteman3d Loc: South Central Pennsylvania, USA

I think I'll grab one of these 393's and I found a good deal on a Manfrotto tripod as well, so I should be set for now. I picked up a Benro monopod that supposedly holds 35 pounds for a good price, so that gives me two pretty solid monopods and a heftier tripod than I've had before that should hold any of my setups. I have the Sigma C lens which is lighter than yours, so I should be good for weight no matter which base I use... now to get my butt out to some lakes and see what I can come up with. Thanks again!