SteveMcBill

Lensmaster RH-2 - see here: http://www.lensmaster.co.uk/rh2.htm

Bill_de Loc: US

I noticed he had to snug up the knob a little to make the lens stay in position when he let go. The Wimberley and others have a height adjustment for the platform. If adjusted with the centerline of the lens just above the pivot point, and proper front to rear placement, the lens will stay in place with the knob completely loose. That means little to no friction.

--

queencitysanta Loc: Charlotte, North Carolina

MT Shooter Carter's Camera Cottage Carter is the man

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

I have that lens. And one of the reasons I got it was that I could hand hold that lens without a tripod. I sold my 300 2.8 and 200-400 cause my 200-500 was at least as sharp. I shoot a lot of wildlife and a tripod wound eliminate about 60% of my shots because I could not react quick enough if I was on a tripod, birds in flight move too fast. Yes, you can mount this lens on a gimbal, and yes, it will balance and you'll get great shots, but you'll get more without a tripod.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

I have owned a Wimberly WH200 and now have a Really Right Stuff Pano Gimbal. These are once in a lifetime purchases like a good tripod in my opinion. The Wimberly is more of a straight up gimbal while I see the RRS as more of a system that can be added to and used in different ways more easily. It also has scales on the components and is therefore easier to set repeatable setups or multi row panos. I prefer the pano gimbal over a ball head even for smaller lens and studio type work. But that is me...your mileage may vary. The Nest fromMTShooter here on the Hog seems to het great reviews from users here on the Hog too. Good luck with your decision.

Best,
Todd Ferguson

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Forgot about the 8 lb load limit. The 70-200 is about 3.4 lbs, and the 200-500 is 4.6 lbs. Either one with a 2 lb D800 would be well below the advertised load limit, so it might be clearance issues. Best to check with RRS in any case, or just get the PG-02 for almost 3x the price.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Bultaco Loc: Aiken, SC

90% of my wildlife (four legged) shots are hand held with a Tammy 150-600 G2. When they alloy I prefer using a mono without a head more often than a tripod with a tilt & slide head, takes to long to set up. Wildlife tend to ignore vehicles, if they see a person many will haul a--.

Nalu Loc: Southern Arizona

Although I shoot Canon, I understand that the 200-500 you should be able to shoot with this lens hand held. But having the option to shoot off a tripod should also be an option. Just for comparison, I use a 4th Generation Mongoose 3.6. Not cheap, but a good Gimbal as well.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

There are three types of gimbals (and one or two "sub types"):

Full size "U shape" with dual posts, the lens sits on a platform in between them. This type has the highest weight ratings to support the heaviest lenses, provides both tilt axis and panning axis, replaces any other head on the tripod making it largely "long lens only" (unless another head is swapped with it). Manfrotto 393 is an example.

Full size "J shape" gimbal that replaces any other head on a tripod. There are "bottom mount" and "side mount" sub-types. The "bottom mount" (foot of lens' tripod mounting ring is positioned at 6 o'clock). This type has a high weight rating to be able to accommodates most lenses. The "side mount" type requires the lens' tripod mounting ring be positioned at 9 o'clock or 3 o'clock, has slightly lower weight rating, so might not be ideal for the heaviest lenses (400/2.8, 600/4, 800mm). Both sub-types offer a lot of adjustment to be able to most precisely set equilibrium with various lens & camera combos. Both sub-types completely replace any other head on the tripod and provide both panning axis and tilt axis control, but make the tripod "long lens only" while installed. Some are convertible from bottom to side mount. I think the Wimberley head was the original full-size gimbal head years ago, but there are many brands of them now to choose among.

Gimbal adapters are used in conjunction with a heavy duty ballhead that has an Arca-compatible quick release platform. The adapter is simply installed when wanted, so the ballhead stays in place and the tripod can quickly be reconfigured for "standard" (non-gimbal) use. All gimbal adapters are "side mount" and provide tilt axis movements, while the ballhead's horizontal axis is used for the panning motions. Gimbal adapters have somewhat lower weight capacity... The Wimberley Sidekick that I use was recommended for up to 500mm f/4 lenses (tho I've seen folks using them with heavier lenses without any problem). Some other brands may not have as high capacity. Induro and Jobu make adapters, too... There may be others. When using an adapter, the ballhead's carrying capacity also needs to be taken into consideration (heavy duty are typically more than enough).

To be practical to use on a gimbal, any lens needs to have a tripod mounting ring (to allow switching the camera between landscape and portrait orientation).

You also need to install a somewhat oversize Arca-compatible lens plate on the tripod ring's "foot". That's needed to mount the camera and lens on the gimbal. It allows the camera & lens to be slid slightly forward and backward to achieve equilibrium (when that's set ideally, the lens & camera won't tip even if the gimbal's tilt axis locking knob is left "loose"... though I still keep a hand on the camera "just in case").

You need to be aware that lenses that ARE NOT internal zooming/internal focusing... such as your 200-500mm... are not 100% ideal on gimbals. They work very well (I use both an adapter and a full size with a Canon 100-400mm at times)... but IZ/IF lenses work even better. The reason is that the lens changing length will upset the equilibrium on the gimbal. Depending upon the weight of the particular lens and camera, it might be only a little, or it can be a lot if there. But gimbals simply work best with internal zooming/focusing lenses, which... once set up... stay very nicely balanced regardless how their focus and/or zoom are set. When set up, a gimbal allows a very light touch to smoothly move a large lens/camera combo around, tracking subject movement.

An accessory I find very useful with gimbal mounts is a leveling platform. This goes between the head and the tripod leg set, to provide a means of quickly setting the head to level. It is possible to do so by adjusting the tripod's leg lengths, but that's slower and "fussier" (and maybe a little risk, should you forget to re-tighten a leg lock). I use Gitzo Series 3 Systematic tripods with Gitzo leveling platforms. Those replace any center column. But I've seen other brands that are usable with center columns, if you happen to use one.

Here's a pretty comprehensive list of available gimbals: http://www.carolinawildphoto.com/gimbal_list.htm

SAVH Loc: La Jolla, CA

Thank you! That is probably the best guidance I have received so far. I'm not eager to wrestle with a gimbal unless it is necessary to get the shots. I will give it a fair set of opportunities first before deciding that I really need one. I appreciate your input.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Yes, the leveling platform options make life much easier and faster than trying to level using the tripod legs. RRS offers several leveling solutions that can be used with pano gimbals or ball heads. They offer about 15 degrees of tilt adjustment. Highly recommended.

Best,
Todd Ferguson

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

A very comprehensive review Alan - as usual ! I would add, that gimbals were originally designed for internal focus PRIME lenses that do not change length unless you add a TC.

..

chrissybabe Loc: New Zealand

My system including a gimbal. Incidentally the gimbal came from China and was about USD100. Looks like a copy of someone elses. It is labelled Ruby.
Each of our tripods has a Manfrotto clamp mounted on top. Wherever possible if the tripod/ball etc has a 3/16" screw then that was used to help maintain rigidity. The mounting plates come in either 1/4" or 3/16" although you have to hunt for the 3/16". Each camera has a plate mounted on it. Every tripod head has another Manfrotto clamp mounted on top of it. I have a few spare plates so that lights, flashes etc can be mounted onto spare tripods. This allows any camera (3) be used with any tripod head (7) on any tripod/monopod (6).
Although you might think this might make some combinations a bit unwieldy this hasn't been the case. In the case of the gimbal head it is seconds work to remove the gimbal and return the tripod to use elsewhere.
I did have to mod a few fittings. In the case of the large ball head you can just see where the clamp on the top had to be modified slightly and I did have to make some adjustment to the lens fitting on the gimbal (can't remember what at the moment).
There is some expense involved but a few of my Manfrotto fittings are copies which reduced the cost a bit (not intentional but sometimes it was all I could get).
This system evolved over a few years and I guess it could be adapted to arca swiss fittings if required. I just used Manfrotto because it was what I started with. We have had no problems with the dual clamp arrangement and all the stuffing around with adding and removing gear from one fitting to another has gone away.
The gimbal clone has proved excellent in use. We haven't tried it in really cold conditions (lower than -10 degrees C) so don't know how it will work then.
Excuse the photo quality - I just organise the gear for my wife.

(Download)