Support for super telephoto lenses

Another equipment type question; do many of you bird photographers use a head only for use with 500mm+ lenses? I hear that the gimbal arrangement is indispensable. They seem so bulky to me. Would like to hear your opinions on the pros/cons based on your experiences. Thankyou!

I use the Wimberley Head II for my 600mm f/4...sometimes I've tried even some high-end ballheads of friends...in my opinion there is no contest - the Wimberley is much, much better, well worth its price and bulk

I use the Wimberley SideKick to support my 500mm f 4L lens. I wouldn't leave home without it!

As Tom said, a good ball head with a Wimberley Sidekick mounted on it. This gives you a good setup where you can use the ball head by itself for the shorter FL lenses (especially macro) and then guickly set up your 500mm when needed. If I were shooting a 600mm I would consider a full Wimberley.

Great post, thanks, Gary. And thanks guys for the info on Wimberly gear options. I am so sick of my ball head losing its grip on my 300/2.8. My hand has been smashed more than once too often! I'm going to look into making my rig safer-- for the lens and for me.

Another issue with using a ball head only to support a 500/600 is that if you don't completely tighten it down, say for panning, and then become distracted for a moment, the lens will flop over. Unfortunately, they weigh so much that flopping over runs a *very* high risk of taking the tripod with it. The gimble heads largely prevent that. Leaving the setup loose, assuming that they are correctly attached, means that nothing happens when you let go.

As ungainly as they appear, they really making handling a supertelephoto a lot easier. You never have to fight the weight, just be able to move its mass.

Gary, I would prefer the Wimberly WH 200 if i could justify $600 for the relatively-few times i use a huge lens. It's just too bulky and heavy for smaller lenses, imo. But I found that an Arca-Swiss type ballhead with the Wimberly sidekick was a good solution. i can use the ballhead alone for the small lenses, and easily add the sidekick for the big lenses.

You can try both on "loan" for no charge from wimberly for 2 months. Keep only what you like, if either. be sure to get the camera body plates and lens plate needed for your camera and lems too.. GREAT people there. www.tripodhead.com -

You can occasionally find one of the wimberly heads in ebay too, or used from B and H. Keep an eye open.

Sandy R

I use the Black Widow by JOBU, very similar to the Wimberley, lighter and as good as the Wimberley and also...cheaper.
Rene de Heer

I use a Wimberley, for flight shots a gimbal type head is the only way to go IMHO, but yes they are bulky to cart around.

Wimberley SideKick and a Really Right Stuff ballhead for my Nikon 300/2.8 and 2x. I put off buying this way too long, but as soon as I tried a friend's setup I ordered both the same day.

For a 300mm f/2.8 or 500mm f/4, the Wimberly Sidekick on a really good ballhead cna be used. However, for either the 400mm f/2.8 or 600mm f/4, the real Wimberly is the only way to go. A 400mm f/2.8 weighs much more than a 500mm f/4.

There is no comparison with ballheads when using a big glass long lens. The Wimberly's are like cutting through soft butter using a hot knife. If one is going to use a $5-10,000+ lens, it is senseless to skimp on the tripod and head.

In addition to the Wimberly, we have ours mounted on a Gitzo 1548. Heavier is not only better, but mandatory.

Full Wimberly head on my tripod. Really Right Stuff big ball head on a window mount. Bean bag for fast grab shots.

I use the sidekick and RRS ballhead for my 600IS, and it works very well. I've used a King Cobra in the past with a non-IS 400 2.8, which is even heavier than the 600 IS. You'll not be disappointed in going with a gimbel mount for a super telephoto.