Posted by Mike Maples on January 28, 2008 at 5:30 PM
I think I know where I want to go with this but want to ask the more experienced folks here for a confirmation or advice. I've upgraded my tripods and I want to place the "most correct" head on each.
For tripods - I have a Gitzo GT5540LS and a Gitzo GT3530S. For heads - I have a Version 1 Full Wimberley and a Bogen 469RC Proball. The 469 is their largest professional model (it's massive and no longer produced) and rated for about 30 pounds with their QR plate but I have replaced the QR mount with a hard mounted Wimberley C-10 Plate so I suspect it will carry much more now.
I've previously been using a Gitzo G1325 with the Wimberley for my big lens, which is currently a 400mm f/2.8 at about 11 pounds. I've had completely acceptable results on birds and other subjects with TC's up to 1.7x but found that under the most demanding conditions like wind or with a 2x TC or moon shots with the tripod full up, I got a bit of shake.
My thinking is this:
Place the Wimberley on the GT3530S, which will be somewhat stiffer than my older G1325, and use it for my normal work like birds and mammals. The thought here is the Wimberley will have some shake anyway, even on the stiffest tripod, just due to the gimbal design and number of joints so putting it on the GT5540LS would be like wasting some tripod stiffness.
Place the Proball on the GT5540LS, which gets the stiffest head on the stiffest tripod and use it for the most demanding shots.
Is there anything I've overlooked or misunderstood about the dynamics here? Any advice appreciated.
I am not certain what you are getting at. We have never had any looseness with our Wimberley on a Gitzo 1548. When we bought that tripod, I compared it to a 1325 at the same time at our local camera dealer and found that the 1325 was not as steady. The WImerley on the 1548 is smooth and the only looseness is around the tripod collar on the lens, usually a 600mm f/4.0. My bet is that what you report as "shake" is the 1325 with the heavy 400mm f/2.8, not the WImberley head.
Personally, I would mount the 400mm f/2.8 on the stiffest tripod with the Wimberley head, particularly if you are taking images of birds. A 400mm f/2.8 weighs almost as much as a 600 mm f/4.0, so both really need the same support.
I think you will be surprised and pleased with the Wimberley on the stiffest tripod. Taking images of birds requires the best tripod and head when panning with a heavy lens. At least try the combination. Also, since you state that the Proball head is fairly stiff, you won't be moving the camera much once the image has been composed. The result is that there will be less load on the tripod so that you will not need the stiffest tripod for that head.
You are dealing with at static versus a dynamic situation. The Wimberley head is designed for movement in a dynamic situation and needs the stiffest tripod available.
Posted by Mike Maples on January 29, 2008 at 10:15 AM
Sorry to be confusing...too much engineering background
What I meant about the Wimberley (or any gimbal head) is that by design it is not as stiff as a robust ballhead due to the number of joints it has and the convoluted path the load takes to get back to "ground". In other words, if you attached a large ballhead to a concrete foundation and a gimbal head to the same foundation, the ballhead would be more stable given the same load is applied to each. So it's not looseness I'm talking about but shake induced by flexing.
Thanks for your comment! Your reasoning makes sense for daily use. I use my Wimberley far more than my ballhead. I can always switch heads on those rare occasions when I'm doing something like taking moon shots and want the stiffest of the stiff setups.
Dang, I guess I should just go ahead and buy another GT5540LS
Agree about the night shots with the stiffest combination possible. Also, an equitorial motor drive as on some telescopes would be really great for timed night exposures.
I think I understand now what you mean by "looseness". My engineering background is in chemical, though. The Wimberley will always be free on its two axises. In general, they are smooth with no play. The third axis for rotation is provided by the tripod collar on the lens. Nevertheless, I feel that when using a big glass long lens, the stiffest tripod will be your best bet even with a head such as the Wimberley which can easily rotate around two axises.
Good luck. Contrary to the old Beach Boy's song, there are no "good vibrations" in photography.
Discussion
3 repliesFor tripods - I have a Gitzo GT5540LS and a Gitzo GT3530S. For heads - I have a Version 1 Full Wimberley and a Bogen 469RC Proball. The 469 is their largest professional model (it's massive and no longer produced) and rated for about 30 pounds with their QR plate but I have replaced the QR mount with a hard mounted Wimberley C-10 Plate so I suspect it will carry much more now.
I've previously been using a Gitzo G1325 with the Wimberley for my big lens, which is currently a 400mm f/2.8 at about 11 pounds. I've had completely acceptable results on birds and other subjects with TC's up to 1.7x but found that under the most demanding conditions like wind or with a 2x TC or moon shots with the tripod full up, I got a bit of shake.
My thinking is this:
Place the Wimberley on the GT3530S, which will be somewhat stiffer than my older G1325, and use it for my normal work like birds and mammals. The thought here is the Wimberley will have some shake anyway, even on the stiffest tripod, just due to the gimbal design and number of joints so putting it on the GT5540LS would be like wasting some tripod stiffness.
Place the Proball on the GT5540LS, which gets the stiffest head on the stiffest tripod and use it for the most demanding shots.
Is there anything I've overlooked or misunderstood about the dynamics here? Any advice appreciated.
I am not certain what you are getting at. We have never had any looseness with our Wimberley on a Gitzo 1548. When we bought that tripod, I compared it to a 1325 at the same time at our local camera dealer and found that the 1325 was not as steady. The WImerley on the 1548 is smooth and the only looseness is around the tripod collar on the lens, usually a 600mm f/4.0. My bet is that what you report as "shake" is the 1325 with the heavy 400mm f/2.8, not the WImberley head.
Personally, I would mount the 400mm f/2.8 on the stiffest tripod with the Wimberley head, particularly if you are taking images of birds. A 400mm f/2.8 weighs almost as much as a 600 mm f/4.0, so both really need the same support.
I think you will be surprised and pleased with the Wimberley on the stiffest tripod. Taking images of birds requires the best tripod and head when panning with a heavy lens. At least try the combination. Also, since you state that the Proball head is fairly stiff, you won't be moving the camera much once the image has been composed. The result is that there will be less load on the tripod so that you will not need the stiffest tripod for that head.
You are dealing with at static versus a dynamic situation. The Wimberley head is designed for movement in a dynamic situation and needs the stiffest tripod available.
What I meant about the Wimberley (or any gimbal head) is that by design it is not as stiff as a robust ballhead due to the number of joints it has and the convoluted path the load takes to get back to "ground". In other words, if you attached a large ballhead to a concrete foundation and a gimbal head to the same foundation, the ballhead would be more stable given the same load is applied to each. So it's not looseness I'm talking about but shake induced by flexing.
Thanks for your comment! Your reasoning makes sense for daily use. I use my Wimberley far more than my ballhead. I can always switch heads on those rare occasions when I'm doing something like taking moon shots and want the stiffest of the stiff setups.
Dang, I guess I should just go ahead and buy another GT5540LS
Agree about the night shots with the stiffest combination possible. Also, an equitorial motor drive as on some telescopes would be really great for timed night exposures.
I think I understand now what you mean by "looseness". My engineering background is in chemical, though. The Wimberley will always be free on its two axises. In general, they are smooth with no play. The third axis for rotation is provided by the tripod collar on the lens. Nevertheless, I feel that when using a big glass long lens, the stiffest tripod will be your best bet even with a head such as the Wimberley which can easily rotate around two axises.
Good luck. Contrary to the old Beach Boy's song, there are no "good vibrations" in photography.