Posted by Brian Irving on March 30, 2008 at 6:13 AM
Hi Everyone
Just found a company making what look like Wimberley copies and are marketing themselves on Ebay. Try searching on 'Gimabal'
Has anyone seen, used, or otherwise one of these heads and what are your thoughts as they are 1/4 of the price of the Wimberley!
That said I do realise that you get what you pay for, but cheap skilled labour and quality materials can turn out a quality product, Sony have done it for years!
Ask Danny which he prefers... the copy or the actual... for he had owned both.
T
Posted by Andy Astbury on March 30, 2008 at 6:38 AM
Mmmmm........I've been wondering about this 'geezer' for a while now, his Magic Arm 6000 was what piqued my interest - if anyone knows much about video gear you'll know just how many 'squillions' a genuine Steadicam is
I too would be very interested to hear anyones experience of 'robustness'.
I`ve just bought one. Have only used it once so far, however, but it supports my 500mm f/4.5 with TCs fine. Haven`t compared it with anything else similar, however. For the price (I got mine for £60 including postage), it seems to do the job very well.
Here is a link to a thread on Bird Forum discussing these heads: http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=105358.
Shame...shame on you! I have worked for British companies that have lost out big time because of cheap and inferior Chinese and Indian rip-offs their designs .
You shouldn't be supporting copyright and design theft. How would you feel if it was someone stealing your design (or your images!)? How would you feel if one of the rip-offs fails and sends your several grand's worth of camera+lens to the ground...
Do the right thing - support the innovators and buy the real items .
Posted by Paul Inglis on March 30, 2008 at 7:32 AM
I'm not knocking these cheap alternatives but I don't favour purchasing items from copycats!
Companies like Wimberley spend time and money innovating and developing these quality items and need to recoup these costs! So when someone to rushes out, manufactures’ and markets’ cheaper alternatives it has a negative effect all-round.
Furthermore I wouldn’t like to entrust a five grand lens + a three grand body to an unknown quantity!
For what it is worth ... I have used one for a short while (a friend bought one which he mounted a 500mm on) and the bearing surface is not as polished as the real one.
Posted by Brian Irving on March 30, 2008 at 8:08 AM
Thanks for the comments, I think
What I didn't expect was a debate on world markets and copyright infringements. Nick, I have no problem with this type of third world copying. Having worked in the middle east for years you cannot find the real McCoy and have no choice but to use locally made copies. It may be that Wimberley will not licence other companies thus creating a monopoly. The Mongoose Head supported by Arthur M is a copy of the sidekick using flat bar rather than cast alloy and the Kirk Cobra is another variant (it may be that because they are £300+, then they are not perceived as copies?).
All I asked was are they functional when compared to the Wimberley. I am open minded.
Regards
Brian
Posted by Brian Phipps on March 30, 2008 at 9:57 AM
I`d had mine for over a year, but recently the sliding adjustable platform has come loose twice and has fallen off, lucky without my lens on.
I`m aware that the knob that holds this in place could work loose after a while, but I`m quite a conscious person and always remembered to check it many times throughout the days of it being used.
After it fell off in a very short distance after tightening, which was from the Car Park at Verulamium lake, St.Albans to the side of the lake which isn`t very far atall as some of you may know, this was one of the last times I used it and bought a Wimberley, which of course has been faltless.
I would personally not reconmend them at all, but this is going on my experience, other people I know have them are perfectly happy.
Posted by Danny Green on March 30, 2008 at 10:02 AM
Hello Brian
I have used both as I brought one second hand which was a fake indian one, it was a cheap option at the time but since then I have brought the real one (again second hand) and I wouldn't go back as the real one is ten times better. You can pick up some good bargains second hand and paid half the cost in this way, so maybe an option.
Danny
Posted by Paul Gibbs on March 30, 2008 at 10:21 AM
If you want a gimbal on the cheap i have to recommend the Manfrotto 393, i've had mine two years, and though it may not be great with a 600mm or 800mm lens, its fine with my 500mm with 1.4x too, and they are only about £90
Posted by Rene de Heer on March 30, 2008 at 1:34 PM
Shame...shame on you! I have worked for British companies that have lost out big time because of cheap and inferior Chinese and Indian rip-offs their designs .
You shouldn't be supporting copyright and design theft. How would you feel if it was someone stealing your design (or your images!)? How would you feel if one of the rip-offs fails and sends your several grand's worth of camera+lens to the ground...
Do the right thing - support the innovators and buy the real items .
Hope you dont mind me disagreeing with you.....
British companies not only lost out due to cheaper competition but also and mainly because their products are/were too expensive and not of a very good quality either! I will not mention any names but a couple spring to my mind.
With regards to cheaper clones: i do agree that the quality can't be as good, as the products and the product control of lets say Wimberley and Gitzo. But if their products were not so ridiculously expensive, i also believe, in that case, that there wouldnt be much demand for cheaper clones anyway!
Someone ones told me (i dont know if this is true or not...) that it is actually rather cheap to make WImberleys.
Not everyone has a money tree in his back garden, so cheaper (cloned) products might benefit those who dont have the money to spend on these expensive bits of kit. Lets face it: the majority of nature photographers are Amateurs who also (might have) kids, schoolfees to pay (something else which is totally ridiculous in this country anyway...) and other day to day cost.
SO good cheaper alternatives are always welcome....unless the quality is really cr.....
Fair enough - If they where coming up with their own cheaper design (as Jobu and Kirk did), then all well and good...but they're not. They're stealing the design and making a living off someone else. The counterfeiters imitate, they don't innovate.
Discussion
12 repliesJust found a company making what look like Wimberley copies and are marketing themselves on Ebay. Try searching on 'Gimabal'
Has anyone seen, used, or otherwise one of these heads and what are your thoughts as they are 1/4 of the price of the Wimberley!
That said I do realise that you get what you pay for, but cheap skilled labour and quality materials can turn out a quality product, Sony have done it for years!
Regards
Brian
T
I too would be very interested to hear anyones experience of 'robustness'.
Here is a link to a thread on Bird Forum discussing these heads: http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=105358.
You shouldn't be supporting copyright and design theft. How would you feel if it was someone stealing your design (or your images!)? How would you feel if one of the rip-offs fails and sends your several grand's worth of camera+lens to the ground...
Do the right thing - support the innovators and buy the real items
Companies like Wimberley spend time and money innovating and developing these quality items and need to recoup these costs! So when someone to rushes out, manufactures’ and markets’ cheaper alternatives it has a negative effect all-round.
Furthermore I wouldn’t like to entrust a five grand lens + a three grand body to an unknown quantity!
EDIT: You're a faster typer than I'm am Nick!
What I didn't expect was a debate on world markets and copyright infringements. Nick, I have no problem with this type of third world copying. Having worked in the middle east for years you cannot find the real McCoy and have no choice but to use locally made copies. It may be that Wimberley will not licence other companies thus creating a monopoly. The Mongoose Head supported by Arthur M is a copy of the sidekick using flat bar rather than cast alloy and the Kirk Cobra is another variant (it may be that because they are £300+, then they are not perceived as copies?).
All I asked was are they functional when compared to the Wimberley. I am open minded.
Regards
Brian
I`m aware that the knob that holds this in place could work loose after a while, but I`m quite a conscious person and always remembered to check it many times throughout the days of it being used.
After it fell off in a very short distance after tightening, which was from the Car Park at Verulamium lake, St.Albans to the side of the lake which isn`t very far atall as some of you may know, this was one of the last times I used it and bought a Wimberley, which of course has been faltless.
I would personally not reconmend them at all, but this is going on my experience, other people I know have them are perfectly happy.
I have used both as I brought one second hand which was a fake indian one, it was a cheap option at the time but since then I have brought the real one (again second hand) and I wouldn't go back as the real one is ten times better. You can pick up some good bargains second hand and paid half the cost in this way, so maybe an option.
Danny
You shouldn't be supporting copyright and design theft. How would you feel if it was someone stealing your design (or your images!)? How would you feel if one of the rip-offs fails and sends your several grand's worth of camera+lens to the ground...
Do the right thing - support the innovators and buy the real items .
Hope you dont mind me disagreeing with you.....
British companies not only lost out due to cheaper competition but also and mainly because their products are/were too expensive and not of a very good quality either! I will not mention any names but a couple spring to my mind.
With regards to cheaper clones: i do agree that the quality can't be as good, as the products and the product control of lets say Wimberley and Gitzo. But if their products were not so ridiculously expensive, i also believe, in that case, that there wouldnt be much demand for cheaper clones anyway!
Someone ones told me (i dont know if this is true or not...) that it is actually rather cheap to make WImberleys.
Not everyone has a money tree in his back garden, so cheaper (cloned) products might benefit those who dont have the money to spend on these expensive bits of kit. Lets face it: the majority of nature photographers are Amateurs who also (might have) kids, schoolfees to pay (something else which is totally ridiculous in this country anyway...) and other day to day cost.
SO good cheaper alternatives are always welcome....unless the quality is really cr.....
Rene de Heer
Fair enough - If they where coming up with their own cheaper design (as Jobu and Kirk did), then all well and good...but they're not. They're stealing the design and making a living off someone else. The counterfeiters imitate, they don't innovate.