Has anyone on here tried the Kirk G1 Gimbal Head? It has been listed off and on at B&H. Not sure if any went to market or if there are manufacturing delays (for three months!). Would like to hear from someone who has tried this and a different gimbal and can share a comparison.
Kirk G1 Gimbal Head
- Thread starter scottburgess
- Start date
I haven't tried that one, but I have used a Jobu (Junior 3 I believe) and I own a Wimberly II. The thing that stands out is the lock knob for the vertical axis; it is tucked in which makes the whole thing smaller but if you have a big white on there then you either have the knob facing the back (with the upright in the way of the buttons/zoom ring) or on the left (with the knob facing away at an odd angle).
The fact that the upright can be adjusted to center the camera over that axis is something to think about though.
Jim
The fact that the upright can be adjusted to center the camera over that axis is something to think about though.
Jim
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
Haven't tried the Kirk gimbal, not sure it's even available since Kirk lists a price of $0 (or maybe they're giving it away? 
).
The design is similar to the RRS full gimbal. In my experience with other Kirk vs. RRS comparisons with which I do have personal experience, both are excellent but if there's a difference the RRS usually has a slight edge (often subtle, though the modular design of the RRS 1D X L-bracket is definitely superior to Kirk's standard design).
The Wimberley II is arguably the gold standard. I prefer the RRS, it breaks down for easier transport and with one additional piece functions as a multirow pano head. I use the side gimbal rather than the full – it's lighter, has one less piece, allows better access to lens controls (nothing under the lens), and if there's an L-bracket on the camera you can use the side gimbal with a standard (non-collared) lens and not have to swap/carry a ballhead.
That shouldn't be necessary with a bottom mount gimbal. The design of the gimbal should place the clamp centered over the base/tripod platform, and I'm not sure why you'd want to move it off-center. I believe the reason the vertical bar is clamped to the horizontal bar (rather than integrated) is so the gimbal can be easily disassembled for transport (as I mentioned for the RRS). However, with a side gimbal like mine, an adjustable vertical bar position is necessary to accommodate different lens sizes.
). The design is similar to the RRS full gimbal. In my experience with other Kirk vs. RRS comparisons with which I do have personal experience, both are excellent but if there's a difference the RRS usually has a slight edge (often subtle, though the modular design of the RRS 1D X L-bracket is definitely superior to Kirk's standard design).
The Wimberley II is arguably the gold standard. I prefer the RRS, it breaks down for easier transport and with one additional piece functions as a multirow pano head. I use the side gimbal rather than the full – it's lighter, has one less piece, allows better access to lens controls (nothing under the lens), and if there's an L-bracket on the camera you can use the side gimbal with a standard (non-collared) lens and not have to swap/carry a ballhead.
Jim Saunders said:
That shouldn't be necessary with a bottom mount gimbal. The design of the gimbal should place the clamp centered over the base/tripod platform, and I'm not sure why you'd want to move it off-center. I believe the reason the vertical bar is clamped to the horizontal bar (rather than integrated) is so the gimbal can be easily disassembled for transport (as I mentioned for the RRS). However, with a side gimbal like mine, an adjustable vertical bar position is necessary to accommodate different lens sizes.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:
I have a double-sided clamp which I can use to attach my 5D3 by its L bracket; the facility to center it would be nice but isn't essential.
Jim
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Deleted member 399245
- EOS R
