Long lens support -- Wimberley vs RRS Gimbals -- Experiences & recommendations?

[can0nfan2379]

Hey all,

Just got my 300 2.8L IS to start my long lens collection. Next one will likely be a 500 when I get the cash together. Needless to say, I'd like to get a gimbal head. What are your recommendations between these 2 brands and any others that I should consider?

Thanks!!!!!

 

[can0nfan2379]

Re: Long lens support -- Wimberly vs RRS Gimbals -- Experiences & recommendations?

Waiting for your input on the RRS head Neuro.........

 

[Lloyd]

Re: Long lens support -- Wimberly vs RRS Gimbals -- Experiences & recommendations?

I am also interested in the RRS Gimbal. However, I think I am going to hold out until later on in the year as they are introducing a new version with 4 levels of dampening. I don't know how much advantage this will give when shooting stills, but apparently it will be useful if you intend to also use it for shooting video. http://blog.reallyrightstuff.com/new-rrs-gear-at-nab/

 

[Loswr]

Re: Long lens support -- Wimberly vs RRS Gimbals -- Experiences & recommendations?

I've borrowed a Wimberley II, and I have the RRS PG-02 LLR - both are excellent in terms of support, but I prefer the RRS. I like that the RRS gimbal breaks down easily for transport. I also like the side mount design - it allows easy access to the MF ring, prefocus ring and lens buttons from underneath with the left hand. Wimberley also has a side mount, but it limits you to specific replacement feet.

I'd also recommend getting a leveling base for your tripod, with whichever gimbal you get.

 

[can0nfan2379]

Thanks for you opinion Neuro

On another forum one individual had said that side mounting the tripod collar on a gimbal may not be good for the lens over time due to wear from not having the mass of the lens supported directly underneath it.....do you have any thoughts on that?

 

[Loswr]

On another forum one individual had said that side mounting the tripod collar on a gimbal may not be good for the lens over time due to wear from not having the mass of the lens supported directly underneath it.....do you have any thoughts on that?

If they stated the lens itself could be affected, I don't buy it - the lens rotates in the tripod collar, so any orientation (or at least two main ones, 90° apart) can be 'down'. I could see someone arguing the tripod collar could be affected over time, I can at least see the logic. But the superteles are very robustly built. I did ask a Canon service engineer about the risk, he said 'not a concern'.

 

[LightandMotion]

I prefer the Wimberley.

My thoughts last year when I went through the decision making process:

http://www.lightandmotionphotography.com/section467038_245473.html

 

[Northbird]

As an alternative I've been very satisfied with the Jobu Design gimbals. I currently use the JR 3 with Feisol 3372 legs for my 7D and 300 2.8 IS. Very well engineered and manufactured. Highly recommended.

http://www.jobu-design.com/Gimbals_c_1.html

 

[eml58]

I own and use both the Wimbeley Gimbal and the RRS PG-02 Full Gimbal (Not Side Mounted), I would agree though with Nuero that the RRS PG-02 is the better unit, breaks down into pieces for better storage, although slightly larger it provides a slightly smoother experience than the Wimberley, but it is quite a bit more expensive.

As suggested by others, look at using a Levelling base on either unit, I use the RRS TA2 when using the Monopod Safari Rig from RRS, and the RRS TA3 Levelling Base when using the RRS TVC 33 Tripod. Look at getting the Levelling base with a Hook, very useful when set up on the Tripod, you can hang gear off the Hook either to be out of the way, or as extra downforce in wind, I use the hook to hang gear such as the Quantum Battery Pack and Promote Control when doing Long Exposures.

RRS I believe make the best gear out there in this Arena of Camera support etc, they're clearly not the only Player, but the degree of thought and fine Engineering that goes into their products impresses me and works well in the Field.

What ever you do, DO NOT download the RRS 2013 Catalogue, it will only lead you to the poor house.

 

[kaihp]

What ever you do, DO NOT download the RRS 2013 Catalogue, it will only lead you to the poor house.

Sounds like it induces the same "MUST HAVE" syndrome that motorcycle accessory catalogs have on bikers.
We call it "bike-porn" (and on, I'm not talking about the centerfold pictures in Performance Bikes or Fast Bikes...)

Maybe catalogs like that should be referred to as camera-porn? ;D

 

[eml58]

What ever you do, DO NOT download the RRS 2013 Catalogue, it will only lead you to the poor house.

Sounds like it induces the same "MUST HAVE" syndrome that motorcycle accessory catalogs have on bikers.
We call it "bike-porn" (and on, I'm not talking about the centerfold pictures in Performance Bikes or Fast Bikes...)

Maybe catalogs like that should be referred to as camera-porn? ;D

Hi Kaihip, your right, Centre fold of the RRS catalogue was the PG-02 with Levelling Base, all done in Matte Black, with a fluid swivelling base so soft to the Touch, had to have one, immediately.

Clearly I have Issues, when it comes to Camera Gear.

 

[WillThompson]

For me the price of $175 and simplicity the Manfrotto 393 Heavy Duty Telephoto Lens Support beats all the others!

It comes with the quick disconnect and long mounting plate shown in the photo.

They show it on a monopod in this photo and have the lens overhead, I have mine on a large Canon heavy duty tripod with my 300 2.8 IS lens on the bottom. With mine on the bottom it returns to level when released with a light pivot tension setting.

I think top or bottom depends on lens balance needed.

Reminds me of the telescopes at the pier.

 

[Deleted member 91053]

Re: Long lens support -- Wimberly vs RRS Gimbals -- Experiences & recommendations?

I've borrowed a Wimberley II, and I have the RRS PG-02 LLR - both are excellent in terms of support, but I prefer the RRS. I like that the RRS gimbal breaks down easily for transport. I also like the side mount design - it allows easy access to the MF ring, prefocus ring and lens buttons from underneath with the left hand. Wimberley also has a side mount, but it limits you to specific replacement feet.

I'd also recommend getting a leveling base for your tripod, with whichever gimbal you get.

I use the Wimberley 2 and am perfectly happy with it compared to the other gimbals I have tried, though I have not had the opportunity to try the RRS so I cannot comment on it.
I noticed in your post that you mention replacement feet, other than a marginal weight saving, why would you want to replace the lens foot? I currently use 300 F2.8 IS and 800 F5.6 IS, used to use a 600 F4 IS, used to use a 400 F2.8 non IS and have tried both Mk1 & 2 500 F4 IS lenses on it all balanced perfectly both vertically and horizontally with a 1 series body - so I don't understand the replacement foot concern.
Am I missing something? This is not meant to be facetious I am actually interested.

 

[Loswr]

Re: Long lens support -- Wimberly vs RRS Gimbals -- Experiences & recommendations?

I've borrowed a Wimberley II, and I have the RRS PG-02 LLR - both are excellent in terms of support, but I prefer the RRS. I like that the RRS gimbal breaks down easily for transport. I also like the side mount design - it allows easy access to the MF ring, prefocus ring and lens buttons from underneath with the left hand. Wimberley also has a side mount, but it limits you to specific replacement feet.

I'd also recommend getting a leveling base for your tripod, with whichever gimbal you get.

I use the Wimberley 2 and am perfectly happy with it compared to the other gimbals I have tried, though I have not had the opportunity to try the RRS so I cannot comment on it.
I noticed in your post that you mention replacement feet, other than a marginal weight saving, why would you want to replace the lens foot? I currently use 300 F2.8 IS and 800 F5.6 IS, used to use a 600 F4 IS, used to use a 400 F2.8 non IS and have tried both Mk1 & 2 500 F4 IS lenses on it all balanced perfectly both vertically and horizontally with a 1 series body - so I don't understand the replacement foot concern.
Am I missing something? This is not meant to be facetious I am actually interested.

Have you tried with a 2x TC on a MkII lens?

 

[Deleted member 91053]

Re: Long lens support -- Wimberly vs RRS Gimbals -- Experiences & recommendations?

Have you tried with a 2x TC on a MkII lens?
[/quote]

No I have not, is there a problem balancing these? I don't have any Mk2 lenses but had an opportunity to have a play with one - very nice too! I am now lusting after a 600 Mk2, but even if I sell a lot of kit it is still out of my reach for now! If there is a problem balancing them then perhaps a suitable foot would be a solution.

 

[Loswr]

Re: Long lens support -- Wimberly vs RRS Gimbals -- Experiences & recommendations?

Have you tried with a 2x TC on a MkII lens?

No I have not, is there a problem balancing these? I don't have any Mk2 lenses but had an opportunity to have a play with one - very nice too! I am now lusting after a 600 Mk2, but even if I sell a lot of kit it is still out of my reach for now! If there is a problem balancing them then perhaps a suitable foot would be a solution.

The MkII lenses are much lighter than their predecessors, and one reason is the elimination of the protective meniscus lens in front. That shifts the lens' center of backwards, but the tripod collar/foot is in the same relative position. It's fine with the bare lens and a 1-series, but problematic with a 2x TC and/or extra weight on the body (I sometimes use an ST-E3-RT to trigger a 600EX-RT with a Better Beamer on a bracket with a long, forward-angled extension). If you used a long lens plate (Wimberley P-50) attached so it extended quite a ways back, that would likely be fine. The RRS replacement foot dovetail extends a bit behind the mounting screws on the collar, and with the 1D X plus 2xIII on the 600 II, the back of that foot is even with the back of the 80mm clamp when correctly balanced - any more and it wouldn't be using the full clamping surface.

 

[scottkinfw]

I just purchased the Wimberly II this week and took it out this weekend. Works great. I didn't look at RRS, but it sure looks slick. Also, the RRS breaks down nicely and looks like it has some sort of protection for transit, which the Wimberly doesn't. I tried to put a large ThinkTank lens pouch over it for protection, but no luck. It cost $600.00 so I don't want it to get whacked for sure.

Anyway, so far it works great for wildlife and stills. I don't have a large selection of lenses but I have been using my 70-200f4L is, 400L 5.6, and 70-200 2.8L is II with 5D II and 5D III. It is great to have the lens stay where put without drifting and with little effort.

sek

 

[Loswr]

I didn't look at RRS, but it sure looks slick. Also, the RRS breaks down nicely and looks like it has some sort of protection for transit, which the Wimberly doesn't. I tried to put a large ThinkTank lens pouch over it for protection, but no luck. It cost $600.00 so I don't want it to get whacked for sure.

By 'protection for transit' I suspect you're referring to the pics of the neoprene pouch on their website. That's the LensCoat RRS PG Pouch. It sells separately (B&H) for $90 and while I bought one, I don't use it much. That pouch is big - with the gimbal parts inside, rolled up it's about the size of a 300/2.8 lens, not the most portable and not easily attached to a bag. Instead, I found that the gimbal parts (plus an MPR-CL II rail than makes the gimbal into a multirow pano rig) fits in a Lowepro Lens Exchange 200 AW (sized for a 70-200/2.8), which also attaches easily via Sliplock to my backpack.

FYI, LensCoat also make a neoprene gimbal pouch for the Wimberley II, in black and various camo prints - and much more reasonably priced at $20-25.

 

[can0nfan2379]

Thanks for the feedback everyone.

I still haven't decided. The RRS does look like a nice unit but the Wimberley at $300 cheaper would be hard to pass up.

I think I'm going to try and see if I can use each. The Wimberly I can try at my local camera shop, the RRS is going to be more difficult, might have to see if someone in the area is using one.

I appreciate all of your opinions.

Cheers

 

[Deleted member 91053]

Re: Long lens support -- Wimberly vs RRS Gimbals -- Experiences & recommendations?

Have you tried with a 2x TC on a MkII lens?

No I have not, is there a problem balancing these? I don't have any Mk2 lenses but had an opportunity to have a play with one - very nice too! I am now lusting after a 600 Mk2, but even if I sell a lot of kit it is still out of my reach for now! If there is a problem balancing them then perhaps a suitable foot would be a solution.

The MkII lenses are much lighter than their predecessors, and one reason is the elimination of the protective meniscus lens in front. That shifts the lens' center of backwards, but the tripod collar/foot is in the same relative position. It's fine with the bare lens and a 1-series, but problematic with a 2x TC and/or extra weight on the body (I sometimes use an ST-E3-RT to trigger a 600EX-RT with a Better Beamer on a bracket with a long, forward-angled extension). If you used a long lens plate (Wimberley P-50) attached so it extended quite a ways back, that would likely be fine. The RRS replacement foot dovetail extends a bit behind the mounting screws on the collar, and with the 1D X plus 2xIII on the 600 II, the back of that foot is even with the back of the 80mm clamp when correctly balanced - any more and it wouldn't be using the full clamping surface.

That's interesting. I thought it wouldn't be a problem with the long Mk2 lenses as when I tried the 500 Mk2 it didn't look like it would be an issue, however I didn't try my extenders.