Large Tele Lens Mounts For TripodmMono

[Roosta]

Looking for any experiences with mounts for long/heavy Tele Lenses and Bodies.

I'm looking at this Wimberly (http://www.tripodhead.com/products/wimberley-main.cfm) or This (http://www.tripodhead.com/products/sidemount-main.cfm), Mount at the moment.

My main use will be sport, so usability will be the key for me.

Any other suggestions would be appreciated.

[nardes]

I would recommend paying attention to what lenses the mount manufacturer recommends for each mount. That is, if the Wimberley is for say, a Canon 600mm F4L/500mm F4L class lens, then I suspect that it would not operate as effectively for a smaller Canon 400mm F5.6L lens.

I have used a (smaller) Jobu Junior on a 400mm F5.6L and it operates perfectly. It is easy to balance, has smooth motions and stays put when hands are removed.

I tried a Wimberley Sidemount in a shop with the same lens and found it more difficult to balance. The movement wasn’t as smooth and the lens tended to droop rather than stay put as it was just too light for the mount. With the lightweight lens, I could not tune the friction adequately to obtain the smooth motion and all-position balance.

Cheers

Dennis

[Roosta]

Cheers Dennis, Read their fact sheet on the "Sidemount Head" and it gave this.

"The Sidemount Wimberley Head is ideally suited for lenses similar in size to a 300 f/2.8 or 500 f/4.

Smaller Lenses: Many of our customers use smaller collared lenses on the Sidemount; however, when used in conjunction with a large, heavy camera body (e.g. a pro body with vertical grip), these lenses can be difficult to balance properly. Generally, 400 f/5.6 and 300 f/4 fixed or zoom lenses with medium-weight camera bodies work well. Heavier camera bodies on theses lenses can be problematic (even more so on 70-200 f/2.8 and smaller lenses)."

or the whole thing here (http://www.tripodhead.com/products/Sidemount-Compatibility.cfm)

Guess I'll be looking at the "Sidemount" rather than the "Wimberley Head"

Thanks for point that out and the feedback.

[Wobbles]

Roosta,
what size Tele lens are you planning mounting on it and what tripod would you be using it on?

[Roosta]

Roosta,
what size Tele lens are you planning mounting on it and what tripod would you be using it on?

300 MM F4 L to start with mate. I have a Manfrotto 190 XPROB Tripod.

I do have a good Manfrotto Mono and Tripod, but only the basic 804 RC2 head on the Tripod and the 234 RC - on the Mono.

There is also this strange looking thing. > http://www.manfrotto.com/long-lens-monopod-bracket

It looks a bit backyardish for me..

[Wayne]

If you think you may later get a larger, heavier lens, I can recommend the Wimberley WH-200II highly. It will balance my 200/2VR or 400/2.8VR with my D800/D3s/D4 and teleconverters superbly. It pans and tilts super smoothly and it locks down rock solid.

[Roosta]

There is also this one (http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Black-Gimbal-Tripod-Head-BK-45-Specialized-AS-Wimberley-WH-2-Capacity-8kg-/260967196518?_trksid=m7&_trkparms=algo%3DLVI%26itu%3DUCI%26otn%3D4%26po%3DLVI%26ps%3D63%26clkid%3D4724344481776884981&_qi=RTM839191#ht_6437wt_1397) on Flea Bay from Germany, but made in - you guessed it.

- - - Updated - - -


If you think you may later get a larger, heavier lens, I can recommend the Wimberley WH-200II highly. It will balance my 200/2VR or 400/2.8VR with my D800/D3s/D4 and teleconverters superbly. It pans and tilts super smoothly and it locks down rock solid.

That was my initial look Wayne, but not sure after reading the 'Smaller Lenses Brief' that it maybe more trouble than its worth, with weight/balance issues, as it will have my 1D body attached to it, it does mention creep on the brief. I may use m 1.4 TC from time to time with the lens, but this will be weight at the body end unfortunately.

Yes down the line I'd like to get a longer - Smaller F Stop lens, but for the price of the lens, $600.00 for a mount will be postage if you get what I mean.

But thanks for the feedback and positive review.

[nardes]

I think that where the mount is designed for the larger (heavier) lenses, the friction knobs can be adjusted quite nicely to obtain the smooth motion and allow the photographer to remove their hands and the lens/camera stays put.

With the lighter weight lens/bodies, the loading is so small that the friction knobs are operating right at the “beginning” of their adjustment range and a tiny adjustment can cause the lens to be too loose or too stiff. With the heavier gear, you are operating more towards the “middle” of the adjustment range and the “difference” between too loose, just right and too tight is a larger twist of the knob, so you can fine tune it better. Hope that makes sense!

We did use my wife’s bird spotting ‘scope on the Manfrotto head in your link and it was quite effective, albeit a heavy mount to carry. My Jobo Junior (the now obsolete, older model) is just fantastic for a 400mm F5.6L or 300mm F4L lens with a 40D or 7D fitted. Here is a link to the current model

http://www.jobu-design.com/catalog/item/2588354/7937720.htm

My original version does not have the swing arm.

Whilst I’ve seen Gimbal Mounts used for bird photography, I don’t think that I have seen many used for sports photography, so how they handle for that type of sports movement / quick panning, may not be suitable?

I have found the Gimbal mount great for reasonably predictable bird in flight shots as they support the weight of the optics and limit the “bouncing” or uncontrolled wobbles so that you can reasonably follow the flight path.

In terms of sports, I suspect that say, a long-jumper might be a similar shooting scenario to a BIF, but a soccer match might have more random and accelerating/decelerating motions?

Cheers

Dennis

[Wayne]

If primarily used for sports, I shoot the 200/2 and 400/2.8 on a Monfrotto 681B mono with a RRS tilt head. Works excellent!

I have a friend shooting the 5DIII and grip with the same 400/5.6L on the same mono rig and he reckons it is ideal.

[Roosta]

If primarily used for sports, I shoot the 200/2 and 400/2.8 on a Monfrotto 681B mono with a RRS tilt head. Works excellent!

I have a friend shooting the 5DIII and grip with the same 400/5.6L on the same mono rig and he reckons it is ideal.

Cheers Wayne, I have the same Mono with the basic tilt head, what is the RRS Tilt head mate?

- - - Updated - - -


I think that where the mount is designed for the larger (heavier) lenses, the friction knobs can be adjusted quite nicely to obtain the smooth motion and allow the photographer to remove their hands and the lens/camera stays put.

With the lighter weight lens/bodies, the loading is so small that the friction knobs are operating right at the “beginning” of their adjustment range and a tiny adjustment can cause the lens to be too loose or too stiff. With the heavier gear, you are operating more towards the “middle” of the adjustment range and the “difference” between too loose, just right and too tight is a larger twist of the knob, so you can fine tune it better. Hope that makes sense!

We did use my wife’s bird spotting ‘scope on the Manfrotto head in your link and it was quite effective, albeit a heavy mount to carry. My Jobo Junior (the now obsolete, older model) is just fantastic for a 400mm F5.6L or 300mm F4L lens with a 40D or 7D fitted. Here is a link to the current model

http://www.jobu-design.com/catalog/item/2588354/7937720.htm

My original version does not have the swing arm.

Whilst I’ve seen Gimbal Mounts used for bird photography, I don’t think that I have seen many used for sports photography, so how they handle for that type of sports movement / quick panning, may not be suitable?

I have found the Gimbal mount great for reasonably predictable bird in flight shots as they support the weight of the optics and limit the “bouncing” or uncontrolled wobbles so that you can reasonably follow the flight path.

In terms of sports, I suspect that say, a long-jumper might be a similar shooting scenario to a BIF, but a soccer match might have more random and accelerating/decelerating motions?

Cheers

Dennis

Gold Dennis, Thanks very much.

As I see it, and in the past, I have just used my 70 - 200 mm F2.8 L + TC on the 1D which sat on top of the Mono and standard tilt head. The Gimbal will be used with my new 300 mm F4 L, so I will be in a more constant kneeling or seated spot, so the lack of full range of movement won't impinge me I feel.

I would like to get into some birding, and longer landscape stuff, so this looks like the goods.

Thanks so much for the link.

[Wobbles]

Cheers Wayne, I have the same Mono with the basic tilt head, what is the RRS Tilt head mate?.

- - - Updated - - - RRS is "Reall Right Stuff" American, very nice gear but premium price http://reallyrightstuff.com/ProductDesc.aspx?code=MH-01-Pro&type=4&eq=&desc=MH-01-Pro%3a-Monopod-Head-with-B2-Pro-II&key=it similar to your Manfrotto head in concept, they also have a 'heavy duty' version. I have a "customised" one from Kirk http://www.ephotocraft.com/itemdesc.asp?ic=MPA1 (they also do a heavier version similar to RSS http://www.kirkphoto.com/Kirk_MPA-2_Monopod_Head.html) which is identical to yours but has an 'arca swiss' type clamp. This has comfortably handled lenses up to EF600f4. I strongly recommend you upgrade to gear with 'arca swiss' fittings as the manfrotto clamps aren't strong enough for the big telephotos.

Cheers
John

- - - Updated - - -

99% of Pro Sportogs I've seen just use monopods unless set up in a 'press box' and then they tend to use fluid heads. Wildlife photogs use the gimbal heads more, where you can set up a tripod and wait, not practical in Africa 'cause you'll get eaten! Though last trip the vehicle I was in had special platforms you could screw a Wimberly onto which worked quite well. If you're just using the 300 for foreseeable future (and want a gimbal) the new Jobu Jr (as noted above) is apprently very good. One thing to consider is you'll still need a ball head if you want to mount camera with smaller lens, say for landscape shots, means unsrewing gimbal head etc... p.s.You'll be limited by the Manfrotto 190 going any bigger as well.

John

[kiwi]

a 300 f/4 is smaller and lighter than a 70-200 2.8 isnt it, so

a) I dont know why you need it
b) see a

- - - Updated - - -

I have a Manfrotto 393 head, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rzy6Jddl90E

Havent used it one single time, make me an offer :-)

[Wayne]

Wobbles linked above to my RRS mono head.

[Roosta]

- - - Updated - - - RRS is "Reall Right Stuff" American, very nice gear but premium price http://reallyrightstuff.com/ProductDesc.aspx?code=MH-01-Pro&type=4&eq=&desc=MH-01-Pro%3a-Monopod-Head-with-B2-Pro-II&key=it similar to your Manfrotto head in concept, they also have a 'heavy duty' version. I have a "customised" one from Kirk http://www.ephotocraft.com/itemdesc.asp?ic=MPA1 (they also do a heavier version similar to RSS http://www.kirkphoto.com/Kirk_MPA-2_Monopod_Head.html) which is identical to yours but has an 'arca swiss' type clamp. This has comfortably handled lenses up to EF600f4. I strongly recommend you upgrade to gear with 'arca swiss' fittings as the manfrotto clamps aren't strong enough for the big telephotos.

Cheers
John

- - - Updated - - -

99% of Pro Sportogs I've seen just use monopods unless set up in a 'press box' and then they tend to use fluid heads. Wildlife photogs use the gimbal heads more, where you can set up a tripod and wait, not practical in Africa 'cause you'll get eaten! Though last trip the vehicle I was in had special platforms you could screw a Wimberly onto which worked quite well. If you're just using the 300 for foreseeable future (and want a gimbal) the new Jobu Jr (as noted above) is apprently very good. One thing to consider is you'll still need a ball head if you want to mount camera with smaller lens, say for landscape shots, means unsrewing gimbal head etc... p.s.You'll be limited by the Manfrotto 190 going any bigger as well.

John

Cheers John, I might be going overkill, it's by no means intended to make me look like a pro tog - I'm just thinking of more uses, and not just walking around hand held, as i feel that will drive me mad. My oldest has started cricket, so it will come in use there, but in saying that, my 190 (albeit limited, and understood) could do and I might get away with, a better head, that will down the line take a larger/heavier lens and still suit my needs, but I looked at the Gimbal, as it seems to suit most circumstances I'll be shooting, although in saying that, I could be completely wrong, as there a limits in range the camera/lens will move on the Jnr Gimbal.

Will look into the Real Right Stuff (Makes sense when you say it out aloud) and the Kirk, had looked at the Arch range previously, but wasn't real sure they'd suit. So thanks for the links, and I thought the lens choice was a pain in the arse.



Wobbles linked above to my RRS mono head.

Cheers mate.

- - - Updated - - -


a 300 f/4 is smaller and lighter than a 70-200 2.8 isnt it, so

a) I dont know why you need it
b) see a

- - - Updated - - -

I have a Manfrotto 393 head, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rzy6Jddl90E

Havent used it one single time, make me an offer :-)

260 Grams Lighter and 1" longer.

See my answer to Wobbles re reasons, maybe you could shed some light as to what you use or recommend please Darren.

The 393 looks very agricultural indeed - the Youtube link didn't do it any justice and with a 1D body, I feel it will foul or limit too much.

And yes mate, I may not need it at all, if I can use a good lens plate and a new head unit that will suit my 681 Mono and 190 Tripod.

Thanks Darren,

[Roosta]

Big thanks to all that replied, I went with the RRS. http://reallyrightstuff.com/ProductD...-Pro-II&key=it

Thanks John.