Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 33

Thread: Use of Wimberly Heads with lenses W/O Tripod COllar

  1. #1
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Use of Wimberly Heads with lenses W/O Tripod COllar

    We all know that gimbal heads such as the wimberly are used to balance really big mama lenses or long lenses so that the centre of gravity is balanced in the centre.

    However, my question is, can I also use the wimberly with lenses without tripd collar? ie attach the camera to the wimberly. I noticed that if this is done, the centre of gravity MAY no longer be where its optimally supposed to be and the whole setup may tilt forward. but with shorter lenses, would it also mean that the tilt forward is negligble?

    And i know we dont usually gimbal heads with nontripodcollar lenses, but im just wondering if it can be so used.

    Any comments?

    Thanks!

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    I'm a Llama!
    Posts
    4,751

    Default

    I think both the Wimberly Head and Sidekick would be an overkill for lenses without a collar mount. As you rightfully pointed out, non-collared lenses are not usually used. The big heavies like the superteles are usually the ones found on these gimbal heads and those must have a ring mount in order to be used.

    The 2 heads only come with an optional Arca type quick release or threaded studs and 4-prong knobs which come supplied with the head.

    If you want to attach the camera directly to the mounting plate, use an extra long plate like the Wimberly P-60 or P-50 which has enough length for you to slide your setup along the mounting plate to adjust the CoG according to the camera and lens setup.

    I suppose you might want to use this to avoid switching between the gimbal head and a ball head if you're only bringing one setup out. But probably best to use the most effective tool for the job, which in this case is a ballhead.
    Last edited by Terence; 19th September 2004 at 02:24 AM.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default

    Vince, I'll trade you information on the Wimberley for information about paternal rights in Sg!
    Last edited by Jed; 19th September 2004 at 03:03 AM.

  4. #4

    Default

    Cockiness I have no problem with. It's those who knows alot but look down on people that i take issue with.

    Maybe they don't even know anything.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,358

    Default

    Hey, I think we haven't really answered the original question here...

    So far Terence has made the best answer for this question...
    The equipment can only bring you so far - the rest of the photographic journey is done by you.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    156

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123
    We all know that gimbal heads such as the wimberly are used to balance really big mama lenses or long lenses so that the centre of gravity is balanced in the centre.

    However, my question is, can I also use the wimberly with lenses without tripd collar? ie attach the camera to the wimberly. I noticed that if this is done, the centre of gravity MAY no longer be where its optimally supposed to be and the whole setup may tilt forward. but with shorter lenses, would it also mean that the tilt forward is negligble?

    And i know we dont usually gimbal heads with nontripodcollar lenses, but im just wondering if it can be so used.

    Any comments?

    Thanks!
    question is y u nd the gimbal at all?

  7. #7

    Default

    vince123123,

    This link may answer your queries.

    http://www.hoothollow.com/Tip-November%202003.html

    Cheers!

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nickmak
    Hey Jed,

    Why don't we just give Vince here a CORRECT answer then than trying to send insults flying around this forum? Whether cocky or ignorant, there will always be people like this right? That's what makes the world so diverse!

    Hope this is clarified and you see it from where I stand, thank you,
    Nick
    yup, just give your knowledge rather then trade insults.

  9. #9
    Senior Member denniskee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    bukit batok
    Posts
    5,468

    Default

    hi guy, everybody is learning mah, be a little more tolerant and a little less blunt, or else sooner or later, cser will not want to put up any more questions in this forum inview of the way fellow cser reply their qustions. let be nice shall we?
    photography makes one sees things from all angles.

  10. #10
    Moderator chngpe01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    9,863
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default

    Chill out guys/gals, Just to share some lighter moments, this was posted sometime back, see this http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthrea...ghlight=tripod


    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123
    We all know that gimbal heads such as the wimberly are used to balance really big mama lenses or long lenses so that the centre of gravity is balanced in the centre.

    However, my question is, can I also use the wimberly with lenses without tripd collar? ie attach the camera to the wimberly. I noticed that if this is done, the centre of gravity MAY no longer be where its optimally supposed to be and the whole setup may tilt forward. but with shorter lenses, would it also mean that the tilt forward is negligble?

    And i know we dont usually gimbal heads with nontripodcollar lenses, but im just wondering if it can be so used.

    Any comments?

    Thanks!
    Here's your answer Vince just to lighten the atmoshpere here


  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by junyang
    Similar to your signature, mine too, is an opinion.

    The difference is, that, i'm not using my signature to judge other people. Its PURELY an opinion that i do not like Nikon's AF.

    However, things change when you use your signature to judge Terence. You're trying to imply that he's pretending to know alot when he dosen't, and thus, is misleading. Who are you to judge that he is pretending? Maybe he isn't, and is just trying to share WHAT he knows, though wrong.

    Seriously, if you're really helpful and stuff, you wouldn't even have posted


    and would have just guide all us lost souls that have been misleaded back to the right path.

    Would you like someone to tell you the same thing too, Jed.
    honestly i have enough of your behaviour Jed, sometimes i wish you are not a moderater so i could put you on the ignore list.

    most of the times you use your 'profound' knowledge on people and dig on other people's old threads and attacked on their character and judgement.

    It's the mindset of the know it all and slamming other people that puts me OFF BIG TIME! You have demonstrated this trait time and time again. Alot of people either put up or have left off with this, i be the first to say so, regardless of others may have a lesser tone as they respect you as a moderater or your behaviour, you are very destructive to many others who want to voice a comment or thought.

  12. #12
    Senior Member denniskee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    bukit batok
    Posts
    5,468

    Default

    sorry, never use one before, cant help you here.

    anyway, guys, may i suggest that enough had been said regarding the less then desirable comment given by the mod. let be more focus on the issue on hand.

    really, there is sky beyond sky, mountain beyond mountain. i though a i crazy enough to mount a small little compact camera on my 268 manfrotto ball head . compare to what chngpe01 had posted , i think i feel more normal now
    photography makes one sees things from all angles.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    beebox
    Posts
    2,078

    Default

    y dun CS come up with a Board of approval where all answers by members will be reviewed and approved>?preferably chaired by someone with profound knowledge.

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kex
    y dun CS come up with a Board of approval where all answers by members will be reviewed and approved>?preferably chaired by someone with profound knowledge.
    i do not wish to dig into any more old threads but i have seem one too many of incidents involving members who feels that comments, better be tight liped or be flamed, like how kex feels.

    i find your appoach to things rather for a better word, direct. You could have pointed out your usage rather than direct an insult to Terrence, regardless he is right or wrong. We can judge who makes sense at the end of the day if we want to review the subject ourselves.

    I'm sorry when i say dig up the old threads cause this thread clearly it has not been demostated. My bad but i have seen it before, but that is another story.

    Just look at how many members feel your comments are insluting or cocky in this thread, if i could say, please change your approach to avoid all who disapprove of your behaviour.
    Last edited by Belle&Sebastain; 13th September 2004 at 08:03 AM.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default

    No please, I am interested to find out.

    As to feeling tight lipped or get flamed, please let me state that I do not and will not flame anybody for just speaking his mind, or being wrong about something. But if you say something please either [1] be sure about what you've said, if you're passing it off as fact, or [2] state that you are unsure about your reply but that to the best of your knowledge...

    I can understand where you're coming from if I jump on every tom dick and harry who opens his mouth. I don't, to the best of my knowledge. I only do so when the poster is making claims they know nothing about, and that bears correction and is asking for a slap.

    Like I said, I really am interested to find out about my digging up old threads as you allege. I will apologise if you find such an instance, and try my best to avoid doing so in future. If not, then I would appreciate you withdraw your statement.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,021

    Default

    I do not think ANYONE would intentionally mislead or disinform, and that a simple correction of a misconception would have saved a lot of bandwidth and needless discussion.

    Everyone would still learn, and there's no need to take anyone down.

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Belle&Sebastain
    honestly i have enough of your behaviour Jed, sometimes i wish you are not a moderater so i could put you on the ignore list.

    most of the times you use your 'profound' knowledge on people and dig on other people's old threads and attacked on their character and judgement.

    It's the mindset of the know it all and slamming other people that puts me OFF BIG TIME! You have demonstrated this trait time and time again. Alot of people either put up or have left off with this, i be the first to say so, regardless of others may have a lesser tone as they respect you as a moderater or your behaviour, you are very destructive to many others who want to voice a comment or thought.
    i totally agreed with u

  18. #18

    Default

    To the best of my knowledge, I have not seen any instance in which Jed has unfairly made unjust remarks to any other forum member. By your comment, Belle & Sebastien, you imply that he has been throwing his weight around as a moderator, and therefore abusing his power and/or privelege. I think otherwise. Jed as been always pointing out misinformation, rather than being picky about some people. As always, remember that "Facts, they are the enemy of truth." It is easy to state "facts" that you read from another website, when the truth is completely different.

    I believe there are some of us here who wish to stand for the truth rather than for "facts" which are in reality myths, simply because the majority of people believe and continue to propagate these pieces of myths as facts.

    In all fairness, I think Jed just wishes to seek redress for your pointing out that he may be abusing his authority as a moderator, and I think that is justified. Just because you don't like someone's mannerisms does not mean you can speak in such a manner in a public forum

    I am not related in any way to Jed but I just think I should point this out. I will post no further on this topic anyway, as I shall be buried in work half a world away.
    http://jeremyalexanderphoto.zenfolio.com/
    JEREMY ALEXANDER PHOTOGRAPHY

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by icebooke
    To the best of my knowledge, I have not seen any instance in which Jed has unfairly made unjust remarks to any other forum member. By your comment, Belle & Sebastien, you imply that he has been throwing his weight around as a moderator, and therefore abusing his power and/or privelege. I think otherwise. Jed as been always pointing out misinformation, rather than being picky about some people. As always, remember that "Facts, they are the enemy of truth." It is easy to state "facts" that you read from another website, when the truth is completely different.

    I believe there are some of us here who wish to stand for the truth rather than for "facts" which are in reality myths, simply because the majority of people believe and continue to propagate these pieces of myths as facts.

    In all fairness, I think Jed just wishes to seek redress for your pointing out that he may be abusing his authority as a moderator, and I think that is justified. Just because you don't like someone's mannerisms does not mean you can speak in such a manner in a public forum

    I am not related in any way to Jed but I just think I should point this out. I will post no further on this topic anyway, as I shall be buried in work half a world away.

    i never imply that he uses his moderater status to push his weight around, what i meant is that as a moderater, i cannot put him on the ignore list which i will choose so because i do not like his approach to answer.

    Yes, i know Jed wishes to address the facts, that is fine, but the approach leaves many unhappy.

    a simple let me know your answer will save all this discussion rather then put anyone down.

    I be the first to say sorry to Jed if my comments sound personal and harsh, that's the feeling i get when he puts someones else's words off with his signature.
    Last edited by Belle&Sebastain; 13th September 2004 at 09:37 AM.

  20. #20

    Default

    i'll also retact what i said about digging old threads against the person.

    What i want to avoid another long and personal war of words.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •