Gimbal heads


Status
Not open for further replies.

Luenny

New Member
Sep 5, 2007
284
0
0
#1
Hi,
Anybody has any tried the different brands of gimbal heads? Any feedback between these 3 brands?

- Benro
- Jobu
- Wimberly

- Luenny
 

PrimePhotog

Deregistered
Oct 25, 2007
1,736
0
0
www.flickr.com
#2
Wimberly seems to be the best option out of the 3. Never heard of "Jobu" but Benro heads are pretty good although they really are not in the same league as the premium brands.
 

Reno

Senior Member
Jan 22, 2005
2,324
1
38
Land of the Teddy Bear
#3
Tried my friend Jobu Gimbal, seems good and very smooth, but not sure it can take those heavy weight lens. I have compare benro full gimbal and wimberley full gimbal at Orient photo, despite of $500 difference, i chose the more expensive wimberley full gimbal because the built is there.
 

Dream Merchant

Moderator
Staff member
Jan 11, 2007
9,659
6
38
#6
Manfrotto has an attractive option. ;)
 

PrimePhotog

Deregistered
Oct 25, 2007
1,736
0
0
www.flickr.com
#9
Manfrotto has an attractive option.
I don't like Manfrotto's design as it didn't feel very stable compared to the Wimberly sidekick. And it doesn't seem very compact.
 

DeSwitch

Senior Member
Oct 28, 2005
3,202
0
0
51
1.45N 103.83E
www.flickr.com
#10
If you are serious, skip all the other brands and go for Wimberly.

The Manfrotto 393 is bulky and not that smooth. Tighten too tight you cant get fast reacttion, tighten too loose your lens will tilt. Wimbrely Gimbal will maintain in position and also smooth enough to move about. Benro may look the same but I have my reservation on the reliability. Benro does not feel as smooth as Benro.


BTW, getting a sidekick + a good ballhead is more expensive than a full Gimbal so just skip the side kick too. And its also not as stable.
 

Jed

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
3,911
0
0
UK
Visit site
#11
It depends. If you don't already have a ballhead then a ballhead + sidekick will be cheaper than a ballhead + full gimbal head.

That said I'm not altogether convinced about sidekicks; I think you can certainly get by with a good ballhead and a 300/2.8, and I'm not sure I'd want to use anything longer/heavier on a sidekick style head anyway.
 

AJ23

Senior Member
Jun 12, 2003
12,716
0
0
101
Town of Queens doing PORT-9YOU
#12
Benro and Jobu are just "copies" of the original Wimberly. As much as they look alike and identical, the worksmanship and material used are miles apart.

Wimberly definitely has better finish, the head feels more weighty and is solid built. But the same cannot be said for Benro, I have not tried Jobu, but it should not be far away.

Cheaper as they are, they are copies. :bsmilie: So it's still basically what you pay is what you get. ;)

If one is just using the head not frequently, or using on a lesser lense (300mm-ish? :dunno:), probably Benro or Jobu will suffice. But if one is using the heavier and pricey lense, I reckon Wimberly would be a much better choice. :thumbsup:
 

chngpe01

Moderator
Staff member
#13
Bought a Jobu before and sold it within a day after it arrives (at a losss) and go back to my old whimberely. That much said about other gimbal head.

For a whimberely you need not even need to exert any force to tighten it and it will stay in position firmly (talking about a 500mmf4 lens). As for the manfrotto (which I gave away), the Jobu (sold immediately - to me it was a con job at that price) and the "thai copy" of the whimberely - they all need force to tighten it and it still have some slippages, - for long lens a slight slippage is magnified when you look thru it.
 

Luenny

New Member
Sep 5, 2007
284
0
0
#14
Thanks for the replies. Sigh!! Looks like still have to spend the money. By the way, my lens is one of those heavy weights of Nikon. Old version of 400mm f2.8. It's even heavier than the new 600mm f4 lens.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom