What zoom to buy?

[Norm53]

I put up a bird feed at the edge of a woods about 80 feet from my lunch table behind a french door. My Canon EOS Rebel T3i with EF 75-300 mm 1:4-5.6 will not bring into focus the birds, large and small.

What lens do I need to buy that will do the job? Cost is no object.

Thanks, Norm

[Norm53]

I think I'll go with the Waverley. Gets 5 stars from a bunch of reviewers. Therefore, if I can't get it right, then I know it is user error, not the head.

BTW, does the Monfrotto tripod have leveling bubbles? Bubbles are important say the Waverley reviewers. Or maybe the waverley head has the bubble(s)?

Came across an Oben CT-2381 carbon fiber tripod, which has excellent reviews. Anyone here had experience with it?

Norm

[Norm53]

A zillion Waverley users can't all be wrong, so the side bracket is not a problem.

Norm

[TCampbell]

I have an Induro GHB2 -- basically identical to the Waverly.

The critical thing is that it must allow the camera to be balanced both front to back (to keep it from being nose-heavy or tail-heave) and it also needs to allow a height-adjustment so that just as much weight is above the pivot axis as below the axis.  

Once you achieve that balance, the camera can be pointed anywhere, without having to snug the clutches, and the camera will remain pointed wherever you put it when you let go.

[Norm53]

The critical thing is that it must allow the camera to be balanced both front to back (to keep it from being nose-heavy or tail-heave) and it also needs to allow a height-adjustment so that just as much weight is above the pivot axis as below the axis.

Thanks for your reply. Two questions:

Can I assume that the only way that I will know that I have achieved proper balance is by turning the head knobs and testing movement "with my little pinky"? (Height of viewfinder must always be at a 4' above floor as I sit in chair.)

After I achieve the proper balance, will it stay that way when I change elevation at the main feeder, pan the ground under that feeder, and refocus to the hummingbird feeder at 30'? (The main feeder is at 64'). I don't want to be constantly adjusting for balance; that would be frustrating.

Norm

[TCampbell]

---

@Norm53 wrote:

The critical thing is that it must allow the camera to be balanced both front to back (to keep it from being nose-heavy or tail-heave) and it also needs to allow a height-adjustment so that just as much weight is above the pivot axis as below the axis.

Thanks for your reply. Two questions:

Can I assume that the only way that I will know that I have achieved proper balance is by turning the head knobs and testing movement "with my little pinky"? (Height of viewfinder must always be at a 4' above floor as I sit in chair.)

After I achieve the proper balance, will it stay that way when I change elevation at the main feeder, pan the ground under that feeder, and refocus to the hummingbird feeder at 30'? (The main feeder is at 64'). I don't want to be constantly adjusting for balance; that would be frustrating.

Norm

---

If you had a ball-head or a pan/tilt head then achieving "balance" would not be possible in any orientation because the pivot point is below the camera.  That means when you point the camera upward, you are moving the entire body of the camera farther back BEHIND the pivot point and that would ruin the balance.

But on a gimbal head, the whole point of the head design is that the pivot axis is literally located at the camera's center of gravity (in every axis).  This means when you tilt the camera to point upward, there is still just as much weight in front of the pivot axis as behind the pivot axis and as much weight above as below.  In other words... the balance wont change just becuase you change targets or point the camera higher or lower.    This is what makes it possible to leave the clutches loose on a gimbal head and yet still be able to point the camera anywhere you want (with your pinky finger if that's how you want to do it) and it will just "stay" wherever you point it -- without needing to snug anything down.

To achieve this balance on a gimbal head...

The camera mounts to a platform which works "like a swing".  But that platform is heigh-adjustable.  

Snug the clutches (knobs) on the gimbal mount.

Lower the platform down (the platform is called the "saddle"). Mount the camera LENS to the arca-swiss (dovetail) mounting plate onto the saddle and secure it, and then attach the plate to the platform.  The camera will be sitting too low at this point... but right now we just want to balance the camera front-to-back on that platform.  

Hold the camera stationary and loosen the altitude knob (that's the one that lets the camera point up/down and it's on the side of the gimbal head.)  Test to see if the camera wants to point up or down as you begin to release it (don't let it crash).  If it points "up" then the camera is tail-heavy.  But the arca-swiss (dovetail) mounting plate is basically a kind of rail... if you slightly loosen the saddle you can slide the plate either forward or backward in the saddle to shift the weight front or back.

When the camera naturally wants to sit "level" when you release it (doesn't want to point up or down -- but points at the horizon) then you've properly balanced the camera on the saddle ... front-to-back so that it is neither nose-heavy nor tail-heavy.

Make sure the arca-swiss rail is snugged tight in the saddle -- you're done with that adjustment.

Next ... raise the platform height.  Since the platform was basically at the bottom of it's travel limit, all the weight of the camera was "below" that altitude pivot axis.  What you want to do is raise it up so that 50% of the weight is above the pivot axis and 50% is below.  You'll find that when the axis of rotation is basically aligned to the center of the lens that you're pretty close.  You might need to adjust very fractionally up or down by perhaps just a millimeter or two... but it wont be much.

Snug the height adjustment and test the lens by point it up or down and make sure it stays where you point it when you let go (without needing to snug the axis).  If it wants to swing itself back level again then the center of gravity is still too low... raise it up very slightly.  if the camera wants to swing to point up or point down when you release it the the center of gravity is too high... lower it very slightly.    But when you find the point where it just remains stationary when you take your hands off it... then you've nailed the balance.

[Norm53]

This is a very valuable procedure that I intend to paste it into my WP photo notes as soon as I understand the word "platform". Here is the list of items I plan to purchase at B&H for my T3i, which later will be used on my 7D Mk ii, assuming they are compatible:

2-Transcend 16GB SDHC Memory Card Premium Class 10 UHS-I
*Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary Lens for Canon EF
Manfrotto MT055CXPRO3 Carbon Fiber Tripod
Wimberly WH-200 gimbal tripod head II
Wimberly P-10 quick release plate

Is the "platform" the P-10 where the lens is attached?  Also, you talk about the camera being mounted. As I understand it, it's actually the lens that should be mounted on the P-10, not the camera. Please clarify.

*The Sigma 600 specs say "for Canon EF". From another excellent thread, I think it also works on Canon EF-S compatible cameras (APS-C) like the 7D and T3i. Someone confirm, please.

Norm

[Waddizzle]

"

Is the "platform" the P-10 where the lens is attached?  Also, you talk about the camera being mounted. As I understand it, it's actually the lens that should be mounted on the P-10, not the camera. Please clarify.

*The Sigma 600 specs say "for Canon EF". From another excellent thread, I think it also works on Canon EF-S compatible cameras (APS-C) like the 7D and T3i. Someone confirm, please."

The P-10 is a "quick release" plate that can attach to the bottom of a camera, or onto a tripod foot of a big lens.  A quick release plate is made to fit into a quick release bracket, which locks the plate in place.   The Sigma 600 comes with a tripod foot, wich is where a quick release plate should be attached, NOT on the camera.

Take a look at the image of the Fiesol model that I posted again.  The "platform" is the horizontal plate in the center of the image that holds the quick release bracket.  It is the one that can be precisely raised and lowered to align the center of gravity of the camra/lens setup with the horizontal tilt axis, as Tim Campbell described in his second adjustment.

The Sigma 600 that Ernie described will work on either a full  frame camera body, or an APS-C camera body like the 7D or the T3i bodies.  Any Canon "EF" lens that can fit a Canon full frame body will fit onto an APS-C body, but not vice versa.  Any "EF-S" lens can fit onto any APS-C body, but not a full frame body like a 6D, 5D, or 1D.

Tim Campbell mentioned that he owns the Induro gimbal, and seems to be quite satisfied with it.  I got the impression that he doesn't feel spending nearly 50% more for the Wimberly 200 is worth it.  I know I don't, which is why I have had the Induro on my wish list. 

Although, I think the identically priced Benro GH3, which comes with a protective bag, may be a better value than the Induro.  Both the Induro and the Benro gimbals come with a quick release plate included.  My favorite NYC superstore, B&H, allows you to return items if they do not fulfill your needs.  I'd suggest buying the same Induro gimbal that Tim Campbell owns, and if it proves to be inadequate then return it for the Wimberly gimbal.

The final choices of tripod and head are yours, of course.  Happy Holiday.

[Norm53]

The P-10 is a "quick release" plate that can attach to the bottom of a camera, or onto a tripod foot of a big lens.  A quick release plate is made to fit into a quick release bracket, which locks the plate in place.   The Sigma 600 comes with a tripod foot, wich is where a quick release plate should be attached, NOT on the camera.

Am I correct in assuming that the purpose of the quick release plate is to quickly remove the lens (with attached camera) from the tripod in order to take a hand-held shot elsewhere?

The Sigma 600 that Ernie described will work on either a full  frame camera body, or an APS-C camera body like the 7D or the T3i bodies.  Any Canon "EF" lens that can fit a Canon full frame body will fit onto an APS-C body, but not vice versa.  Any "EF-S" lens can fit onto any APS-C body, but not a full frame body like a 6D, 5D, or 1D.

Thanks for the confirmation.

Tim Campbell mentioned that he owns the Induro gimbal, and seems to be quite satisfied with it.  I got the impression that he doesn't feel spending nearly 50% more for the Wimberly 200 is worth it.  I know I don't, which is why I have had the Induro on my wish list. 

Not knowing very much about any camera gear, I picked the Waverly because it received 5 stars, whereas the Induro received 4.7 stars around the Internet. OTOH, I must also consider what gear is used mostly by the forum members, so that if I run into trouble, someone here can help me. Maybe I need to rethink the side bracket gimbal choice.

Although, I think the identically priced Benro GH3, which comes with a protective bag, may be a better value than the Induro.  Both the Induro and the Benro gimbals come with a quick release plate included.  My favorite NYC superstore, B&H, allows you to return items if they do not fulfill your needs.  I'd suggest buying the same Induro gimbal that Tim Campbell owns, and if it proves to be inadequate then return it for the Wimberly gimbal.

Problem I have with the GH3 is that I can't find reviews of it. When I buy something with which I am not familiar, I search the Internet to find out what all kinds of users think of the product.

Norm

[Waddizzle]

As far as the Benro GH2 and GH3 heads go, it is safe bet that the GH2 is virtually identical to the Induro model.  I have found a couple of reviews of the GH3 at UK web sites, but they were neither insightful or helpful.  The reviewers seemed to be quite satisfied, however, with their Benro gimbals, which really doesn't mean much.  A Big Mac hamburger tastes fantastic if you have never eaten a hamburger before.  Basically, their reviews said, "Yummy".  They were one sentence long.

I think the Benro would be a bigger roll of the dice than the Induro.  But, I suspect the differences are small.  Again, always purchase your equipment from a reliable vendor with good post sale customer service.

[Norm53]

Checked the Induro and Benro heads again. Induro spec says, "Suitable for Lenses Up to 400mm". I will be buying the 600, so will I have a problem?

A Benro GH2 review: "I tried this gimbal head and while the pan movement was very smooth the tilt was not. This made it hard to frame a shot with my Sigma 150-600 Sport lens. The tilt movement felt smooth until I added the weight of the lens and camera assembly at which point it became tighter and resulted in a jerky motion. The design appears to use a sleeve bearing and not ball or roller bearings. I returned this one and bought a custom brackets gimbal head instead." 

Might be too light for the 600?

About the Benro GH3, the only difference I can see betwen the GH2 and GH3 is weight capacity, 50# and 55# respectively. So maybe the GH3 can handle more weight than the GH2. I'm curious why you would chance the GH3 w/o the benefit of some user reviews.

Norm