Question for Gimbal Head Experts

[Busted Knuckles]

I have been looking at the gimbal head for awhile. When I take a close look at them, it seems that all of them that I can find, even the "W" the center of rotation does not align w/ the center of the mounting plate, the plate is "out board" of the center of rotation by 1/4 inch - which I would think can be fixed with better design.

This defeats the head being used for multi shot stitching as it introduces parallax error (or at least I think so). I can see that I can get to the vertical "nodal point" but not the horizontal.

What I am I missing, or did all the gimbal manf's miss it?

[HDNitehawk]

Last year I was looking for an option for Pano.
I thought RRS made just what you are looking for.

I typed this on the cell phone, otherwise I would have looked it up.

[HDNitehawk]

See if I can post the RRS link
http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop...ds-Components/

[Busted Knuckles]

OK, so I popped for the Really Right Stuff pano head PG-02LLR. What a beast - I didn't get the vertical arm w/ cradle style clamp. When I am shooting movement, I can get to the center of gravity, or at least really close. Not sure I need the vertical arm & cradle, but we shall see.

From my understanding/perspective the side mount aligns the vertical center of the lens by default.

To find the offset on the horizontal base I used extension tubes w/ the camera/lens pointed straight down and lined it up w/ the crosshairs - Magic Lantern has a feature to find the exact center of the sensor with a uber small box for the magnification window. I used it to line up the with the markings for the base for center of rotation. I did this for my camera body (L plate) and my 70-200 (lens foot). The camera body setting should be the same regardless of the smaller lens mounted. The offset are 89 (vertical orientation) and 96 millimeters respectively. I won't be able to do this for my 150-600 but I should be able to really close by measuring the diameter of the lens ring & foot compared to the 70-200.

Now I need to find the nodal point, which is a trial and error effort for Saturday morning.

I am impressed w/ the fit and finish, I can see the difference of a Pano-Gimbal head vs. a Gimbal head that is focused on the super/uber telephotos.

I am good w/ the 150-600 on this, a 600 f4 etc would not break it, but I would think a dedicated Gimbal would be more functional for a swinging set of bird shots, etc. with such a hefty lens.

[neuroanatomist]

OK, so I popped for the Really Right Stuff pano head PG-02LLR.

I am good w/ the 150-600 on this, a 600 f4 etc would not break it, but I would think a dedicated Gimbal would be more functional for a swinging set of bird shots, etc. with such a hefty lens.

Congrats on the purchase.

I rarely use my PG-02 LLR for panos, but use it frequently for shooting BIF with my 1D X + 600/4 (usually with the 1.4xIII, sometimes with the 2xIII), and it's great for that use.

[Busted Knuckles]

that big of rig, I would suspect you use the vertical arm & cradle or just side mount?

[neuroanatomist]

I have the RRS PG-02 LLR, works great as a gimbal for my 600/4, works great as a multirow pano head with a standard lens. With the side mount setup like I have you need a nodal slide (I use the MPR-CL II) and an L-bracket on the body for panos. With the full gimbal you need an FAS clamp and also the L-bracket. Having a leveling base on the tripod really helps.

[Busted Knuckles]

I have a nodal slider which I can use to move the alignment to the inside - mount the the L bracket a bit to the left.

So it is by design that the standard gimbal head config is not to align the center of rotation w/ the center of the lens/camera mounting bracket.

I looked up the RRS bracket, would have rather stayed w/ a config that had fewer joints and points of flex.

If the bracket lined up w/ the center of rotation, that would reduce the number of alignment points. I would only have to worry about elevation and fore/aft i.e. 2 dimensions vs. 3.

Was hoping that there was a traditional gimbal that lined up. arrrrggghhhh

[neuroanatomist]

I looked up the RRS bracket, would have rather stayed w/ a config that had fewer joints and points of flex.

When assembled, the RRS PG-02 has no noticeable flex, even with a ~15 lb load (1D X, 600 II, 2xIII, ST-E3-RT and 600EX with better beamer). The Wimberley II is the same.

When the RSS gimbal is disassembled, it makes transport and storage easier. When the Wimberley II is disassembled...oh, wait...it doesn't break down for transport.

[Busted Knuckles]

When assembled, the RRS PG-02 has no noticeable flex, even with a ~15 lb load (1D X, 600 II, 2xIII, ST-E3-RT and 600EX with better beamer). The Wimberley II is the same.

When the RSS gimbal is disassembled, it makes transport and storage easier. When the Wimberley II is disassembled...oh, wait...it doesn't break down for transport.

LOL, yea, noticed, that - trying out a gimbal and yep it makes for a large, space hogging hunk