500 mm lens on Sidekick and Skimmer

[Evgeny Kuzmenko]

Hi everyone.

I am considering buying Nikon 500 mm VR and want to make sure that I choose the right support system for my needs.

I decided to go with Induro “Sidekick” head (GHB1 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/655339-REG/Induro_485_001_GHB1_Gimbal_Head.html)) due to cost and (more important) – weight reasons. I also shoot a lot from the ground level with Skimmer so I think the lower profile of this head will suit me better than the full Gimbal (GHB2 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/655340-REG/Induro_485_002_GHB2_Gimbal_Head.html)).

However, my concern is the center of gravity, as from the pictures of GHB1 I conclude that the lens will be off the center. While this should not be a great problem when mounting on a tripod, I think on Skimmer the whole rig may be imbalanced, which would be very frustrating. I am ready to reconsider my head choice simply based on this fact, but I am not sure whether my concerns are real.

Does anyone have practical experience with such set up? Not necessarily with GHB1, maybe with Sidemount Wimberley? I plan to buy Kirk replacement foot (LP-47) for the lens.

Thanks a lot. I don’t have any possibility to try this myself, so I have to rely on you guys :)

[David Burren]

The Sidekick (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/205329-REG/Wimberley_SK_100_Arca_Sidekick_Ball_to.html) is a Wimberley product which is a gimbal arm that attaches to a ballhead. I would refer to the GHB1 as a "side-mount" head, but definitely not a "Sidekick".

On a tripod the main effect of a centre of gravity off to the side is uneven loading on the head's panning base, but you're worrying that on the Skimmer the whole rig might be unsteady. While I don't have experience with the Nikkor 500 I would expect that the centre of gravity will have to be a long way off for the Skimmer to be unstable. The replacement lens foot you mention should help a lot.

[Evgeny Kuzmenko]

Thanks for the reply and correction, David. Yes, I should better use word "side-mount".

[Robert Hardy]

on that linc it says Suitable for Lenses Up to 400mm . could be why your lens will be a little off centre.
Rob.
<!-- End Product Highlights --><!-- End More info about the product --><!-- End topRight -->

[Ulli Hoeger]

I decided to go with Induro “Sidekick” head (GHB1 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/655339-REG/Induro_485_001_GHB1_Gimbal_Head.html)) due to cost and (more important) – weight reasons. I also shoot a lot from the ground level with Skimmer so I think the lower profile of this head will suit me better than the full Gimbal (GHB2 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/655340-REG/Induro_485_002_GHB2_Gimbal_Head.html)).



A note on the skimmer application. I appreciate the extra ground clearance provided by a "full" gimbal as I don't have to dig a hole for my chin to be able to look into the viewfinder ......

Never understood the rating based on focal length, as a 400/5.6 is very different in dimensions and weight from a 400/2.8 (that even tops a 500/4).

I used both side-mount and full gimbals in the past and prefer the full version. For me it handles much better .......

My 0.02

ulli

[Evgeny Kuzmenko]

Thanks for your replies. I would really appreciate an advice based on personal and practical experience of the setup I mentioned (maybe with another side-mount head).

In any case, it appears I have more time to consider the head as I decided to postpone its purchase until my bank account recovers from 500 VR deal :)

[Tiago Caravana]

I have a 500mm VR and use it with a wimberley sideckick mounted on a Markins Q20 ballhead and I couldn't ask for a better combo. It works perfectelly!!!

One very important thing is that I replaced the original foot for the wimberley foot.

[Evgeny Kuzmenko]

Thank you for sharing your experience, Tiago. Though now I am thinking of buying a head with "vertical load" - Jobu Heavy Duty MK III.