Markins Q10i ball head with gimble attachement vs a full gimbled head like a wimberley

[Terry Johnson]

Hello, I am looking at purchasing a ball head, particularly the Markins Q10i with the gimble attachment. I was wondering if any of the membership have familiarity with this combo. I would like to know how the Markins Q10i combo stacks up against the wimberley gimbled head or the wimberley sidekick attached to a ball head.

I would like to use the Q10i combo for short telephoto lens (100-300mm) and long telephoto lens (300-600mm)

Thanks for your help in this matter...Terry Johnson:e3

[Alan Lillich]

Terry,
I looked at the Markins website and did not see anything about a gimbal attachment, so I can't comment on that part. We do own Markins M10 and M20 ballheads, and have used both with a Sidekick. We also own a Wimberley II. We no longer use either Wimberley gimbal, we have switched to Jobu Jr heads with the one piece arm, they are incredibly light. It is a matter of personal choice, but I much prefer a bottom mount for lenses bigger than a 300 2.8, and for all lenses when wearing winter gloves. The Markins heads were fine for the Sidekick, the ball locks in place very solidly. A side mount does eliminate the need for height adjustment, the Jobu heads do not have a slider like the full Wimberley. We pretty much only use a gimbal for a 600, handholding anything else for flight.
hope this helps,
Alan