Printable View
I'm looking to buy a Mongoose gimbal type head and was wondering which one to buy. I have a Mark III body and my largest lens is the Canon 100-400 which I sometimes use with a 1.4x attached. I know that they recommend the smaller 2.3 but doesn't the addition of the extender make it too heavy to balance? Or, should I spend the money for the 3.5? I'll be using it for nature/wildlife photography. Any help would be greatly appreciated....Thanks!
Ed
Ed,
Go with the 3.5a - you won't be sorry - and should you go to a bigger lens you will not have to upgrade.
I use the 3.5a with a 40D body/vertical grip with both 100-400 and 500 F4 lens - very happy.
Have a blessed day - dave b.
Ed,
I should have mentioned - having a 40D I never use a TC with the 100-400 (no AF) - therefore I can't comment on the balance issue with this combination. If no one posts concerning the balance, I would gladly set it up and let you know. Send a PM if you like.
The balance issue (I assume) would be the same with both models. The 3.5a is designed to hold heavier lens.
dave b.
Dave,
Thanks for the advice! I was leaning towards the 3.5a but was trying to save a little money. BTW what plate do you use?
Ed
Ed,
My son uses a 2.3 with a Sigma 500mm F4.5 and D300.
I use a 3.5a with a Nikon 600mm AF-S I (the heaviest 600mm Nikon) and a Nikon D700.
If you are looking to save a few $ the 2.3 will work great.
If in the future you plan on getting a 500mm-600mm lens, then consider the 3.5a.
Thanks James
James,
Thanks for the reply! Yes I guess at some point I would like to step up to at least the 500mm. That being said, what plate would you recommend?
Ed
For the longer lenses, 4th generations "short foot". It changes the center of gravity to balance better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Gonzalez
Great information here: http://www.birdsasart.com/mongoose.htm
I have had both 2.3 and now the 3.5a. I would highly recomment going with the 3.5a, esp if at some point you plan on getting a bigger lens.
Thanks Marina, I'm pretty sure I'll get the 3.5a. It makes sense if I'm going to get a bigger lense later down the road.
Ed, I hope you don't mind me asking a slightly different question regarding the Mongoose in your thread.
It is my understanding that the Wimberley Gimbal head can be balanced such that the lens remains at rest without tightening regardless of which direction it is pointing. I vaguely remember someone claiming that this is not possible with the Mongoose. Is that correct?
Thanks, JR
You are correct John It won't balance.
Isn't that a major disadvantage of the Mongoose? Of course tightening up always ensures that the lens doesn't tip over when you make changes to the setup...
Thanks, JR
Overall its a great design and you will appreciate the lightness. I will use the Mongoose with my 600 if walking more than a couple of miles.
With this design the biggest worry is dropping the lens.
I would go with a ball head from Kirk and the side kick from Wimberly. That's what I used with my 400 f/5.6. Works like a charm!!!
Hi Ed. I recently had a discussion with John Zeiss of 4th Generation Designs about which Mongoose model to purchase. I currently use a Canon 40D coupled with a Canon 300mm f/4 IS with a 1.4x for my major telephoto lens. Some day, I hope to have a 500mm lens. Based on these factors, and the fact that I really can't afford or justify owning both models, John strongly recommended the 3.5. I use a CP-16 plate from 4th Generation which is recommended for all lenses with the "B" rotating collar. I'm no expert on balance, but to me, it balances the 300mm lens perfectly. The dimensions and weight are essentially the same for the two models although the cost of the 3.5 is greater. I'm VERY pleased with the purchase. It's as smooth as silk and has allowed me to make images of birds in flight I only dreamed of.
roger
Maxis idea is not bad since you end up with a ball head for landscape but its very heavy and expensive. Before the Mongoose it was a viable alternative to the full Wimberlly.
Roger try your 300 handheld for BIF Will be much easier. On the plus side you are getting practice using the tripod which is great then once you get a 500 you will feel right at home. No need to hand hold those large lenses if you know how to use a tripod,.
I use the same set up as Maxis mainly for security of my equipment. I find it difficult to lift the lever just a little to adjust the lens while on the Mongoose. On the Sidekick you turn the knob a little and you can use both hands to adjust lens. Also I find it easier to put the Sidekick on the lens and then they both slide down on the ballhead. Using the mongoose you have to mount the lens from the side. With age my arms are getting weaker. Just a thought.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JP Bruce
Not to mention you have to buy a double side plate for your camera.
I don't know what I am doing right or wrong but the 500 F4 - 40D+battery grip - w/TC - wo/TC can be balanced perfectly on the 3.5a. Maybe it's the smaller lens that can't be balanced.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfred Forns
With regards to the lever clamp - a big plus (IMHO) is you see visually and quickly if it is locked. The only time I nearly dropped my rig was after loosening the sidekick to balance and forgetting to tighten it.
Have a blessed day - dave b.
Hey guys, I bought the Mongoose 3a for use with the 500mm f4 and also with 1.4 and 2x Tc. I bought the Mongoose and the foot from Artie, I got it from USA to UK within 4 days of order. I could not recommend this combination highly enough. I get perfect - yes perfect balance. The friction is infinitely adjustable for vertical as well as lateral movement. It is light and very sturdy indeed. It is a bit expensive - especially when I was hit for import duty by Customs and Excise but I am absolutely convinced this is ideal.
Jon
