Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: wimberly

  1. #1
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Jackson, Wyoming and the Outer Banks of North Carolina
    Posts
    136
    Threads
    51
    Thank You Posts

    Default wimberly

    I have been going back forth over the idea of purchasing a wimberly head. I use a 200-400vr which is much less weight than something like a 600 f4. Therefore I was considering purchasing the sidekick isntead of its big brother. Does anyone have experience with the side kick? Will I get similiar performance from the side kick? Considering I am not putting an 11 lbs lens on it, is the side kick better suited for my combo?

    thanks,
    Jared

  2. #2
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Parsonsfield, Maine
    Posts
    2,183
    Threads
    199
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    I can't comment directly on the side kick, I own and use the Wimberley 2 Head on the Canon 5D, MK2N with the 300 2.8 being the largest. Highly recommend it. If the sidekick is anything like it, buy it! Wimberley's high quality is, well excellent. Bought it from Artie. He answered all my questions, patiently too.

  3. #3
    Lifetime Member Doug Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM
    Posts
    11,879
    Threads
    917
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Consider the Mongoose Head that Artie sells. I prefer it to the Sidekick.
    Upcoming Workshops: Bosque del Apache 2019, Ecuador 2020 (details coming soon)
    Website -
    Facebook - 500px

  4. #4
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    173
    Threads
    39
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    I agree with Doug.

    I have both the Sidekick and a Mongoose 3.5a and prefer the latter. It's very smooth and lighter than a ball
    head/sidekick combo.

  5. #5
    BPN Member Tony Whitehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    3,972
    Threads
    142
    Thank You Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    I use a Sidekick with my RRS BH55 and 200-400 and am very happy with it. Weight wise - I always travel with the ballhead anyway so the sidekick is a small addition to get the function of a gimbal. I use RRS Quick release clamp so it all goes together very quickly and conveniently.
    Tony Whitehead
    Visit my blog at WildLight Photography for latest news and images.

  6. #6
    Alfred Forns
    Guest

    Default

    Mongoose 3.5a is the way to go Light and simple The flash bracket is a thing of beauty. The sidekick is good but you need a ball head (weight)

    If you need to mount the camera directly to the Mongoose there is an adapter then you can use the L bracket !!!

  7. #7
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Jackson, Wyoming and the Outer Banks of North Carolina
    Posts
    136
    Threads
    51
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    other than weight, what are the advantages over the sidekick and the wimberly?

  8. #8
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    173
    Threads
    39
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Functionally all three work quite well.

    With the Sidekick setup there are several clamps that have to kept tight or the results could be disaster. The Mongoose 3.5a is a sleek design and travels a little better than the full Wimberly.

  9. #9
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Jackson, Wyoming and the Outer Banks of North Carolina
    Posts
    136
    Threads
    51
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    sorry y'all in my last post I meant to ask : other than weight, what are the advantages of the Mongoose over the sidekick and full size wimberly?

    thanks,
    Jared

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Web Analytics