I currently have a Wimberley WH-200. I use it exclusively with my 300mm f2.8L IS with and without converters on an Induro C414 tripod. I initially bought the Wimberley because I anticipated getting a 500 f4, but that's probably NOT going to happen now for a long, long time if ever.... If anything, I'd opt for a 400DO at some point in the future.
While the Wimberley is very nice albeit a little heavy, it also seems like overkill for my lens. A fellow photographer suggested that I look into a Mongoose.
Is the Wimberley overkill? Would I do similarly or better with a Mongoose?
Looking forward to your suggestions....
I think the Mongoose would be perfect for the 400DO and the 300 2.8 Have to agree the Wimberley is an overkill. btw if I'm walking a long ways I will use the Mongoose with my longer lenses ... just need to be careful balancing after adding converters !!!
btw to really answer you question you need to specify your application ... if you only take a couple of steps form the car then weight would be no problem, lots of walking would ... all depends !!! Performance wise you will do fine with the Mongoose ... remember to get the little flash bracket !!!
I use the gimbal head year-round for some BIF and static shots as well as in the summer and early fall for high speed jets at airshows. Most times I'm walking a fair distance from where I park so weight would be a slight factor.
I use the Wimberley with the DO. It may be "overkill," but after Artie's 500 slipped out of a Mongoose while trying to mount it twice in Kenya in 2007, I'm permanently spooked by it. If it works for other people, great, but I'm not risking a side-mount head for my gear.
Wimberley WH-II vs. Mongoose M3.5?
Reply With Quote
