Top Mount vs. Side mount gimbals?

[Chris Brennan]

Rather than add to my other post, I'm opening a new one because this info request is a bit different. (Moderators: feel free to consolidate if I'm in error)

Some people swear by the "top mount" gimbal heads like the Wimberley or the Bogen 393 or the Jobu Black Widow; others prefer the side-mount such as the Wimberley Sidekick or the Mongoose. I have a Wimberley (see other thread) and considering a Mongoose but I'm wondering gravity or something else affects the lens position and balance or whether it makes no difference...

[Nancy A Elwood]

Chris for me the top mount is much better. I use my wimberley with my 500 f4 and would feel uncomfortable trying to mount it sideways, especially because I have small hands. Now even my 300 2.8 was not as long but heavy enough I did not feel comfortable with a side mount.

[Jay Gould]

Chris, as a newbie I haven't had the experience of others; however, I am just starting to play with my 300 2.8 and the Sidekick/Markins M-20 combination and it so far is very solid and easy to use. The best thing is all you do is remove the Sidekick and you are ready to use the ballhead. The idea of changing from a ballhead to a gimbal doesn't appeal to me.

[Alfred Forns]

Chris the top mount is better and can be balanced. With side mounts you can't !!!

For big lenses like 400 2.8 500 f 4.0 etc I would go with the Wimberley For smaller with the side mounted Mongoose. It all boils down to personal choice. btw some people like the sidekick since you have a ball head also ... good for landscape work. Different people have different requirements !!!

[Desmond Chan]

I don't think the side-mount one such as sidekick is meant to be the better choice between the two. I think it's selling point is it can offer some convenience to users who need it.

[Jay Gould]

I don't think the side-mount one such as sidekick is meant to be the better choice between the two. I think it's selling point is it can offer some convenience to users who need it.

Very diplomatic, Desmond! ;):)

[Doug Brown]

Having used the Mongoose, Sidekick, and Wimberley II, my vote for the best gimbal head for big glass goes to the Wimberley. I agree with Desmond that the Sidekick and Mongoose have different selling points than the full Wimberley. But you haven't explained what you're looking for in a gimbal head. Is weight the most important feature or is performance? That'd help answer your question.

[Chris Brennan]

Doug -

Initially I felt that the weight & heft of the Wimberley might be too much, given my current (and not likely to change anytime soon!) need for a 300/2.8 IS with converters. However, giving it more critical evaluation over the weekend, the item which should be changed out is the tripod NOT the gimbal. The tripod I'm using is the largest that Induro makes: the CF414, weighing in at about 6.5 lbs. I initally got it because I couldn't afford a Gitzo, and I'm tall (6'5"). However, it can sell it for a reasonable amount of $$, I'll invest in a GT3540XLS, which will trim the weight substantially.

[Doug Brown]

I'm 6'3" myself. I own the tall Gitzo tripod, and it comes in really handy. Check out this photo of my rig:
http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...ad.php?t=35892