Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Jobu Gimball heads, are they good?

  1. #1
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    62
    Threads
    37
    Thank You Posts

    Default Jobu Gimball heads, are they good?

    I'm looking for a Jobu BWG-LW mkII or a Jobu Jr 2 - Compact Gimbal Head for my 300mm lens. Are they smoth and stuff enought? Any one has experienced these gimbals?

    paulo anjo

  2. #2
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Bosnia-Herzegovina and Italy
    Posts
    238
    Threads
    72
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    The last generation is excellent. I use BWG-Pro withe Sigmonster and BWG-LW MkII with smaller lenses.

    Giulio

  3. #3
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    York, England
    Posts
    229
    Threads
    15
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Giulo

    Would you say that the BWG-LW would fit/support a lens as large as a 300/f2.8 or 400/f4 with extenders? I am looking for something lighter than a ballhead/sidekick combination. In comparison to the Jobu, the Mongoose is more expensive after UK import duty (Jobu is sold in UK and Mongoose is not).

    Also, I have read complaints (on here, I think) that previous Jobu designs slipped with the weight of a lens after tightening. Are the new versions OK in this regard?

    Thank you

  4. #4
    Michael Bertelsen
    Guest

    Default

    Hi John,

    I upgraded to the Jobu Pro because bought a Sigma 300 - 800 5.6.
    It's extremely strong and very smooth, and you could hang from this gimbal head and it would never slip.
    A client of mine loves his BWG-LW and uses it on his 500 f4. So I would think it would be good for anything under that size.

    Michael

  5. #5
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Barnstaple,South West England
    Posts
    155
    Threads
    28
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    I have the BWG-HD MKII which is an excellent Gimbal IMO. the BWG-LW is exactly the same head as the BWG-HD but the HD has the full gimbal attachment whereas the LW is a sidekick type mount. I prefer the HG because I find it easier to mount the lens. You can convert the HG into a LW by simply removing the full Gimbal attachment if you want.

    Roy

  6. #6
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Bosnia-Herzegovina and Italy
    Posts
    238
    Threads
    72
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by john jackson View Post
    Giulo

    Would you say that the BWG-LW would fit/support a lens as large as a 300/f2.8 or 400/f4 with extenders? I am looking for something lighter than a ballhead/sidekick combination. In comparison to the Jobu, the Mongoose is more expensive after UK import duty (Jobu is sold in UK and Mongoose is not).

    Also, I have read complaints (on here, I think) that previous Jobu designs slipped with the weight of a lens after tightening. Are the new versions OK in this regard?

    Thank you
    Absolutely, I use the BW-LW MkII with the 300/2.8. I don't have experience with the previous Jobus, but I find the current ones to be excellent. I know that I am not going to be popular here, but I prefer the BW-LW MkII to the Mongoose. The lock of my Mongoose was stiff and especially in the cold I often hurt my finger when locking/unlocking...

    Giulio

  7. #7
    BPN Member Chris Ober's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Texas, Ya'll
    Posts
    1,490
    Threads
    108
    Thank You Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I reviewed one of their first model gimbal heads a few years back and found it was a fine performer. I still have it. It's an earlier version of what I believe they are not calling the Jr. I have not doubts the current line are just as good of products. The owner was very knowledgeable and quick to respond to inquiries.
    Chris


    0 .· ` ' / ·. 100
    I have a high sarcasm rate. Deal with it.
    include('sarcasm.php')

  8. #8
    Brad Manchas
    Guest

    Default

    I have both the Jr and BWG-HD, and am more than happy with the heads. Neither has had any issue with movement after being locked down and both are smooth and easily tensionable. I use these for 400mm DO on the Jr and the 500mm on the BWG.

    In the field in Klamath, OR last year with a few Canon reps and Adam Jones playing with the 800mm f/5.6 on both the Jobu and Wimberly's (they had) there was nothing but compliments on the Jobu and quetions on how I bought mine. Which was direct from Canada to save a bit more on the exchange rate over B&H or other retailer closer to home.

    As Martha Stewart might say; Jobu, it is a good thing. :D

  9. #9
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    62
    Threads
    37
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Thank you for your opinions. Currently I have an 300mm f/4 lens, but in the future I plan to buy an 300mm f/2.8.

    So I was wondering if the Jobu Jr 2 - Compact Gimbal Head will be enouth to hold tight this lens with a 1.4X for example.

    paulo anjo

  10. #10
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Haliburton, Ontario
    Posts
    886
    Threads
    57
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Paulo - I have the MKII and use it with my 500 f4. It is very high quality. Very smooth and very light. I really prefer the HD vs the LW because with a heavy lens you are less likely to have mounting difficulties - it is easier to set the lens down on the plate than to hold the lens in place as you mount it sideways onto the plate of the LW. Having said that I know some who don't mind that situation.

  11. #11
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    York, England
    Posts
    229
    Threads
    15
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Thanks Giulio and others for helpful comments. And all positive. Interesting.

  12. #12
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Barnstaple,South West England
    Posts
    155
    Threads
    28
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pauloanjo View Post
    Thank you for your opinions. Currently I have an 300mm f/4 lens, but in the future I plan to buy an 300mm f/2.8.

    So I was wondering if the Jobu Jr 2 - Compact Gimbal Head will be enouth to hold tight this lens with a 1.4X for example.

    paulo anjo
    Paulo

    I had the Jobu Jr for my 400/5.6 but when I got to the 300/2.8 I upgraded to the BWG-HD II.
    Although the Jr will take the weight of the 300 it is not recommended, I tried it a few times and it is nowhere near as stable as the BWG-HD.

    Roy

  13. #13
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Boca Raton, FL
    Posts
    28
    Threads
    5
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    How well did the Jr. work with your 400 5.6? Did you get the kit, or use the sideways mount? Thanks.

  14. #14
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Barnstaple,South West England
    Posts
    155
    Threads
    28
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay Abrams View Post
    How well did the Jr. work with your 400 5.6? Did you get the kit, or use the sideways mount? Thanks.
    Jay, I found the Jr superb with the 400/5.6 (including with a 1.4tc) I got the kit but to be quite honest I preferred the sideways mount, the 400/5.6 is light enough to mount easily sideways and it is not really heavy enough to work well with the bottom mount IMO.

    Roy

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