Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Mongoose Vs Wimberly

  1. #1
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Palm Coast, Fla - The Hammock
    Posts
    68
    Threads
    3
    Thank You Posts

    Default Mongoose Vs Wimberly

    I'm new to the forum, first post/reply.
    I have a Nikon AF-S 300 2.8 mkII and was looking around at heads vs gimbals. I have a Markins Q20 on my Manfrotto 0055MF3 which supports my 70-200 2.8 and 300 f4 lens quite well but really want a gimbal on a separate tripod base since I intend to add a 500 f4 next year.. I have a Gitzo GT3541LS arriving in a few days. So I was looking at the Sidkick but saw these recommendations to Mongoose products. Never in my life have I heard of them. I shoot wildlife, birds using my 300 with TC14eII and TC 20eIII extenders along with a SB800 and a Better Beamer when some light is needed.

    I guess does mongoose make the lens plates, flash brackets that are for the cost better than say Wimberly, how do they support the product after the sale, will RSS and Markins plates fit the Mongoose base.. Is this product made in the U.S...

    I have used a Wimberly II and a Sidekick on loan for a week and never had any issues with either using my 300 2.8, but after reading the post on this forum maybe I need to reconsider my purchase.:confused:

  2. #2
    Bill Stubbs
    Guest

    Default

    Chris, 4th Generation Designs makes the Mongoose heads. The current version (3.6) is pretty strong, locks securely for transport, and is compact and light weight (about 1 lb. lighter than the Wimberly V-2). You can also get an integrated flash bracket for it. A lot of people use it, and most like it a lot.

    FWIW, I prefer the Wimberly V-2 to the Sidekick with ball head; it's more secure, in my view, and with the weight of a good ball head added, I don't think the Sidekick is lighter.

    Both the Mongoose and Wimberly have clamps that accept Arca-Swiss style quick release plates/replacement lens feet. I'm not familiar with the Markins plates, but I know the RRS plates and feet work with both,(as do the Wimberly and 4th Generation plates/feet).

    I personally would not use the Mongoose with anything larger or heavier than a 500 (You can, but have only one hand free to support the lens when mounting it-it mounts sideways, and I don't like balancing a large, heavy lens with one hand). The BAA store carries both the Mongoose and Wimberly. With what you want it for, either will work, and cost is similar, so it comes down to how important weight and compactness are to you; the Mongoose is small and light enough to just drop in your pocket; the Wimberly isn't.

    BTW, 4th Generation Designs is located in MN. I've heard their customer service dept. is hard to reach, but the BAA Store has some knowledgeable people who can help you with anything you get from them, and a reputation for standing behind the stuff they sell.

    Hope that helps,
    Bill
    Last edited by Bill Stubbs; 01-06-2011 at 11:45 AM.

  3. #3
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Palm Coast, Fla - The Hammock
    Posts
    68
    Threads
    3
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Thanks Bill

  4. #4
    Lifetime Member Marina Scarr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sarasota, FL
    Posts
    10,347
    Threads
    403
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Chris:

    I have used 3 versions of the Mongoose now and am very happy with the product. I mostly use it with a 400 Do and a 1.4. It is light weight and easy to use. The camera is secure. I also have the flash arm which is a wonderful product as well.

    My only issue in the past has been with customer service. It is a family-run operation, and there are issues from time to time. However, they are good people and mean well, you just have to be persistent.

    Good luck with your choice.

    Marina

  5. #5
    Danny J Brown
    Guest

    Default

    Hi Chris,

    I'm not sure I understand why you were looking at the Wimberley Sidekick for your dedicated second platform for your new 500. If it is just for the 500 I wouldn't consider a Sidekick because you shouldn't need to be changing back and forth to a smaller lens on that tripod. I recommend a Wimberley II for your 500 even though many BPNrs love their Mongoose heads. The Wimberley II has proven to be the most "perfect" piece of camera gear I've ever purchased. It locks down for shoulder carry like a vise with the slightest turn of the control knobs and continues to be smooth as silk in operation even though I've had mine in every kind of weather situation. I don't even use my lighter tripod with its Markins M10 Ballhead anymore for my little 300/4. I just put that lens on the Wimberley II as well because it works soooo much better, especially in cold weather. Good luck with your decision!

    DB

  6. #6
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Palm Coast, Fla - The Hammock
    Posts
    68
    Threads
    3
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Thanks Danny.. I haven't gotten that 500 yet, most likely late year for sure so right now it's the 300 2.8 with TC's. But after corresponding with Mike Sweeney of Wimberly Friday the full Wimberly head is what I'm going to get.
    Last edited by Chris Poole; 01-09-2011 at 08:29 AM.

  7. #7
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,647
    Threads
    83
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    The choice of a full Wimberley II cannot be faulted, nor the Mongoose, nor the Sidekick.

    I don't know if Danny meant it, but it seemed to imply to me that he doesn't think that the Wimberley Sidekick will work well with the 500mm f/4L IS. I use the Sidekick with my 500mm, combined with the Arca-Swiss Z1 ballhead. This is a very solid and smooth combination that locks down solidly when I want to put the whole rig over my shoulder. It DOES require a very strong, solid ballhead because of the side-mount on the ballhead. The A-S fill this bill in spades.

    By the time you buy a strong ballhead and the Sidekick you've spent as much as the full Wimberley, or thereabouts. For me a significant added advantage is that can quickly take the Sidekick off and use the ballhead for scenics when the dawn or dusk or mountain scenery so moves me. If you never make that switch, then the Wimberley or Mongoose is probably the way to go.

  8. #8
    Pedro Serralheiro
    Guest

    Default Or the other way...

    Through the years I have use some different gimbal heads, I still have my last one a CB gimbal.
    I believe all of them, from the "big" names, Wimberley, 4th Generation, CB, Eki, are well done, secure and produce the expected results.
    But when you start to go down on shutter speed (even new bodies with high ISO can't do everything) the main gimbal head weakness appears, that is, shaking, loss of rigidity, and of course worst quality photos. This is especially true with longer glass.
    If you look around to find an answer, you'll end up with the hydraulic heads. I have tried the Scahtler ones and I was sold immediately. The FSB-8 is a killer in this respect.
    So, I'm not saying they are the best option, what I'm saying is that they provide the best support you can get. Try them if you wish, but be prepared, addicting is at risk...
    Drawbacks? Yes, size, weight and price.

  9. #9
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,647
    Threads
    83
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro Serralheiro View Post
    Through the years I have use some different gimbal heads, I still have my last one a CB gimbal.
    I believe all of them, from the "big" names, Wimberley, 4th Generation, CB, Eki, are well done, secure and produce the expected results.
    But when you start to go down on shutter speed (even new bodies with high ISO can't do everything) the main gimbal head weakness appears, that is, shaking, loss of rigidity, and of course worst quality photos. This is especially true with longer glass.
    If you look around to find an answer, you'll end up with the hydraulic heads. I have tried the Scahtler ones and I was sold immediately. The FSB-8 is a killer in this respect.
    So, I'm not saying they are the best option, what I'm saying is that they provide the best support you can get. Try them if you wish, but be prepared, addicting is at risk...
    Drawbacks? Yes, size, weight and price.
    Yes, video heads are heavy, EXPENSIVE and a valid approach. I'd be interested to see if they actually yield superior results for still photography as compared to a properly setup gimbal. Using my Wimberley Sidekick, I adjust the drag to have a slight amount of resistance. The Arca-Swiss/Sidekick combination gives me a smooth response, with no apparent "slop". I shoot most shots on the tripod/gimbal at 1/1000-second, but go as low at around 1/150 for still birds, this is when using my 500mm f/4. It doesn't seem like the tripod/gimbal is a limiting factor that would warrant spending $1,500 on a head.

    Still, I'd be willing to take the plunge if I could see a demonstration of superior results for still photography. (There's no argument that it's a "must" for video).

  10. #10
    Pedro Serralheiro
    Guest

    Default

    David, I started to see, feel, the need of a better platform only with the big ones and when the "rule" of shutter speed (higher then the focal distance) was no more an option.
    Normally I don't make "lab" tests to my gear; I tested it on normal use. What I have realized is that with the 600VR (VR off) and on the Sachtler I manage a much higher percentage of professional quality photos with 1/125s. That was not the case with any gimbals. When I say normal use I mean , no mirror lock-up, no shutter delay, neither remote trigger or flash (you know flash help things).
    I did think that the video (hydraulic, because there are enough ones not true hydraulic) heads where only good to still photography. That's not the case! With my FSB-8 I follow the flying birds with the same ease that I used to do with the gimbals. Sure, you'll have more controls to deal with, but after some practice it's really a joy to use them.
    I have learned with more seasoned photographers that you should seek the more stable platform you can. Than comes the photo gear.
    Rent one and use it for a weak.
    Remember video needs are not so different from what we are doing. Both are running after "shackingless" photos...
    Last edited by Pedro Serralheiro; 01-11-2011 at 06:28 AM.

  11. #11
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,647
    Threads
    83
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro Serralheiro View Post
    ...Remember video needs are not so different from what we are doing. Both are running after "shackingless" photos...
    Pedro, no disrespect meant my friend, but did you mean "shakeless" or "shake free" photos?

    You are right about video compared to still, but video puts an additional requirement on the head and that the need to achieve a very smooth, SLOW pan that doesn't manifest itself in the image and uneveness or bumping. A true hydraulic head, as you've suggested, does that extremely well. For those of us shooting at 1/1000-second and above, that's an expensive extra.

    I do occasionally shoot at low shutter speed, with my 500mm lens on my Wimberley Sidekick with no special procedures. Here's one at 1/80-second:

    Name:  WarblerCottonWood.jpg
Views: 2004
Size:  174.6 KB

  12. #12
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Palm Coast, Fla - The Hammock
    Posts
    68
    Threads
    3
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Based on product cost and my close friends who routinely us the product, I think I'm going to stick with a Wimberly product. Thanks for the feedback..

  13. #13
    Pedro Serralheiro
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Stephens View Post
    Pedro, no disrespect meant my friend, but did you mean "shakeless" or "shake free" photos?
    Name:  WarblerCottonWood.jpg
Views: 2004
Size:  174.6 KB
    :p Upps, my english... shake free, of course :p
    And again, yes, with the 500 I never had this need.

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