[galt_57]

In wishing for better scope balance I realized I could do this;

http://home.att.net/~galt_57/slide_plate2.jpg

But obviously the direct approach would be to use a really sturdy metal angle plate with threaded holes for the scope and the head. Does anyone use this approach? The disadvantage is obviously that the scope is set off to the side, which would apply some unusual torque to the QR plate, and the position relative to the tripod and arm would take some getting used to.

It seems to me that this might be much more cost effective than a Wimberley head.

Dave

[Hermann]

Originally Posted by galt_57

It seems to me that this might be much more cost effective than a Wimberley head.Dave

There are lots of things that are more cost effective than a Wimberley head ...:) Seriously, I' not sure that works. I experimented with this kind of setup for a while, but the good ol' Manfrotto 128RC always proved to be more vibration-free, flexible and user-friendly. I'd also tend to distrust the quick release system even more than I already do.
Hermann

[galt_57]

Originally Posted by Hermann

There are lots of things that are more cost effective than a Wimberley head ...:) Seriously, I' not sure that works. I experimented with this kind of setup for a while, but the good ol' Manfrotto 128RC always proved to be more vibration-free, flexible and user-friendly. I'd also tend to distrust the quick release system even more than I already do.

I'm going to experiment with an angle bracket to hang the scope on the side of the head. It seems like this should be cheap and easy to try and should offer superior balance and superior rigidity with only a little added clunkiness. Also it should be more compact and portable than going the gymbal route;

http://www.nikonians.org/html/resour...393/393_1.html