Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Do you have a general dislike of ball heads or is it because your present one lacks friction adjustment? Ball heads are very versatile and you might like to look at something like a Benro B3.
If your 150-500 mm lens has a rotating collar, you could of course use a fluid video head like the Manfrotto 502 HD but it would not allow you to rotate the camera to the vertical format with the other lenses.
I would not have thought that the moving elements would have much effect on balance and if so, that would be a problem with any other head.
Fore and aft balance can be achieved with the QR plate and if the gimbal head has a vertical adjustment it would allow you to put the horizontal pivot axis (for vertical tilt) through the centre of gravity of the camera/lens system for virtually perfect balance.
Curious as to which ballhead you are using. I use the same exact Sigma that you are using and I use it on a Markins M10 ballhead. This ballhead is super smooth and once the friction is set right on this ballhead I don't even need to tighthen the ball head down. I can move the lens to the position I want and let go and it stays there. I have even used it with success for hawks in flight. Another ballhead that is similiar to the Markins is the Photoclam and can be had for slightly less money. If you are totally against ballheads then I realize this info is useless to you, but I thought I'd share my experience with the same lens in hopes it may help.
Have a look at the Manfrotto 393 and the Lensmaster Gimbal, both of these would be good solutions to your problem (and FAR cheaper than a Wimberley!). They are both reasonably priced and will support far heavier lenses than yours. I used to use a Manfrotto 393 with a 6.1 Kilo (+ camera) 400 F2.8 and it coped very well. I love ball heads but they are not the best for long or heavy lenses.
I have heard gimbal heads will be no good since I have a zoom lens and that will upset the balance?
Alex[/QUOTE]
Yes it will upset the balance with your lens. This is NOT a big issue if you are holding the camera you will hardly even notice. If you are not holding the camera it will be an issue but unless you are using an off camera shutter release then with a fairly light lens like the Sigma then it's not really an issue.
See my suggestions in my previous post and give them a try - I think they would do the job nicely for you.
Good luck!
Awhile back I put together a chart of quite a few gimbel heads for quick comparison of basic specs between them that you might find useful. It's at the bottom of this page on the 393 gimbel. http://www.carolinawildphoto.com/393gimbel.htm
It doesn't cover everything by any means. Only gimbels available in the US are listed, not including the really cheap knockoffs that have mostly bad reviews. Anyway, you might find it easier to do comparisons with the info right there together in the form of a chart.
Happy hunting.
Interesting article OBXGuide, there is a lot of useful information there!
I had the 393 and rate it highly, especially for the price. However I now use the Wimberley 2 (because I got a nearly new one V cheap!), personally I find this head more secure and adjustable than the 393. Further, with the Canon 400 F2.8 (pre IS model) and Canon 600 F4 IS you do not need to replace the lens foot - at least I haven't when using a 1 series body.
IMO the Wimberley 2 is better, worth the money no!
I have a 393 that i use on my monopod & car window mount. I have removed the 357 plate clamp & put a 4" arca-swiss type clamp on it. I found them far better made & robust & would defy anyone to remove the plate without undoing it first. I feel far happier with it on there than i did with manfrottos offering. Yes they do have there short comings as mentioned above, but unsecure, they aint.