I do a lot of bird shooting & have been through the Giotto, Arca B1, and now finally 
use the Wimberly.  As you described, as the glass gets bigger, so does the need for a 
better tripod head.

First off, I would not even think about mounting big glass on a Giotto.  Torquing it 
down even further is a terrible idea - I know, I tried it.  Ultimately, the stem of 
the Giotto actually broke in two under the weight of a rented 400 2.8 lens, and all 
the extra stress I'd placed on it!

When I moved from a 100-400 to the 500 as my primary bird glass, I also finally got 
the B1.  It was a big step up from the giotto and a bogen I'd been using, and it was 
far better than any other ball head I'd had a chance to try.  You still end up having 
to tinker with the adjustments a bit more than I'd like, but still far less than other 
ball head, due to the aspherical design.  You still have have to be pretty careful to 
keep your big lens from 'flopping', as too much of that will damage the ball's 
container, and result in erratic movement of the ball.  

In any case, I finally got a Wimberly after doing an Arthur Morris workshop, and 
seeing first hand how much easier it was to handle than the ball head.  It's not that 
the B1 is so bad, it's just that the Wimberly is so much better when your subjects 
move around alot.  For birds in flight, there's just no comparison.

First off, it's set and forget.  Once you have your entire rig mounted & balanced, it 
does feel virtually weightless.  You can freely move the camera to just about any 
position you choose.  Let go, and it stays right where you left it without touching or 
adjusting anything, and no need to clamp it down.  Flopping is simply not an issue.  
All movements are so much smoother when you never have to fight the weight of the 
lens.  You also have a much fuller range of movement vertically than you do with the 
ball head - no need to worry about where you place a notch.

Wimberly also makes plates and flash brackets that work nicely with their heads.  In 
particular, their plates are designed so that even if you fail to tighten the plate 
down completely, it (and your expensive gear) cannot slide all the way off.

I have only found two downsides.  One is that the weight is certainly more than the 
B1.  Wimberly makes a 'Sidekick' version of their head that is much lighter, and 
actually mounts on a B1.  I haven't tried one of these, but you'll find opinions pro 
and con on photo.net.

The other is that the Wimberly works best when you have a tripod foot on the lens.  If 
you're shooting a small lens with no foot, you can mount the camera body, but I find 
it cumbersome at best.

So, for situations where my subject matter may vary, or where every ounce matters, 
I'll still use the B1.  For a serious bird outing, though, it's always the Wimberly.

I think that Wimberly offers some kind of trial period or money-back guarantee, but 
I'm not sure what the details are.

Paul Wasserman












Ken Durling wrote:

> So I need to think about springing for a really good ballhead.  I'm
> aware of the Arca-Swiss heads, and the Kirk head 
. . . .
> orniphotography (?) puts extra demands on the head.
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
*  For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*    http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************

Reply via email to