With how popular camera tripods and ball mounts have become I was just wondering why no one is using gimbal mounts like the Wimberley WH-200?
I know RRS and social media does a great job of hyping RRS tripods and arca ball heads but having shot wildlife photography for years I can tell you that most professionals are running Gitzo tripods (even more expensive that RRS if you can believe that and personally I think much better quality) and WH-200 gimbal mounts for big/long lens. Having spent countless hours behind a long lens on a WH-200 I can tell you it is worlds more comfortable to use and adjust than a ball head. My thinking was especially on a rife since it so long they would give you perfectly smooth adjustments, much stronger lockup than a ball head, can hold alot more weight then a ball head, you can just let the gun go hands free with the lock up knobs "unlocked" and the gun will just sit there (hence the name gimbal head) and you can freely move it around up down, left right, etc, its not like a ball head where when you unlock the knob you gun wants to fall over in some random direction. The only major downside to them is the price and there a little bit heavier, however if your already willing to drop $500 on a RRS BH-40 or 55 then your in the same range as a WH-200
I know for big/long lens camera shooting ball heads are mehhh and there really not that nice compared to a gimbal head so I am just wondering why no one is running gimbal heads like the WH-200? Or maybe I am just dumb and this is not the correct application??
Quick youtube search pulls this up for a quick and dirty explanation of a Gimbal Head for those not familiar with them.
I know RRS and social media does a great job of hyping RRS tripods and arca ball heads but having shot wildlife photography for years I can tell you that most professionals are running Gitzo tripods (even more expensive that RRS if you can believe that and personally I think much better quality) and WH-200 gimbal mounts for big/long lens. Having spent countless hours behind a long lens on a WH-200 I can tell you it is worlds more comfortable to use and adjust than a ball head. My thinking was especially on a rife since it so long they would give you perfectly smooth adjustments, much stronger lockup than a ball head, can hold alot more weight then a ball head, you can just let the gun go hands free with the lock up knobs "unlocked" and the gun will just sit there (hence the name gimbal head) and you can freely move it around up down, left right, etc, its not like a ball head where when you unlock the knob you gun wants to fall over in some random direction. The only major downside to them is the price and there a little bit heavier, however if your already willing to drop $500 on a RRS BH-40 or 55 then your in the same range as a WH-200
I know for big/long lens camera shooting ball heads are mehhh and there really not that nice compared to a gimbal head so I am just wondering why no one is running gimbal heads like the WH-200? Or maybe I am just dumb and this is not the correct application??
Quick youtube search pulls this up for a quick and dirty explanation of a Gimbal Head for those not familiar with them.
Last edited:
