Does anyone here use Fly/Glidecams anymore?

[BrorSvensson]

2 hours ago, kgv5 said:

Or this

 

two very different looks, glidecam looks better too be but i think it has to do more with the operator at that point.

[M Carter]

I've got a Came carbon-fiber, pretty simple model, no battery rig at the bottom. As far as operating, yeah, you need tons of practice, but I've gotten very useful shots, corporate gigs, b-roll stuff. I can't imagine it being any better for what it is, very well constructed and smooth, quality piece of gear.

I've balanced it pretty quickly to different cameras, lately I find the NX1 with the tiny 16-50 kit lens to be excellent on it with the optical OIS turned on, sometimes even use the AF. I use the manfrotto release plates everywhere, I had to mount one to a little plywood block so the release knob would clear the release lock on the Came, but I can switch from sticks or shoulder to steadicam in a flash and give the balance a quick tweak. I skip the matte box and use screw-in ND on the kit lens, I just got a 52mm step ring and a rubber hood for it. 52mm filters are all over the place, whatever flavor you want can be found pretty cheap. Generally for steadicam you shoot wide and stopped down so I haven't had a reason to stick any big glass on the thing and the Samsung kit's an impressive little lens.

I haven't looked seriously at gimbals due to the expense and hassle factors, but they are coming down in price and the usability bugs seem to be getting ironed out. 

Gimbals are, to some extent, like drones. Drones are just killer to cheaply get very high-dollar shots, like huge crane moves and helicopter stuff. But most drone ops are like "look at all the stuff this can do" and suddenly a classic cinematic move starts screaming "look!!! I'm a drone!!" Gimbals aren't quite as bad in that regard, if someone executes a well planned shot - the clip that sold so many on gimbals was the roller blader with the taxi cab shot, a good example of shot design that's exciting but not something that would pull the viewer out of the scene. To me the gimbals seem like the kind of thing where I'd rather just hire an op that knows it well and cans et it up quickly. My brain is too full...

[MountneerMan]

20 hours ago, M Carter said:

I've got a Came carbon-fiber, pretty simple model, no battery rig at the bottom. As far as operating, yeah, you need tons of practice, but I've gotten very useful shots, corporate gigs, b-roll stuff. I can't imagine it being any better for what it is, very well constructed and smooth, quality piece of gear.

I've balanced it pretty quickly to different cameras, lately I find the NX1 with the tiny 16-50 kit lens to be excellent on it with the optical OIS turned on, sometimes even use the AF. I use the manfrotto release plates everywhere, I had to mount one to a little plywood block so the release knob would clear the release lock on the Came, but I can switch from sticks or shoulder to steadicam in a flash and give the balance a quick tweak. I skip the matte box and use screw-in ND on the kit lens, I just got a 52mm step ring and a rubber hood for it. 52mm filters are all over the place, whatever flavor you want can be found pretty cheap. Generally for steadicam you shoot wide and stopped down so I haven't had a reason to stick any big glass on the thing and the Samsung kit's an impressive little lens.

I haven't looked seriously at gimbals due to the expense and hassle factors, but they are coming down in price and the usability bugs seem to be getting ironed out. 

Gimbals are, to some extent, like drones. Drones are just killer to cheaply get very high-dollar shots, like huge crane moves and helicopter stuff. But most drone ops are like "look at all the stuff this can do" and suddenly a classic cinematic move starts screaming "look!!! I'm a drone!!" Gimbals aren't quite as bad in that regard, if someone executes a well planned shot - the clip that sold so many on gimbals was the roller blader with the taxi cab shot, a good example of shot design that's exciting but not something that would pull the viewer out of the scene. To me the gimbals seem like the kind of thing where I'd rather just hire an op that knows it well and cans et it up quickly. My brain is too full...

Sorry I have a few questions if you don't mind.

what came carbon-fiber steady cam do you have? I was looking at getting one for myself so I don't need to borrow my friends and was considering the CAME H4

When you say Samsung 16-50 kit lens do you mean the 16-50 S lens for the power zoom one?

 

Thank you in advance.

[kgv5]

Yesterday i  shot some family sunday walk, everythihg shot with glidecam, the camera was mounted on it all the time, it helped to stabilize also the more static footage as well as comfortably carry all the set around. I cannot imagine taking ronin with me for such an occasion, playing with settings and batteries, walking with it through crowded streets, to the park, I would feel like a dork with all the people around staring at me. Most people treat glidecam as a strange monopod.

Recorded with 5d3 in ML raw format, two or three shots have warp stabilizer applied at 1-5 %, rest of them are straight from the glidecam. 

 

[M Carter]

12 hours ago, MountneerMan said:

Sorry I have a few questions if you don't mind.

what came carbon-fiber steady cam do you have? I was looking at getting one for myself so I don't need to borrow my friends and was considering the CAME H4

When you say Samsung 16-50 kit lens do you mean the 16-50 S lens for the power zoom one?

 

Thank you in advance.

I mean the little kit lens, tiny thing, goes for about $140 on eBay. Sweet little steadicam lens, and if you own an NX1 its kind of a no brainer. TINY thing. I put a 52mm step up ring on it and use 52mm filters for steadicam and ditch the matte box. You can pick up Tiffen or BW ND's on eBay for next to nothing in 52mm. It's f 3.5 at 16mm to 5.6 at 50, but I only use it wide and generally with steadicam you go wide and F4 - 5.6 anyway. If you stop it down to F16 or so, it's just absurdly sharp - too sharp. I've only used it wide open. Very fast AF, but with steadicam or handheld, you have to really work to keep the focus point on the subject so I usually go MF or at least do takes with and without AF.Shoulder mount I go with my big old Nikkors. Big fan of the 28-70 2.8 for fast moving gigs on the shoulder mount.

I don't think Came makes the model I own anymore, but I've been happy with it and gotten some great shots. Really, really nice with slowmo for corporate stuff, manufacturing, b-roll, etc.

[MountneerMan]

10 hours ago, M Carter said:

I mean the little kit lens, tiny thing, goes for about $140 on eBay. Sweet little steadicam lens, and if you own an NX1 its kind of a no brainer. TINY thing. I put a 52mm step up ring on it and use 52mm filters for steadicam and ditch the matte box. You can pick up Tiffen or BW ND's on eBay for next to nothing in 52mm. It's f 3.5 at 16mm to 5.6 at 50, but I only use it wide and generally with steadicam you go wide and F4 - 5.6 anyway. If you stop it down to F16 or so, it's just absurdly sharp - too sharp. I've only used it wide open. Very fast AF, but with steadicam or handheld, you have to really work to keep the focus point on the subject so I usually go MF or at least do takes with and without AF.Shoulder mount I go with my big old Nikkors. Big fan of the 28-70 2.8 for fast moving gigs on the shoulder mount.

I don't think Came makes the model I own anymore, but I've been happy with it and gotten some great shots. Really, really nice with slowmo for corporate stuff, manufacturing, b-roll, etc.

Do you think you would be able to use the 16-50 f2-2.8 lens?

[MountneerMan]

So as of yesterday I am officially on the market for a Steadicam and would like some suggestions/help choosing.

So I want to use it with my NX1 with the 16-50 S lens and a rode video mic pro (~1,400g or 3 lbs) but would also like some room to grow if my next camera is heavier. I plan on also buying an arca quick release so I can easily switch between the steady cam and tripod. Is this recommended?

So far this is my list of options:

Glidecam HD200:
My friend has this one and I have used it a few times and I really like it so it is definitely high on my list. My main issue with the HD2000 is the price. It is the most expensive option on my list currently.

Glidecam XR-2000:
I was looking at this one because it is really close to the HD200 but with a few less features at less than half the cost. The primary feature missing is the XY screw adjustments witch seems quite critical to me but seeing as I have very minimal experience balancing steady cams how important is this feature considering that I will be using an additional quick release?

CAME-TV H4 Carbon Fiber:
This little guy is extremely appealing because it’s compact, light, and affordable and it comes with the micro adjustments. Right now it is the front runner except I feel like the quality is lacking compared to the Glidecams

Cheap “Amazon” Steady Cam (Opteka):
I am curious if this is actually any good at all. It appears to be decent but I am worried that it is shit. Anyone have any experience with this one?

Steadicam Solo Stabilizer & Monopod
I am curious about the monopod functionality because I really like versatility. Also the build quality looks quite nice and it has a lot of really good reviews. It appears to be gear rental work horse witch also appeals to me. Any one have any experience with this Steady cam?

Just wait and get a gimbal
This is the less appealing of all the options beacuse I feel like there is so much settings involved I feel like it would be just be another excuse for me to play around with settings oppose to actually shooting. I also feel like waiting even just a year the gimbals will be twice as good and half the cost where steady cams have definitely been refined to the point where they are not getting alot better.

Any feedback is wanted and helpful. Thank you all in advance.

 

EDIT: It is also worth noting that I have used the 'C' type steady cam like the merlin and I did not like it.

[aldolega]

The screw-style fine adjustment (HD series, DG edition, Came H4 etc) is welllll worth the extra money over the simple sliding adjustment (XR series/Flycam/etc). It makes fine-tuning your balance actually practical/possible, which if you have to work anywhere near quickly is essential. If you're just putzing around on personal stuff with infinite time to fiddle with your rig, and you're a patient but broke person, save the money on the cheaper units with the sliding-style adjustment... I guess... still not worth it IMO.

I shot with my Flycam maybe four-five times before shelving it and picking up an HD1000. Night & day difference, and worth every penny of the $200-ish difference at the time, just for being able to pull the HD1000 out, have it still be 98% balanced, and then tweaking the knobs to get to 100% within a few seconds. The Flycam was a ten-minute struggle every time, if not more, and even then its cheaper gimbal and build quality didn't give quite as good of performance.

I actually have a Came H4 too, that I have yet to really run through the paces, but it seems promising. Good build quality, much more compact than the HD1000, and the sliding gimbal lets you switch to inverted mode pretty painlessly.

[TheRenaissanceMan]

I would be very curious to hear a comparison between the HD1000 and CAME H4. I've also seen people recommend the Blackbird. This seems like a great higher-end option, if pricey. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=1148838&gclid=Cj0KEQjwrte4BRD-oYi3y5_AhZ4BEiQAzIFxn7g7PmBoDDk61YraecWxg5c2_L9UTisaOo8K7RLMU2saAla48P8HAQ&is=REG&ap=y&c3api=1876%2C52934714882%2C&Q=&A=details

I'm trying really hard to decide between one of these and a Beholder DS1 ($600). Any insight from you more experienced flyers would be much appreciated.

[MountneerMan]

33 minutes ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

I would be very curious to hear a comparison between the HD1000 and CAME H4.

I second that request.

 

 

49 minutes ago, aldolega said:

The screw-style fine adjustment (HD series, DG edition, Came H4 etc) is welllll worth the extra money over the simple sliding adjustment (XR series/Flycam/etc). It makes fine-tuning your balance actually practical/possible, which if you have to work anywhere near quickly is essential. If you're just putzing around on personal stuff with infinite time to fiddle with your rig, and you're a patient but broke person, save the money on the cheaper units with the sliding-style adjustment... I guess... still not worth it IMO.

I hear you... note taken the XR and optika have been taken off the list.

49 minutes ago, aldolega said:

I shot with my Flycam maybe four-five times before shelving it and picking up an HD1000. Night & day difference, and worth every penny of the $200-ish difference at the time, just for being able to pull the HD1000 out, have it still be 98% balanced, and then tweaking the knobs to get to 100% within a few seconds. The Flycam was a ten-minute struggle every time, if not more, and even then its cheaper gimbal and build quality didn't give quite as good of performance.

I saw the HD1000 but its only rated for up to 3 lbs and figured that is was like tripod ratings where they are usually pretty generous with their specs meaning in order to get good results you should stay well under their specified maximums.

What is your experience with the HD1000 can it comfortably fly 3lbs? How about compared to the CAME-H4 witch is APPARENTLY rated for up to 6 lbs(eye roll).

49 minutes ago, aldolega said:

I actually have a Came H4 too, that I have yet to really run through the paces, but it seems promising. Good build quality, much more compact than the HD1000, and the sliding gimbal lets you switch to inverted mode pretty painlessly.

OK... I am going to put you on the spot.... you have to grab either your HD1000 or your CAME-H4.... What do you grab?

[aldolega]

Right now this instant, I grab the HD1000, just because I've barely used the H4 yet. 

I wasn't putting the HD1000 up as the specific HD model you should get, by the way. That's just what I have. My 60D setup (body, Tokina 11-16, Rode VMP, Manfrotto QR adapter) was about 3.5lbs and that was maxing it out I think. It always flew well for me but I wouldn't want to go any heavier.

I only loaded the H4 to about 3lbs when I used it, but I'm also suspicious of that supposed 6lb max. My gut says more like 4.5-5.

Between the two, from my very limited experience with the H4, I think the Glidecam is going to be the better performer, but the H4 packs up much much smaller/lighter and goes inverted much easier, which for me personally are more important than that last tiny bit of performance.

Frankly I haven't really used the Glidecam much at all in the last two years because I got sick of hauling it around, and combined with getting over the typical initial OMGGLIDECAMALLTHETIMMMMEEE phase everyone goes through, it just started staying at home pretty much always.

 

[MountneerMan]

1 hour ago, aldolega said:

Right now this instant, I grab the HD1000, just because I've barely used the H4 yet. 

I wasn't putting the HD1000 up as the specific HD model you should get, by the way. That's just what I have. My 60D setup (body, Tokina 11-16, Rode VMP, Manfrotto QR adapter) was about 3.5lbs and that was maxing it out I think. It always flew well for me but I wouldn't want to go any heavier.

I only loaded the H4 to about 3lbs when I used it, but I'm also suspicious of that supposed 6lb max. My gut says more like 4.5-5.

Between the two, from my very limited experience with the H4, I think the Glidecam is going to be the better performer, but the H4 packs up much much smaller/lighter and goes inverted much easier, which for me personally are more important than that last tiny bit of performance.

Frankly I haven't really used the Glidecam much at all in the last two years because I got sick of hauling it around, and combined with getting over the typical initial OMGGLIDECAMALLTHETIMMMMEEE phase everyone goes through, it just started staying at home pretty much always.

 

Thank you for your insight I agree with that I would prefer the smaller lighet more compactness of the H4 over the HD1000/2000.

Do you think its fair to compare the HD2000 to the CAME-H4. After looking at the specs I think the more fair comparison would be the HD1000 and CAME-H4. Would you agree?

Also, is your gut feeling that the CAME could fly more than the HD1000?

Sorry to keep bugging you with questions. If you dont want to respond I wont hold it against you.

[aldolega]

As I said before, my gut instinct is that the real max payload in the H4 is more like 4.5-5lbs, but I haven't loaded it nearly that much so I can't say for sure. So payload-wise it's probably right between the HD1000 and HD2000. Construction-wise the Glidecams are a bit nicer but the H4 is good too. The only thing I would keep an eye on is the twist locks on the center column and gimbal, they have plastic pieces where the Glidecam is all metal.

Emm at Cheesycam has a nice long in-depth video about the H4 and balancing stabilizers in general.

[M Carter]

On April 19, 2016 at 9:43 AM, MountneerMan said:

Do you think you would be able to use the 16-50 f2-2.8 lens?

I imagine so, just a question of more weight on the bottom and balancing it. The appeal to me is what a tiny and lightweight system it is, I think the S zoom weights more than the camera? I don't own the S zoom and probably won't, I like the look of the Nikkors with the NX1. The kit zoom is a bit more "sterile" but that's pretty subtle wide open. Very very clean image and very sharp, and the colors really pop a bit more than the Nikkors. Easy to deal with in post, but I still want to play with something like a light glimmerglass or diffusion for the kit. So cheap working at 52mm I can try a couple different things.

[mojo43]

Just picked up an H4. Looks like a really good rig!

[MountneerMan]

7 hours ago, mojo43 said:

Just picked up an H4. Looks like a really good rig!

Excellent. Currently this is the one I am leaning towards but need to find a store that has it so I can try it before committing.  Please let me know if you like it and what camera/lens you use it with. As stated before I am looking to use my NX1 w/ 16-50S lens and Rode VMP.

[bluefonia]

I already think I have enough batteries, cables and powersupplies to carry around, - so back to simple and proved equipment: I just ordered a Laing H3, - which is the same thing as a Came H4. Maybe this is going to be the new black, - or white or pink,- whatever... :-).

[Ed Andrews]

Glidecams and Gimbals are like swords and guns.

The sword (glidecam) takes more skill and precision but doesn't jam, run out of bullets and just needs a bit of sharpening from time to time - if that isn't stretching the metaphor too far.

I still use mine for a lot of run and gun stuff and when  you need that little bit of paralax. It's great for solo shooting. I've nothing against gimbals but the glidecam seems to be doing 90% of the job it can do without all the extra hassle. 

All horses for course though

[Jimbo]

I currently use a Glidecam HD1000 with a GH4 + Olympus 12-40mm. In answer to your question, OP, I usually settle on a drop time of 2.5 seconds (timing it with phone not my fast voice =)). I like the solidarity of 2 seconds but like you say it's much harder to control up and down movements. However I dislike the more seesawing action of a 3 second balance when doing normal moves so halfway works for me.

I personally don't see myself getting a MoVi etc. anytime soon. My work currently calls for small, reliable gear and the Glidecam fits the bill. It takes some patience to get a good balance but once it's in it's a rocky steady piece of gear and delivers some of my favourite shots.

[Snowfun]

Took out my new steadicam solo (bmpcc plus weights) for its first walk around the garden... reviewing the footage,  I thought I must have bought a yacht! 

I had read that it isn't easy but I was quite surprised at just how difficult it is to stop it swaying. And, yes, it does seem to be balanced and it has a drop time of 2s. One thing I did notice during the drop test is that it does develop a spin. Presumably that means that it cannot be balanced.