Jump to content



Photo

GPIPro's new Modular sled


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Rich Cottrell

Rich Cottrell

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 178 posts
  • Erdenheim, PA

Posted 26 June 2012 - 12:48 PM

About four weeks ago i had called GPIPro to talk about their new arm and they told me about their new lightweight modular sled concept. As it has been pointed out elsewhere Pro now has some pictures up on their web site so maybe there are some off these babies out in the wild by now?
I know there was already a resale on the GenIV battery base, so who has played with this thing?

The one thing that really caught my ear was in the lightest configuration, this sled only weighs in at 6.5lbs without the monitor or batteries.

The junction boxes are still the same, so you can scale up or scale down depending your needs and budget.
  • 0

#2 RonBaldwin

RonBaldwin

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2351 posts
  • Los Angeles

Posted 26 June 2012 - 01:05 PM

I think the gen4 base that was for sale was most likely the one won in a lottery at the steadicam expo, and the lass who won it does not have a pro. Pretty nice, innexpensive solution.
  • 0

#3 Mariano Costa

Mariano Costa

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 148 posts

Posted 03 August 2012 - 12:50 PM

The one thing that really caught my ear was in the lightest configuration, this sled only weighs in at 6.5lbs without the monitor or batteries.



wow! that`s even lighter than the archer sled w/o monitor/batts - which configuration was this?
  • 0

#4 Eric Fletcher S.O.C.

Eric Fletcher S.O.C.

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2922 posts
  • LA, Ca

Posted 03 August 2012 - 03:17 PM

The one thing that really caught my ear was in the lightest configuration, this sled only weighs in at 6.5lbs without the monitor or batteries.



wow! that`s even lighter than the archer sled w/o monitor/batts - which configuration was this?


It's the lightweight base, fixed post, kip handle gimbal and DBox 2. It's not only liteweight but it's also inexpensive and gives the owner the ability to build up the rig to a full blown "Big Rig".

Same for the arm. It's a fantastic solution with the most growth potential of any professional system on the market
  • 0

#5 Andrew Ansnick

Andrew Ansnick

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 137 posts
  • Los Angeles, CA

Posted 04 August 2012 - 01:47 AM

The lightest sled configuration I've used: Donkey Box Gen II, HD Upper & Lower Junction boxes, Fixed length Center Post, Gimbal w/kip handle grip, Gen IV Battery Rack w/AB mounts, Transvideo 6" CineMonitor HD Superbright w/PRO telescoping monitor bracket, 1 Anton Bauer Dionic HC battery, Preston MDR-2. Total sled weight without a camera was about 11 lbs if my memory serves me correctly.

I have been able to fly this setup quite a bit actually and have been very impressed with how well it handled slow moves to running shots. The Gen IV Battery Rack will do 12/24V but limits you to being able to use only two batteries. Surprisingly, it has a greater range of adjustment on it then the GEN III Battery Rack does! Super low profile and SOLID when fully extended, really quick and easy adjustment thanks to a locking knob too, the list goes on and on...

Another thing worthy of note is that when you combine this sled configuration with an Atlas arm w/ 2 Gray Canisters, you will have a total camera capacity of about 35lbs! Of course there is the modularity and ability to upgrade as needed....but it's really great for those just starting out or it makes an awesome live tv/backup/running rig.
  • 0

#6 Mariano Costa

Mariano Costa

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 148 posts

Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:26 PM

Hi Eric and Andrew,

thanks for the detailed info, gentlemen!

I really love the direction Pro is going, they were great before Jack took over, but now they`re getting unbeatable with all those options and new modules/components.
  • 0

#7 Alec Jarnagin SOC

Alec Jarnagin SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 1800 posts
  • New York City, USA

Posted 04 August 2012 - 12:50 PM

"you will have a total camera capacity of about 35lbs!"

I'd add that it could be very difficult to balance a 35 pound camera on an 11 pound sled with a fixed post.
  • 0

#8 Andrew Ansnick

Andrew Ansnick

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 137 posts
  • Los Angeles, CA

Posted 04 August 2012 - 06:28 PM

I'd add that it could be very difficult to balance a 35 pound camera on an 11 pound sled with a fixed post.



I would whole heartedly agree. Obviously for a camera that heavy it would be ideal to have an extendable center post and a third battery. But as long as you have a way of getting some added mass down below the gimbal you could balance it.
  • 1

#9 Brian Freesh

Brian Freesh

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 922 posts
  • Los Angeles, CA

Posted 04 August 2012 - 07:13 PM

I'd add that it could be very difficult to balance a 35 pound camera on an 11 pound sled with a fixed post.



I would whole heartedly agree. Obviously for a camera that heavy it would be ideal to have an extendable center post and a third battery. But as long as you have a way of getting some added mass down below the gimbal you could balance it.


To be specific, since the 35lb camera weight was based on using an Atlas arm: you'd have to MOVE that mass below the gimbal, not add any. A Titan arm would be needed if you add.

There is also only 1 battery in your 11lb example, so a second battery would help before a third.

The new arm and sled options are fantastic, I'd just warn all to be realistic about the camera set ups possible. With a fixed post and the atlas arm, I wouldn't bet on 35lb camera set-ups (more power to anyone who succeeds). The beauty is you can upgrade to the extendable post, add a second battery, and still possibly get 33lbs.
  • 0

#10 Andrew Ansnick

Andrew Ansnick

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 137 posts
  • Los Angeles, CA

Posted 04 August 2012 - 07:42 PM

To be specific, yes, that's what I meant by adding weight to the bottom of the sled- by moving a transmitter or recorder or instead of an onboard camera battery power the camera off the sled, etc. I haven't tried to balance out a 35lb camera with this setup, but now I'm curious to try a few different configurations and see if it can realistically work, though I'm guessing it won't be practical.

Absolutely it would make sense to add a second battery before swapping out to a different battery rack if you're concerned about weight. Also, keep in mind that if you exchange the fixed center post for a telescoping one you're adding weight. Not sure what the difference is between the two center posts offered but I'm guessing it's about a pound.
  • 0

#11 RonBaldwin

RonBaldwin

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2351 posts
  • Los Angeles

Posted 04 August 2012 - 11:06 PM

I doubt that a typically out-fitted alexa (around 26/27lbs) could be balanced with two hc's in this lw configuration.

You'll definitely need more weight down unda or a redonkulously long post like the tiffen rigs need (not a slam, just is what it is).
  • 0

#12 Eric Fletcher S.O.C.

Eric Fletcher S.O.C.

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2922 posts
  • LA, Ca

Posted 04 August 2012 - 11:26 PM

You'll definitely need more weight down unda or a redonkulously long post like the tiffen rigs need (not a slam, just is what it is).



Well part of their problem is the ridiculous placement of the monitor and all those post clamps that just add weight to the carry structure
  • 0

#13 RonBaldwin

RonBaldwin

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2351 posts
  • Los Angeles

Posted 05 August 2012 - 12:18 AM

I do have to note that in Tiffen's defense, their post is closer to a stripper pole diameter than the Pro post...Greg got it right going full stripper with the 2" post!
  • 0

#14 Eric Fletcher S.O.C.

Eric Fletcher S.O.C.

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2922 posts
  • LA, Ca

Posted 05 August 2012 - 12:31 AM

I do have to note that in Tiffen's defense, their post is closer to a stripper pole diameter than the Pro post...Greg got it right going full stripper with the 2" post!



8 HUNDREDTHS larger diameter? ummm no.... Greg got it right. Tiffen did it out of spite to prevent PRO users from using their gimbal back in the day
  • 0

#15 RonBaldwin

RonBaldwin

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2351 posts
  • Los Angeles

Posted 05 August 2012 - 01:34 AM

That was a bit dastardly (and desparate) on CP's behalf...but jumbos-friendly on greg's part. Though the old-school 1.5" post is the one for me! Luckily Cricket, Sophia and Cassidy have small hands.
  • 0




PLC - Bartech

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Paralinx LLC

IDX

Boland Communications

Omnishot Systems

Wireless Video Systems

Ritter Battery

PLC Electronics Solutions

Betz Tools for Stabilizers

Teradek

BOXX

SkyDreams

Engineered Cinema Solutions

rebotnix Technologies

Varizoom Follow Focus

GPI Pro Systems