Quick question. I need to get a steady rig for a spec job by next Saturday. (Friday actually, so I can set it up).
I have a 5D3 with a battery grip, and will most likely shoot the 16-35 a lot, and I will also have sticks and monopod along. There are some steady shots I want to try out, and may even throw on the 70-200f4. IS the 2000 enough rig for this?
You obviously know I am not experienced with Steady cam type gear, and for this gig, it is a good place to screw it up, and learn something, if it is going to get screwed up. These aren't mandatory shots, but would be great to have if I pull them off. This seemed like a good entry level unit I can get my feet wet with.
I would need to order something by tomorrow I think, just to make sure I have it here.
I'm not sure how that affects the ability for the 2000 to balance out the camera with a 70-200 f4. The f4, by the way, is quite a bit lighter than the f2.8. Which of course, is why I own it.
Not trying to stir the pot here, just would like a little help from some people that have experience putting different rigs together, that may know if this combination will work. I can move up to the 4000, if necessary, but I don't want to be handholding more stick than I need. Of course, as I build out a rig over time, maybe it is best to have a big enough stabilizer, such as the 4000, to grow into. For this project, with only two cameras shooting, and covering all the activities of a triathlon, a vest would be way too cumbersome, for what I need right now.
Well, that is why I am here. For advice.
The shots I am planning for the 70-200 (not that it matters) the athlete(s) would run/swim/bike into focus and cam2 with a shoulder rig and wide angle lens picks up the shot.
The point Eric and Janice are making is you're a little too focused on getting the thing to balance and fly straight, yet perhaps overlooking the more important task of actually shooting with it. Yes, you can let the subjects go into and out of focus, but if that's the shot, what do you need a Steadicam for? If you really want to show off the abilities of a stabilizer, your shots should be as dynamic as possible - moving, tracking, etc - and keeping those shots in focus is critical. If you don't have a remote focus system, my suggestion would be to stick to as wide a lens as possible on the stabilizer. Give yourself a high F-stop, set your focus, and then concentrate on getting something dynamic.
Thanks Afton, I understand that and appreciate your thoughtful input. I'm a photographer and understand DOF, Aperture etc., and, as I said, these are not critical shots, but it is an opportunity to mess around with it.
I have also been pretty successful at manually pulling and racking focus with the 70-200, and yes, it is a major PIA. I won't have "second take" opportunity here, and I also said I was planning to use the 16-35 most of the time, but would like the ability to put the 200 on and have it balance.
This is not a feature film, or even a national TV ad. Chances are, it will never be seen by anyone. So, does anyone know if it is 2000 is enough rig to balance that combination effectively, or do I really need to go to a 4000?
I am so trying not to be the next new guy that everyone hates. It always seems to have a certain suck factor joining a new forum, be it Diesel Trucks, Commercial photography, aviation, farrier. It is weird. Like getting 'jumped in' to a gang.
I have read enough of these posts to expect it, as I even told my wife when I posted, that, A) Eric would be the first to respond. and it was not going to be a helpful post. So Thank You Afton, for at least not being antagonistic.
I have found things don't always work to there advertised limits. I was hoping somebody might actually have some experience with these products. It may just be to much on the amateur side to have been used here.
About to get out of cell coverage for the day. Thanks Afton.
I use an hd-2000. You will not learn it perfectly in a few days, and pretty much any canon lens on it will balance with either one to two weights on each side. Even one of the hand-held rigs takes practice, and lots of it.
Edit: You can balance anything from 2-6 lbs on the glidecam.
Edit 2: You do understand that you can't pull focus while it's on a steadicam, unless it's wireless, right? You should definitely shoot wide, and stop down as much as you can, especially on something like a glidecam without a focus puller.
Edited by Jordan Tetewsky, 07 September 2013 - 11:36 AM.
the information you were seeking is on the glidecam site, and you answered it yourself. This site is for professional level rigs. The HD-2000 is not, as such few of us have any practical experience with it and frankly I doubt it's on many radar's here.
We have plenty of experience of putting rigs together, we also understand their limitations, that's why the question of the lens choice was made so that we could give you a helpful answer, but hey you know better than a group of people that do this for a living.
Sorry Eric. There is no way that you can successfully argue that your first response was helpful or had the intent of being. It wasn't, and for the very simple reason you stated. It isn't a "Pro Rig" and it isn't worth the effort to help. But, it is, however, worth the effort to be obnoxious.
At nearly 50 years old, I don't have enough years left to live, to waste time paying unwarranted homage to somebody that is notorious for just being a jerk to people that come here to seek answers to questions about equipment you supposedly have such a vast knowledge of. So, I hope you aren't expecting me to kiss your pompous butt.
Thanks Joe. The 4000 it is then. That is exactly what I was looking for. I understand how hard it is to try to keep focus on the 70-200, as I use it a lot for interviews. There are only a couple shots I want to experiment with. The 16-35 will be my main lens.
I also have a 24mm Tilt shift that is manual focus and fully mechanical, but is heavy as compared to the 16-35. It is also much easier to pull focus with (off the steady rig) but, it allows for some great selective focus, and carried at a consistent height, could give some great DOF with scheimpflug. Could be a pretty creative effect. .
I'm looking to add a Lee matte box and small HDMI monitor and then, and then. . .so yeah, it will likely grow. The 4000 makes more sense.
I'm not expecting miracles from something that costs a third of what my tripod costs, but I want to be sure this is the direction to go before dropping thousands on a pro rig, and this is the perfect event to figure that out. Yup, wish I had more time to practice. . . C'est la vie.