My experience with gimbal heads.

[Buckster]

You can maintain that there's a reason all you like, but that doesn't prove there actually is.

You can choose the finest products on Amazon and find reviews from folks who were unhappy. And for all we know, the bad reviews were written by Wimberly employees.

I'd much prefer actual quantifiable justification for the additional $450 before I spend it, rather than rely on, "well, it costs a lot more, so it must be better".

 

[Buckster]

I'd be interested to see the quantifiable justification for the additional $450.

I have a question, considering that you made this comment about the head that you built, "It works REAL well, and makes me VERY happy!" and I believe that you stated that it only cost you some time, then why would you spend $150 on another head that does the same thing as the one that cost you nothing but time? How do you justify the additional $150?

While it worked well and made me very happy, I suspected that a professionally manufactured one would have a better tensioning system than what I came up with on my DIY version, and it did.

I thought it would probably also have a smoother system for achieving balance when changing lenses, and it does.

It also has a nicer finish than my paint job, though that doesn't affect the functionality.

ETA: It's also perhaps worth noting that I worked with the DIY version for just over 3 years before deciding that I wanted to get the Opteka head and see how they compared. I wouldn't have bothered if all I could find were $600 heads to compare it to.

 

[Ted Evans]

I'm glad you take pride in your work. I work as a painter, and have worked carpentry as well, so I see a LOT of people willing to cut corners and use cheap materials while working in houses. That being said, there are plenty of companies in the photography world that perform as good, or better, than their big name counterparts. The biggest problem I see with these companies is their quality control. For some people it is worth spending 2-3x as much to know the product they get will work perfectly the first time around, and some people will save a bunch of money knowing they may have to return something to get a good copy.

Look at the rokinon 24mm 1.4, which is consistently rated higher than the nikon or Canon equivalents for astrophotography. It costs like 2k less but performs better wide open, with less coma. The problem is their QC is terrible so you may have to go through a few copies to get a good one. I still see people buying the significantly more expensive canon or nikons thibling that they'll perform better. That's just ONE example. You're basing your entire opinion around one experience

"You're basing your entire opinion around one experience"

Well, yes and no. That is true relative to the gimbal head but I have plenty of experiences with tools and a multitude of other items. I found, sadly and costly, that buying cheap tools ended up costing me more than had I purchased the more expensive and better quality ones in the beginning. What difference does it make if someone has an item that cost them $150 and they are very satisfied with it and I have a like item that cost me $600 that I am very satisfied with? I read many reviews on gimbal heads and no one can convince me that $150 head is just as good as a $600-800 head but if the less expensive one works satisfactorily, all the better. I was not satisfied with the way the Induro performed, nor the response received from the tech and I am completely satisfied with the Wimberley.

 

[Ted Evans]

I'd be interested to see the quantifiable justification for the additional $450.

I have a question, considering that you made this comment about the head that you built, "It works REAL well, and makes me VERY happy!" and I believe that you stated that it only cost you some time, then why would you spend $150 on another head that does the same thing as the one that cost you nothing but time? How do you justify the additional $150?

While it worked well and made me very happy, I suspected that a professionally manufactured one would have a better tensioning system than what I came up with on my DIY version, and it did.

I thought it would probably also have a smoother system for achieving balance when changing lenses, and it does.

It also has a nicer finish than my paint job, though that doesn't affect the functionality.

So, are you telling me that all the qualities that made you prefer the "professionally manufactured" one, Opteka, are of the same quality as in the Wimberley, is that what you are saying? I used your same reasoning, from watching a number of video clips on gimbal heads and how they functioned and from reading many reviews of inexpensive to very expensive heads that the Wimberley would perform better than the Induro that I had.....and it did. Does it perform any better than the one you have, I cannot say because I have not compared them. Have you compared yours to the Wimberley and can you say unequivocally that the Opteka is just as smooth, has just as good of tensioning and has just as good of finish and will be just as dependable as the Wimberley?

 

[Dave442]

Nice to see Opteka offer a low cost option, never ran across that. Even if I had, the difference in price seems almost too good to be true. Now the funny part was watching Buck's video on his homemade head and the very next video that came up was the Induro GHB model.

 

[Ted Evans]

Nice to see Opteka offer a low cost option, never ran across that. Even if I had, the difference in price seems almost too good to be true. Now the funny part was watching Buck's video on his homemade head and the very next video that came up was the Induro GHB model.

Another interesting point IMV, the Induro is approximately 20% less expensive than the Wimberley, the Opteka is approximately 75% less expensive than the Wimberley. In my experience, the one 20% less expensive was not as good but I should believe the one that is 75% less expensive is just as good? Not convinced.

 

[astroNikon]

Geez guys (and gals)
The only way to find out is to buy each of them and test them for your particular use.
assuming you have no financial restrictions.

I find it somewhat reassuring that another TFPer has used a lower cost product and found it good for them. .

Will my usage lead to it breaking? .. maybe .. or maybe not.

But I may end up sinking $175 for a product that doesn't work for me and I'll be back to nothing. Or, maybe it will work just fine for me in which case something on my list to get at some point gets ticked off that list.

Then I can save up for that Tamron 150-600 because a 600/2.8 (or whatever) is way too much money.

 

[Buckster]

I'd be interested to see the quantifiable justification for the additional $450.

I have a question, considering that you made this comment about the head that you built, "It works REAL well, and makes me VERY happy!" and I believe that you stated that it only cost you some time, then why would you spend $150 on another head that does the same thing as the one that cost you nothing but time? How do you justify the additional $150?

While it worked well and made me very happy, I suspected that a professionally manufactured one would have a better tensioning system than what I came up with on my DIY version, and it did.

I thought it would probably also have a smoother system for achieving balance when changing lenses, and it does.

It also has a nicer finish than my paint job, though that doesn't affect the functionality.

So, are you telling me that all the qualities that made you prefer the "professionally manufactured" one, Opteka, are of the same quality as in the Wimberley, is that what you are saying?

I'm saying that YOU are the one continuing to claim that the Wimberly IS worth $450 more, and I'm still challenging you show me WHY it's worth $450 more.

I used your same reasoning, from watching a number of video clips on gimbal heads and how they functioned and from reading many reviews of inexpensive to very expensive heads that the Wimberley would perform better than the Induro that I had.....and it did.

You still haven't shown that your Induro wasn't a one-off, or even that it was a problem due to user error. 99 out of 100 other people who bought and use the Induro may have zero issues at all with it.

Does it perform any better than the one you have, I cannot say because I have not compared them.

That's exactly right.

Have you compared yours to the Wimberley and can you say unequivocally that the Opteka is just as smooth, has just as good of tensioning and has just as good of finish and will be just as dependable as the Wimberley?

No, I can't, but I'm not the one claiming that the Wimberly IS worth $450 more - you are.

What I CAN say unequivocally is that it is too smooth to NOT be as smooth as ANYTHING that spins on good ball bearings and isn't damaged. I can also say unequivocally as an engineer of over 30 years that the tensioning works PERFECTLY and there's simply no possible way that the Wimberly's tensioning can possibly work any better - It's a tensioning knob, not rocket science. You turn it to go from ZERO tension, through more and more tension, until you get to 100% tension which is rock-solid, won't move.

And if you think for a moment that "the finish" on the Wimberly is worth $450 more, then all I can do is laugh.

Now then, you tell me - HOW do YOU justify the extra $450, because I'm still waiting for an actual answer to that question. Show us all the quantifiable justification for it. Show us the side by side testing someone did that shows that the zero friction of one is better than the zero friction of the other. Show that the balanced lens on one is somehow more balanced than the balanced lens on the other. Show us how the ball bearings in one are better than the ball bearings in the other.

Show SOMETHING if you're going to keep making the claim that it IS worth the extra $450.

 

[Ted Evans]

I'd be interested to see the quantifiable justification for the additional $450.

I have a question, considering that you made this comment about the head that you built, "It works REAL well, and makes me VERY happy!" and I believe that you stated that it only cost you some time, then why would you spend $150 on another head that does the same thing as the one that cost you nothing but time? How do you justify the additional $150?

While it worked well and made me very happy, I suspected that a professionally manufactured one would have a better tensioning system than what I came up with on my DIY version, and it did.

I thought it would probably also have a smoother system for achieving balance when changing lenses, and it does.

It also has a nicer finish than my paint job, though that doesn't affect the functionality.

So, are you telling me that all the qualities that made you prefer the "professionally manufactured" one, Opteka, are of the same quality as in the Wimberley, is that what you are saying?

I'm saying that YOU are the one continuing to claim that the Wimberly IS worth $450 more, and I'm still challenging you show me WHY it's worth $450 more.

I used your same reasoning, from watching a number of video clips on gimbal heads and how they functioned and from reading many reviews of inexpensive to very expensive heads that the Wimberley would perform better than the Induro that I had.....and it did.

You still haven't shown that your Induro wasn't a one-off, or even that it was a problem due to user error. 99 out of 100 other people who bought and use the Induro may have zero issues at all with it.

Does it perform any better than the one you have, I cannot say because I have not compared them.

That's exactly right.

Have you compared yours to the Wimberley and can you say unequivocally that the Opteka is just as smooth, has just as good of tensioning and has just as good of finish and will be just as dependable as the Wimberley?

No, I can't, but I'm not the one claiming that the Wimberly IS worth $450 more - you are.

What I CAN say unequivocally is that it is too smooth to NOT be as smooth as ANYTHING that spins on good ball bearings and isn't damaged. I can also say unequivocally as an engineer of over 30 years that the tensioning works PERFECTLY and there's simply no possible way that the Wimberly's tensioning can possibly work any better - It's a tensioning knob, not rocket science. You turn it to go from ZERO tension, through more and more tension, until you get to 100% tension which is rock-solid, won't move.

And if you think for a moment that "the finish" on the Wimberly is worth $450 more, then all I can do is laugh.

Now then, you tell me - HOW do YOU justify the extra $450, because I'm still waiting for an actual answer to that question. Show us all the quantifiable justification for it. Show us the side by side testing someone did that shows that the zero friction of one is better than the zero friction of the other. Show that the balanced lens on one is somehow more balanced than the balanced lens on the other. Show us how the ball bearings in one are better than the ball bearings in the other.

Show SOMETHING if you're going to keep making the claim that it IS worth the extra $450.

Buck, I have no idea what your problem is however, if you will quote me ever saying the Wimberley is worth $450 more than the Opteka I will gladly give you an answer. If, you cannot quote me saying that, then I request that you stop making false statements about what I have stated, can you do that? BTW, I do not have to justify anything to you and I have just as much right to express my opinion as do you. It is none of your business if I think the Wimberley is worth $450 or $2k more than the Opteka or any other head. IMO, it is hypocritical for someone to make a big deal out of a person spending $595 for a gimbal head when they have many expensive Canon lens when there are a number of less expensive ones that will perform just as good as the Canon's do.

I did not start this thread to challenge anyone, as I have stated, and have tried to be civil, at least to this point, I only related the experience that I had with the Induro and the Wimberley and my views. Now, if you wish to continue a discussion with this tone, I will be happy to do so by PM as I do not think this is an acceptable vehicle for contentious discussions.

 

[Buckster]

Buck, I have no idea what your problem is

No problem. I'm just big on seeing the evidence that supports the statements people make.

however, if you will quote me ever saying the Wimberley is worth $450 more than the Opteka I will gladly give you an answer.

Great! We could all use the enlightenment from you!!

You've been saying it all along with statements like these:

IMO, if a $150 unit is as good as a $600 dollar unit then the more expensive company would go out of business.

If someone chooses to believe that a $150 unit has the same quality as a $600 dollar unit then good for them.

I still maintain there is a reason why one is $150 and the other $600.

no one can convince me that $150 head is just as good as a $600-800 head

CLEARLY, you are saying that you think that, as you put it, "the Wimberley is worth $450 more than the Opteka".

Now that we've cleared that up, I'm looking forward to those quantifiable justifications via your answer, and thanks!

 

[ratssass]

...and were off......lol

 

[MSnowy]

I use one of the Opteka GH1 and have great results with. I can tell you that it stands up to some abuse. I've used in rain, sleet and snow storms. I've left it out side in the bed of my truck in the same types of weather for days and still works great. I use it with a Nikon D3s and 500mm with the weight of these two I've had no issues with it tilting back to level.

 

[astroNikon]

I use one of the Opteka GH1 and have great results with. I can tell you that it stands up to some abuse. I've used in rain, sleet and snow storms. I've left it out side in the bed of my truck in the same types of weather for days and still works great. I use it with a Nikon D3s and 500mm with the weight of these two I've had no issues with it tilting back to level.

Yeah but does it make a mean cup of coffee ?

 

[MSnowy]

I use one of the Opteka GH1 and have great results with. I can tell you that it stands up to some abuse. I've used in rain, sleet and snow storms. I've left it out side in the bed of my truck in the same types of weather for days and still works great. I use it with a Nikon D3s and 500mm with the weight of these two I've had no issues with it tilting back to level.

Yeah but does it make a mean cup of coffee ?

It might, but I don't drink coffee.

 

[Ted Evans]

OK, apparently you want this to play out here so that will work for me if it does for the moderators. You have made these accusations….

I'm saying that YOU are the one continuing to claim that the Wimberly IS worth $450 more, and I'm still challenging you show me WHY it's worth $450 more.

1) Again, I ask you to quote me saying the Wimberley is “worth $450 more” as you have stated, can you do that, yes or no?

No, I can't, but I'm not the one claiming that the Wimberly IS worth $450 more - you are.

2) OK, all you must do is quote where I “claimed that the Wimberly IS worth $450 more", can you do that, yes or no?

And if you think for a moment that "the finish" on the Wimberly is worth $450 more, then all I can do is laugh.

3) Of course you know what is coming, can you quote me ever saying that I “think for a moment that “the finish” on the Wimberly is worth $450 more”, can you do that, yes or no?

Show SOMETHING if you're going to keep making the claim that it IS worth the extra $450.

4) Who is it that insist on making a claim about the $450? Have you been able to quote me one time stating that the Wimberley is worth $450 more than the Opteka, yes or no?

Buck, I have no idea what your problem is

No problem. I'm just big on seeing the evidence that supports the statements people make.

however, if you will quote me ever saying the Wimberley is worth $450 more than the Opteka I will gladly give you an answer.

Great! We could all use the enlightenment from you!!


You've been saying it all along with statements like these:

IMO, if a $150 unit is as good as a $600 dollar unit then the more expensive company would go out of business.

5) Really, can you point out specifically where there is one word about the Wimberley being worth $450 more than the Opteka? I offered an opinion, that a business would not likely stay in business if they were selling the same quality product for $600 dollars as one selling it for $150, is that not correct? You do know the difference in something presented as an opinion as opposed to something presented as a fact, do you not?

If someone chooses to believe that a $150 unit has the same quality as a $600 dollar unit then good for them.

6) So, in your mind, that quote is me claiming that the Wimberley is worth $450 more than the Opteka, is that what you are saying? In my little mind, it is saying just what is written, if someone chooses to believe that something costing 75% less is just as good as the more expensive version, that is certainly their right to do so. Is it not also my right to have a different view or, is everyone wrong that disagrees with you?

I still maintain there is a reason why one is $150 and the other $600.

7) My goodness, so you are saying that quote claims that the Wimberley is worth $450 more than the Opteka, is that correct? Interesting, I guess quality of materials, manufacturing tolerances, quality control, dependability etc. are not reasons for an elevated price, is that your position?

no one can convince me that $150 head is just as good as a $600-800 head

8) That is an absolute fact, no one can convince me that a product selling 75 to 90% less is just as good as the more expensive one. BTW, where does that quote say that I believe the Wimberley is worth $450 more than the Opteka?

CLEARLY, you are saying that you think that, as you put it, "the Wimberley is worth $450 more than the Opteka".

9) If, I am “CLEARLY” saying that “the Wimberley is worth $450 more than the Opteka” why can you not quote my words rather than just how you want to read them, can you answer that?

Now that we've cleared that up, I'm looking forward to those quantifiable justifications via your answer, and thanks!

10) What have you “cleared” up other than the fact that you cannot quote me claiming the Wimberley is worth $450 more than the Opteka? All you have done is read into my comments what worked for your purpose while disregarding facts and accuracy.


11) You have totally ignored my comments such as…

It could have been just a defective unit but when the tech could not, or would not, tell me that the symptoms were an anomaly and being that I had read another person saying the operation of his unit was not smooth, I was not willing to take the chance.


I agree with your comments and if you are happy with your equipment and it works for you, then that is all that matters. I was not happy with the Induro and I am happy with the Wimberley and that works for me.

In my experience, the one 20% less expensive was not as good but I should believe the one that is 75% less expensive is just as good?

12) Did you notice the phrase, “In my experience”? I had the Induro and although I stated, “…It could have been just a defective unit…” it is fact that the quality on that unit was not as good as the Wimberley that replaced it and furthermore, I read another person’s review that had the same complaint as I had with mine. But I am probably lying about that, huh?

13) Since this thread has gotten total divorced from the OP and I question if you actually read what I wrote, I am going to quote it here for your convenience.

Gimbal heads are new to me and being cheap by nature, I did not want to spend any more than absolutely necessary on one. The Induro head looked good and was a bit cheaper than Jobu or Wimberley so that is what I ordered. It was very well finished and seemed to be made very well, I really like the looks of it. However, although the pan was very smooth the tilt was not. It was almost like the tilt tension was lightly set but it was not and the camera/lens remained in whatever attitude they were released at, they did not return to level. The decision was made to return it and try the Wimberley. Although I prefer the appearance of the Induro, the Wimberley tilt is much smoother and it was very easy to balance where it returns to the level position when released.

I cannot say if this was unique to the specific head or if it is a design issue and the Induro tech person could not tell me. He suggested that I send it back for them to test which I was not willing to do if he could not answer my question if the unit was defective or if it was performing as designed. It made no sense to me to pay for shipping it back to them and be without the head for days/weeks to only have it returned as no trouble found. Therefore, the reason for spending the extra dollars for the Wimberley.

14) Do you see one word in those comments about cost, do you see one word where I was trashing the Induro or, did I relate my experience with the unit. Did I imply that I was looking for the most expensive unit or was I looking for a quality unit at the most reasonable price? Did I not also explain why I chose to send the unit back and order the Wimberley?


15) Should I, in essence, tell someone that pays $80k or more, for a Mercedes Benz that they are stupid for paying $50k or more for a Mercedes when a $25k Chevy is just as good as their $80k car? Would you agree that something’s worth is very subjective to the individual? There are many people who think a $2500 70-200 lens is worth every penny and to them it is. To me, I would not argue that my $1050 70-200 is just as good as their $2500 lens is but for me, it does the job and is not worth $1400 more for the Canon/Nikon. Should I ridicule those that are happy with their expensive lens and feel the cost is justified? I think not. I think you conveniently overlooked my comment,

“I agree with your comments and if you are happy with your equipment and it works for you, then that is all that matters. I was not happy with the Induro and I am happy with the Wimberley and that works for me.”

16) In addition, your insistence, “Show us all the quantifiable justification for it.” First I do not need to justify anything to you and second the command in itself is ludicrous. How many labs can you name that have the equipment to do an in-depth analyses that has done so on gimbal heads? I did find a review by “digital camera world” that listed the top 6 models.

Benro GHA Gimbal Head
Manfrotto 393 Long Lens Monopod Bracket
Benro GH1 Gimbal Head
Triopo DG-3 Gimbal Head
Wimberley WH-200 Mk II
Custom Brackets Gimbal LS Head

17) How about that, not one Opteka model made the list. Apparently, digital camera world places a higher value on the Wimberley than they do the Opteka but I bet that is not “quantifiable justification” in your mind either, correct?


18) 275 reviews of the Wimberley at B&H and I believe I am being conservative when I say over 90% were 5 star and the remainder were 4, not one less than 4. In a group this large, I would expect there would be a few complaints, if nothing else, the price. OTOH, the 150 reviews on Amazon for the Opteka, there were…

5 star 76

4 star 41

3 star 17

2 star 6

1 star 10

19) As I said, apparently, everyone that has owned a Opteka has not been as fortunate as you and I cannot help but to wonder, how many of them would maintain the Opteka is just as good as the Wimberley if, they had both of them.