Comments on: Manfrotto 393 gimbal head http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/2009/04/19/manfrotto-393-review/ Fri, 12 Mar 2010 00:27:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Canonistas.com http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/2009/04/19/manfrotto-393-review/comment-page-1/#comment-7827 Canonistas.com Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:38:00 +0000 http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/?p=1309#comment-7827 [...] Yo utilizo la Manfrotto 393, te enlazo un informe que hace este reputado fotografo de naturaleza Manfrotto 393 gimbal head | Richard Peters Photography blog los resultados de esta rotula son mas que aceptables y a 1/3 del precio de las reputadas [...] [...] Yo utilizo la Manfrotto 393, te enlazo un informe que hace este reputado fotografo de naturaleza Manfrotto 393 gimbal head | Richard Peters Photography blog los resultados de esta rotula son mas que aceptables y a 1/3 del precio de las reputadas [...]

]]> By: Troy http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/2009/04/19/manfrotto-393-review/comment-page-1/#comment-6124 Troy Thu, 19 Nov 2009 03:46:40 +0000 http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/?p=1309#comment-6124 Richard, I just got this bracket for the same lens. I am wonder if there is any type of bracket out there that would fit on this for use with flash/better beamer. If you can help, I really appreciate it. Richard, I just got this bracket for the same lens. I am wonder if there is any type of bracket out there that would fit on this for use with flash/better beamer. If you can help, I really appreciate it.

]]> By: Tim Bates http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/2009/04/19/manfrotto-393-review/comment-page-1/#comment-5633 Tim Bates Sun, 01 Nov 2009 14:35:45 +0000 http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/?p=1309#comment-5633 Richard Me again... Just thanking you for the good, interesting and most helpful writeup on the Manfrotto 393 Gimbal Head. The Manfrotto 393 shall also be on my purchase list from Morris Photographic when I call them tomorrow. The 393 shall be housing the Sigma 300-800 as mentioned in the other subject re the lens case. Once again Many Thanks Tim Richard
Me again…
Just thanking you for the good, interesting and most helpful writeup on the Manfrotto 393 Gimbal Head. The Manfrotto 393 shall also be on my purchase list from Morris Photographic when I call them tomorrow.
The 393 shall be housing the Sigma 300-800 as mentioned in the other subject re the lens case.
Once again Many Thanks

Tim

]]> By: Richard Peters http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/2009/04/19/manfrotto-393-review/comment-page-1/#comment-4903 Richard Peters Thu, 08 Oct 2009 16:19:15 +0000 http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/?p=1309#comment-4903 <em><strong>I guess what it really boils down to is what you shoot with/plan to shoot with in future, and what you deem to be too heavy. For me, the size and weight isn't too much of an issue and I personally like to know I have the ultimate stability when out with the 600mm - which is why I switched from a 393 to a Wimberley. For lighter lenses though (or those shooters that never intend on upgrading to the largest telephotos) I think both the 393 and the ballhead/sidekick options are good ones depending on the amount of money potential owners want to spend. Some good points made all round I think </strong></em>:) I guess what it really boils down to is what you shoot with/plan to shoot with in future, and what you deem to be too heavy. For me, the size and weight isn’t too much of an issue and I personally like to know I have the ultimate stability when out with the 600mm – which is why I switched from a 393 to a Wimberley. For lighter lenses though (or those shooters that never intend on upgrading to the largest telephotos) I think both the 393 and the ballhead/sidekick options are good ones depending on the amount of money potential owners want to spend. Some good points made all round I think :)

]]> By: LOU http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/2009/04/19/manfrotto-393-review/comment-page-1/#comment-4899 LOU Thu, 08 Oct 2009 15:14:30 +0000 http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/?p=1309#comment-4899 Hi, Richard: Good points. I haven't used the 393, but if you have invested $5-10K in your lens, then a few hundred on support seems trivial - though it's not. If you're using a Really Right Stuff BH-55 with the "Sidekick", I believe you get a no-excuses gimbal. I found I didn't need the full-blown Wimberly for my 200-400, but I can see panic setting in for the full-time 600mm user. The MkII Wimberly takes any guess work out of the equation, but it's huge & a little fussy. I guess it's all relative when you get to a 13lb. lens, right? Personally, I've replaced most of this girth with my Gitzo 5541 & RRS monopod head, and RRS B2-pro "L" clamp for a fraction of the cost, but no loss in component/photo quality. Granted, it's not the same approach, but it works great, and very portable. Sincerely, LD Hi, Richard:

Good points. I haven’t used the 393, but if you have invested $5-10K in your lens, then a few hundred on support seems trivial – though it’s not. If you’re using a Really Right Stuff BH-55 with the “Sidekick”, I believe you get a no-excuses gimbal. I found I didn’t need the full-blown Wimberly for my 200-400, but I can see panic setting in for the full-time 600mm user. The MkII Wimberly takes any guess work out of the equation, but it’s huge & a little fussy. I guess it’s all relative when you get to a 13lb. lens, right? Personally, I’ve replaced most of this girth with my Gitzo 5541 & RRS monopod head, and RRS B2-pro “L” clamp for a fraction of the cost, but no loss in component/photo quality. Granted, it’s not the same approach, but it works great, and very portable.

Sincerely,

LD

]]> By: Richard Peters http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/2009/04/19/manfrotto-393-review/comment-page-1/#comment-4894 Richard Peters Thu, 08 Oct 2009 11:08:25 +0000 http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/?p=1309#comment-4894 <em><strong>I've read full time shooters say they don't trust the sidekick with the largest telephoto's because they are simple too heavy - which is probably why most telephoto shooters you see have the Wimberley MKII.. I do like the fact that Sidekick option gives you more portability as you say, but one thing to keep in mind is that setup is also a lot more costly than a 393. So for someone just starting out and experimenting with gimbal type heads the 393 is certainly worth looking at due to it's low cost.</strong></em> I’ve read full time shooters say they don’t trust the sidekick with the largest telephoto’s because they are simple too heavy – which is probably why most telephoto shooters you see have the Wimberley MKII.. I do like the fact that Sidekick option gives you more portability as you say, but one thing to keep in mind is that setup is also a lot more costly than a 393. So for someone just starting out and experimenting with gimbal type heads the 393 is certainly worth looking at due to it’s low cost.

]]> By: LOU http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/2009/04/19/manfrotto-393-review/comment-page-1/#comment-4886 LOU Thu, 08 Oct 2009 02:18:03 +0000 http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/?p=1309#comment-4886 I haven't used this product. If one feels they need a gimbal, I recommend the Wimberly "Sidekick" on a Really Right Stuff (RRS) BH-55. This isn't a perfect tripod head, but close, and it has ample capacity for the largest primes. It operates far better than the ArcaSwiss B1 I used before. It's a smooth, high-tech, field-proven head, and it should last one for their shooting career. The Sidekick much more portable than the full-blown Wimberly, or the gimmicky 393. Other advantages of the Sidekick option - besides portability: You get Wimberly quality/functionality, but without the bulk, plus the flexibility and convenience of leaving your ball head intact. I haven’t used this product. If one feels they need a gimbal, I recommend the Wimberly “Sidekick” on a Really Right Stuff (RRS) BH-55. This isn’t a perfect tripod head, but close, and it has ample capacity for the largest primes. It operates far better than the ArcaSwiss B1 I used before. It’s a smooth, high-tech, field-proven head, and it should last one for their shooting career. The Sidekick much more portable than the full-blown Wimberly, or the gimmicky 393.

Other advantages of the Sidekick option – besides portability: You get Wimberly quality/functionality, but without the bulk, plus the flexibility and convenience of leaving your ball head intact.

]]> By: Mat http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/2009/04/19/manfrotto-393-review/comment-page-1/#comment-2375 Mat Sun, 26 Apr 2009 12:41:44 +0000 http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/?p=1309#comment-2375 I have a 393 too. And I also modified it. I have a 393 too. And I also modified it.

]]> By: Adam http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/2009/04/19/manfrotto-393-review/comment-page-1/#comment-2219 Adam Wed, 22 Apr 2009 15:44:53 +0000 http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/?p=1309#comment-2219 Yep, anoter vote for the 393. Excellent bit of kit. Supports both my Canon 300 2.8 and 500 4 with ease. Agree with your gripes as well. Yep, anoter vote for the 393. Excellent bit of kit. Supports both my Canon 300 2.8 and 500 4 with ease. Agree with your gripes as well.

]]>