Back-Bone Dead Weight for Solo Gimbal

[Jubalr]

Okay. Just completely ignore my whole theory in the post above about wind and forces, etc, etc. Total crap.

I just flew with the backbone counter weight thing today and wow. The footage is much, much, more stable than what I normally get in those kinds of conditions (5 to 15 mph winds). I did not have time to do a side-by-side comparison of the same mission in Tower, with and without the backbone thing. None-the-less, the footage I got today is the smoothest I've gotten in a long time (other than when there is zero wind). Suffice it to say that I'm going to balance from now on.

This thing is pretty good because you can adjust for the weight differences between different filters.

Hey Erik, Glad to see you noticed a difference. I'd always had a thought about your not balancing idea, but just never posted it. Sure there are wind forces, but I would think you would also have to consider that if the wind is pushing it the same direction it wants to fall un-balanced, then that force is multiplied and the gimbal is working even harder.
Just a thought.. YMMV

 

[pyrate]

hmmmm balancing mine was a total failure
it would go limp when pointed straight down with the roll weigh in place

tempted to try this

 

[erikgraham]

It would almost be worth it to start a thread for different backbone weight configurations for different filters and GoPro models.

For example, I know a lot of people fly with my set up, GoPro Hero 4 + BlurFix ND8/PL filter. (I also use a 3.97 mm lens, but that weighs the same as stock). Now that I *think* I've got the right weights in the right place, I should snap a picture to save the next guy the hassle of figuring it out.
(Maybe I will tomorrow).

 

[pyrate]

that would be great, I am almost the same
same camera and lens but polar pro filters I think the blurfix are heavier
Trying to find a US distributor now. Shipping here from Canada is almost as much as the kit

 

[erikgraham]

that would be great, I am almost the same
same camera and lens but polar pro filters I think the blurfix are heavier
Trying to find a US distributor now. Shipping here from Canada is almost as much as the kit

The PolarPro are lighter. I think *maybe* the BlurFix are better. I had one bad experience with a PolarPro ND16/PL. I should probably give them another try. Maybe their ND8.

 

[pyrate]

No doubt the blurfix are better and heavier
I use their filters for scuba. cant beat them for quality

I hated how they worked on my 4,4 lens
they seem to work better with the 3,97

 

[franknitty69]

Okay. Just completely ignore my whole theory in the post above about wind and forces, etc, etc. Total crap.

I just flew with the backbone counter weight thing today and wow. The footage is much, much, more stable than what I normally get in those kinds of conditions (5 to 15 mph winds). I did not have time to do a side-by-side comparison of the same mission in Tower, with and without the backbone thing. None-the-less, the footage I got today is the smoothest I've gotten in a long time (other than when there is zero wind). Suffice it to say that I'm going to balance from now on.

This thing is pretty good because you can adjust for the weight differences between different filters.

thanks i'll pick one up.

 

[SurfnSkate81]

Might have to try the Blurfix. Are they real glass? I found that my PolarPro filters have small scratches after cleaning. I do have the good Rosco lens tissues and Rosco lens cleaner have never had a problem with using Rosco on my 4x4 filters for my mattebox. Seems these PolarPro filters are just not real good glass.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk