View Full Version : Does the Glidecam 4000 pro work, or is it me?


Pages : 1 [2]

George Ellis
November 12th, 2004, 09:18 AM
You could remove weights and possible shorten the staff to lengthen the drop time.

Charles Papert
November 12th, 2004, 09:52 AM
Yes, what George said. If you are out of options for reducing weight on the bottom and the post is as short as possible and it is still bottom heavy, you can add weight up top by the camera.

My guess is that it has something to do with the monitor. If you have this and a battery attached to the front of the rig, you will obviously need back weight on the bottom to counteract this. My recommendation would be to move the battery from under the monitor to the rear of the sled (you'll need to extend the power cable of course) which will spread out the components better. Try taping it in place as a test before you bother with the wiring work to see if it makes sense. You may even be able to remove the washer weights with this scenario, achieve a 2-3 second drop and be working with a lighter rig.

To understand why the 1lb monitor is making such an impact, consider the principles of leverage.

In a perfect world, you would be able to raise the monitor off the bottom plate. A clamp attached about 8" up the center post with a short arm to the monitor wouldn't be too hard to build if you are handy. Keep the battery down at the bottom rear of the base. This is the model of the big rig design, and has been proven to be an efficient and effective distribution of masses.

George Ellis
November 12th, 2004, 12:49 PM
If you need weight up top, a Bogen quick-release will pile it on quickly ;) My old quick-release was about 1 pound!

Simon Wyndham
November 12th, 2004, 01:28 PM
Coming into this late! I'm one person who was mad enough to mount an XL1s onto a GC 2000 Pro once! It actually worked pretty nice, but I'm lucky I have the arms for it!

Good luck to anyone using a 4000Pro with one of those things attached without an arm brace!

Casey Visco
November 14th, 2004, 02:10 PM
Well, the good news is that the Smooth Shooter (the arm and vest system designed for the 2000/4000 Pro) is almost done. So you wont have to rely on your own arms to hold up a fully loaded 4000 Pro.

Jean-Philippe Archibald
November 14th, 2004, 06:29 PM
Casey,

Great to know that glidecam is designing an arm and vest add on for the handheld devices. But don't you think that this system will canibalize the sales of the V8 ?

Casey Visco
November 14th, 2004, 06:43 PM
Ofcourse it will, Jean-Philippe. A Smooth Shooter/4000 Pro setup would be a great alternative to the V-8...but we're replacing the V-8 as well with a newly designed rig called the V-10. The Smooth Shooter prototype was recently shown at the Satis trade show in France, and the production versions will likely be ready in the coming few months, if not sooner.

Like the V-35 that's already been previewed at the NAB and IBC shows, the V-10 and Smooth Shooter represent a significant departure from the existing line of products in terms of design, engineering and construction. I, for one, am very excited and proud of what we've come up with.

Charles Papert
November 14th, 2004, 09:20 PM
Casey, I think that's great. It's pretty clear that the current (and probably future) line of "serious" DV/HDV cameras are of a weight class that aren't appropriate for handheld stabilizers, but are also in a price range that make larger stabilizers seem too expensive, relatively speaking. Sounds like the Smooth Shooter will service the needs of the digital filmmaker that doesn't need to (or can't afford to) accomodate a larger/more expensive camera package. Looking forward to seeing the new product.

George Ellis
November 15th, 2004, 08:13 AM
As Charles said, looking forward to it. Sounds like a great deal for the occasional time user like me.