ah, thanks for the replies, unfortunately i'll be in the wilderness for 15 days in a tent with nothing but a campfire, so no going home and recharging everynight. . i've read other places where people have taken a car battery and solar panel used the 12v battery charger with some success, the only problem with that is that i can only pack about 80lbs of gear out to the camp.

what kind of usable range do you get using the 75-300mm and the ef adapter?

i'm looking at getting the Bogen / Manfrotto 3221WN (055BWB) Wilderness Tripod Legs with 3433 (501) Pro Video Head

also i'm thinking about getting a polarizing filter, any advice on using one of these?

thanks

austin

The PBS HD Channel features all of its Alaska footage in high definition only. High Definition is the only format that can capture the breathtaking scenery of Alaska.

i'm looking at getting the Bogen / Manfrotto 3221WN (055BWB) Wilderness Tripod Legs with 3433 (501) Pro Video Head

Austin:

I would suggest purchasing a Bogen/Manfrotto 441 CarbonOne Video Tripod--or whatever is their current version of this tripod. It weighs less than 4 pounds and can support up to 13 pounds. It is lighter but stronger than the one you are looking at purchasing. The extra weight savings will make a deference. See post #44 in this thread. In that post, I give more detail about what I use in terms of tripods.

By saving the extra three pounds on tripod weight, you can either bring more food or batteries!

You have some serious problems. Be careful trying to charge a 7 volt battery
with a 12 volt battery without a step-down transformer. Also, sunshine for a solar panel may be in short supply in autumnal Alaska. A polarizer is nice, but probably won't make a big difference. Some polarizers change the color as well as the polarity with the XL 1-s. For something as big as a bear, you can easily shoot at 100 yards with the 300mm zoom, and probably more. It's the equivalent of a 2100mm lens on a 35 mm film camera.

what kind of packs do yall use when hiking with video equip?

My xl2 comes in the mail on Thursday, I am shooting ducks and geese on Saturday, does anybody have any tips as far as camera settings out of the box to get me ready for the weekend? Thanks.

xl2 settings out of the box are pretty good already, actually. if you are shooting ducks and geese to get footage of ducks and geese, i'd start with the factory settings and play with the shutter, iris, filters, speed, and other manual controls first. if you are shooting ducks and geese to learn the in-menu features, then i would suggest shooting indoors hooked up to a monitor first.

my tips:

if you can set up an external monitor, do so. even if you tweak the settings, it is not that easy to see the results in the viewfinder. in fact, if you don't have a monitor, i would suggest shooting indoors first and hooking it up to a monitor, so that you can see what all the features do.

if you do experiment with the custom features, it helps to crank them all the way up or down to figure out how they adjust the camera. just cranking them up a notch or two does not sufficiently dramatize the differences. you can get subtle after you understand them.

watch the XL2 movie at this link: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=48803&page=1&pp=15

watch it again, after you've played with the camera a bit....

What would be the best lens choice for fast flying birds at 20-50 yards?

that's a whole 'nother level of experimentation....try this link.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=47753

Thanks for the info, now I just have to hope that my two 8 hour batteries arrive before my shoot this weekend!

The following site might be of use to some of you www.wildeye.co.uk.
They are particulaly keen on the xl2

this is without a doubt my favorite thread on this site. there hasn't been much action on it lately. everyone must be out shooting fall colors or something.

anyway, i am wondering if anyone else has thoughts or opinions on using the FX-1 for shooting outdoors and wildlife. i did some tests today with the FX-1 to compare it to the XL2 mounted with a 70-200mm 2.8 EOS lens today. to some extent, it is an apples and oranges comparison because one is a 12x zoom and the other a telephoto. but i fully expected the FX-1 to blow away the XL2 and it absolutely didn't. with the 35mm lens, the XL2 displays a sharpness and clarity and detail which even HDV can't match.

i would say, for landscapes, the FX-1 wins even without a wide angle. it is tremendous. the colors and detail are the best i've seen. but for wildlife and leaf/pinecone detail, the XL2 is still without peer.

for portability, the FX-1 wins hands-down, though. for the portability in outdoors shooting, measured against the still-wonderful quality of the footage, it is matchless. i need a llama or something to carry all the associated XL2 gear and the big fat tripod needed to keep the shot steady.

anyway, i was just wondering how or if the outdoors and wildlife videographers, specifically, were making the leap to HDV, and what has the experience been?

anyone?

In order for the Sony FX1 to compete with the Canon XL2 the Sony must be displayed on a name brand full high definition
television that has the complete 1920 x 1080 pixel count. These are called 1080p televisions and are available as LCD, LCOS, IDLA and Plasma. A 720p television will not have the pixel count to make an adequate comparison.

that's a really good point. i was only thinking about the image on the front-end, in camera. hm...

I think John Junor has been trying out Canon lenses on his fx1 to create a monster zoom. Look in the hdv forums.

for portability, the FX-1 wins hands-down, though. for the portability in outdoors shooting, measured against the still-wonderful quality of the footage, it is matchless. i need a llama or something to carry all the associated XL2 gear and the big fat tripod needed to keep the shot steady.
Meryem (or anyone with a Sony FX1/Z1) - I assume your 'big fat tripod' is for the XL2 - yes? What tripod are you using with the FX1? I have a Bogen/Manfrotto 440 CarbonOne Tripod (very similar to Jeff Sayre's 441) and it's great except I'm wondering how stable that tripod will be for FX1 HDV footage. Have you noticed the need for a heavier tripod (more stable) with the FX1 just to make sure that the High-Def footage isn't shaky?

In order for the Sony FX1 to compete with the Canon XL2, the Sony must be displayed on a name brand full high-definition television that has the complete 1920 x 1080 pixel count. These are called 1080p televisions and are available as LCD, LCOS, IDLA and Plasma. A 720p television will not have the pixel count to make an adequate comparison.
---------------------------------------------

The fact is that with the exception of some very special non-production HDTVs, the ones currently available just can't display anything near 1080 scanning lines. The dot-pitch on HD-CRT sets is too large to resolve more than 670 scanning lines and some models can't deliver more than about 570 lines. The better CRTs have a dot-pitch of .64mm and others have an .84mm size on the phosphor screen dots.
Compare that to computer monitors that commonly have a dot-pitch of .25mm, allowing for a much sharper picture to be displayed with the smaller and more numerous dots.

Plasma and LCD sets with a display of 720 progressive lines are somewhat sharper than the best CRTs and some of them use up to 760 scanning lines. This is as high a number of scanning lines that the plasma and LCD sets can display.

Because of this, a 720-line source can look just as good on most HD sets as one that has 1080 lines. Only when they start producing HD monitors with smaller dot-pitches, will you be able to see all the resolution from a 1080-line source. For now, those 720p camcorders will display just as good a picture on most home HDTV sets. I'm not familiar with how fine a dot-pitch is available on expensive broadcast HD monitors.

The bottom line is that for the masses, HDTV is not yet all that it's cracked up to be.

shawn: before i purchased the fx-1, i owned a bogen 701rc2 head on 3001pro legs and a bogen 516 head on 3246 legs. the smaller head still runs the XL2 using the 20x or 3x lens but not the 35mm lens (too much shake) and is also not good with the XL2 in wind. but i can carry it pretty far. since i am female, i can't carry the same weight as jeff's set-up, which he considers light for him, but would not be light at all for me.

the tripod/camera weight question is always a big trade depending on how far/how vertical/how ugly the hike in is. i feel like i'm constantly experimenting with sacrifices of quality measured against the weight and distance i can carry.

as far as the fx-1, i think it works pretty well with the lighter set-up, which is one reason i am so happy to have found it. i can take it up the big peaks around here, which i hope to do next summer. it is actually more stable in some ways than the XL2, because with its 12x lens, it has less available zoom, so the zoomed-in footage has less range, but therefore requires less stabilizing as well. i shot a bunch of footage using mostly a beanbag and a velbon DF-10ML, which is as minimalist as you can possibly get, and i don't think it is too bad at all. my conclusion with my first FX-1 camera test is that the FX-1's reputation for shake is absolutely undeserved, and it is a breakthrough for outdoors shooting, because its quality in some circumstances, exceeds the XL2 (even though the XL2 with a 35mm lens is unbeatable in other circumstances). but since i almost only take the XL2 35mm set-up to places where i can drive the gear in, which is preferable? if anything, shawn, i'm absolutely delighted with how little i can get away with, in terms of a light tripod, and still get nice footage.

anyway, these are the issues that i'm recently grappling with and some current thoughts. i used to prefer my GL2 over my XL2 for portability, but the FX-1 is almost as easy to carry and use as my GL2, which is why it is such a miracle. and the footage is fabulous.

if you're inclined, my FX-1 upload can be viewed at:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=52904

but i'm interested in whether anyone else is doing comparisons of the FX-1 versus XL2/35mm set-up. if i had to choose between an FX-1 and an XL2 with a 20x stock lens, i'd take the FX-1, i believe, for both portability and quality. but the 35mm option puts the XL2 in a whole different class for sharpness and vibrancy. (but also for anti-portability....)

so if anyone else has any ideas or experiments with the FX-1 versus XL2 with a 35mm set-up, i'd really be interested to hear or see them.

I use a Bogen/Manfrotto 441 CarbonOne Video Tripod with a 3443 Bogen head. ... I believe that this series has been replaced by Bogen's Mag Fiber Tripods. Here are some links:
http://www.procam.com/shop/product_info.php?products_id=233
Hey Jeff - Have you noticed that B&H still sells a CarbonOne 3445 (shown here at B&H) (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=216462&is=REG&addedTroughType=search) that has a 75mm bowl. Does your 441 'video tripod' have a bowl or does it look like the photo in the procam link you gave? The reason I'm asking is because I have Bogan CarbonOne 440/3444 (4-extension leg version of what you have - probably a little less stable than your 441), and it has that same "center column that can be converted to lateral arm" (which is really cool for photos - do you use that for video?). Anyway, I'm mostly curious if you have ever tried removing the three hexnuts underneath the legs to see if that would fit a 75mm bowl somehow? Or does Bogan sell anything that will allow a 75mm bowl to fit in there? I can't imagine that the 3445 is anything more than the same basic tripod with a slightly different piece to fit the bowl. Do you think that would be a benefit if the tripod could be converted to a bowl design? - or do you prefer the center column design?

Also, have you ever used the "snow shoes" (part #230) and if so, do they work well?

Thanks, Shawn

shawn: before i purchased the fx-1 ... the tripod/camera weight question is always a big trade depending on how far/how vertical/how ugly the hike in is. i feel like i'm constantly experimenting with sacrifices of quality measured against the weight and distance i can carry. ... as far as the fx-1, i think it works pretty well with the lighter set-up, which is one reason i am so happy to have found it. i can take it up the big peaks around here, which i hope to do next summer. ... if you're inclined, my FX-1 upload can be viewed at:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=52904
... so if anyone else has any ideas or experiments with the FX-1 versus XL2 with a 35mm set-up, i'd really be interested to hear or see them.
Hey Meryem - thanks for the very helpful post. This makes me think that carrying a CarbonOne might be overkill! :) I assume you're shooting on top of available rocks with the beanbag and a velbon DF-10ML - or doing ground level work?

As far as the experimenting goes, you've probably heard of RedRock micro's 35 mm add on for the FX1/Z1 (http://www.redrockmicro.com/). I almost won one of these at a Sony Vegas/FX1/Z1 group (I was picked as one of four people from different cities where DSE toured, but lost in the final drawing - many tears ...). Anyway the adapter is $500 I think and you can make use of your 35mm lenses, but I have no idea how good it is - also the image is inverted. Have you considered using one of these or checked them out? If so, I'd be interested in your reveiw of it for the outdoors. It's one way to get a long lens going into HDV.

Here in Pal land I have just finished shooting the red deer rut. I used a the ZX1 with a 1.6 centuary tele plus a Miller trekker with 75mm bowl. I managed to get all the shots I required with this combination, but of course the had to be patient.

The results are great with excellent autumn colour.

I have 3 telextenders, with 1.4X, 1.7X and 2.2X, which give me good enough magnification for most needs, on the 12X basic lens. A .5X, 58mm WA lens gives me good indoor capabilities, when I need them. This model does very well indoors, without added video lighting.
Steve - can you share a little more about your 1.4X, 1.7X ad 2.2X telextenders - like the brand/model#/cost and your feelings about the quality of each of them? Would really appreciate that.

I maybe wrong but adding low cost/quality tele converters to a lens designed for HDV is going to produce poor images.

I did some tests and opted for the century 1.6 VS-16TC-HDS, and I certainly would'nt try more than one.

hi shawn: i may be wrong about this, but the 35mm adapter you are describing is primarily for close-in, studio use, to obtain shallow DOF and a more film-like look from objects closer to the camera. i don't think they are really designed for telephoto use, although maybe someone else has done some experimenting of this nature and can talk about this.

Hey Jeff - Have you noticed that B&H still sells a CarbonOne 3445 (shown here at B&H) (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=216462&is=REG&addedTroughType=search) that has a 75mm bowl. Does your 441 'video tripod' have a bowl or does it look like the photo in the procam link you gave? The reason I'm asking is because I have Bogan CarbonOne 440/3444 (4-extension leg version of what you have - probably a little less stable than your 441), and it has that same "center column that can be converted to lateral arm" (which is really cool for photos - do you use that for video?). Anyway, I'm mostly curious if you have ever tried removing the three hexnuts underneath the legs to see if that would fit a 75mm bowl somehow? Or does Bogan sell anything that will allow a 75mm bowl to fit in there? I can't imagine that the 3445 is anything more than the same basic tripod with a slightly different piece to fit the bowl. Do you think that would be a benefit if the tripod could be converted to a bowl design? - or do you prefer the center column design?

Also, have you ever used the "snow shoes" (part #230) and if so, do they work well?

Thanks, Shawn


Shawn:

I have noticed that B & H is still selling the CarbonOne 3445. My tripod does not have the 75mm bowl and I have not tried removing the hexnuts. Niether have I tried the snow shoes. I usually have no problem in snow.

By the way, Shawn, I now have a Sony Z1 and it also is very stable on my CarbonOne 441. I use this field tripod for both video and digital still photography.

Jeff

Here's a general backpacking question related to video gear. When you all go on overnight trips, where you'll need to pack camping gear and video gear into remote locations, do you use a typical backpacker's backpack (like a Gregory, Dana, Arc'Teryx, etc.) or do you use a backpack specialized for the video gear (like a LowePro Trekker II or a Kata HB-207) or something else (not including a Sherpa!)? The reason I ask is because I have Gregory Wind River (6000+ cu-in pack) and I plan to do some backpacking with the FX1 into Sequoia NP, but I'm sure it'll be either a solo trip or with one other person. Most likely, I'll have to carry the bulk or all video and camping gear. My Gregory should be able to handle that much gear (legs may be a different story), but I'll have to figure out how to pack the FX1 safely among the other gear. Right now I'm thinking of foam around the FX1 in a large stuff sack (like a Granite Gear bag). The thing I notice about the LowePro Trekker is that the backpack is so heavy by itself, and I'm not convinced that it overs that much padded protection (though clearly some) - it pretty much seems like it's just for day-hikes. So, for those of you planning something similar, how do you plan to pack, carry, manage your gear? Thanks, Shawn

By the way, Shawn, I now have a Sony Z1 and it also is very stable on my CarbonOne 441. I use this field tripod for both video and digital still photography.Jeff
Hey Jeff - glad to hear you got the Z1! It's a geat camera. I just saw that you are from Northern Indiana. I am from the outskirts of North-East Indy (GO COLTS!), and most recently from farming country, but have been in CA for a while now. Do you video around Lake Michigan in South Bend or do you take your gear on the road quite a bit? Also, regarding the 441/Z1 combo, what head are you using on that?

Hey Jeff - glad to hear you got the Z1! It's a geat camera. I just saw that you are from Northern Indiana. I am from the outskirts of North-East Indy (GO COLTS!), and most recently from farming country, but have been in CA for a while now. Do you video around Lake Michigan in South Bend or do you take your gear on the road quite a bit? Also, regarding the 441/Z1 combo, what head are you using on that?


Shawn:

I do some shooting around Lake Michigan but most of my stuff is done in the tropics--the rainforests of Panama and Amazonian Peru. So, tripod weight and portability are very important to me.

As far as tripod head, my Bogen/Manfrotto 441 CarbonOne Video Tripod has a 3443 Bogen head. To that I attach a Wimberley head which allows me to find the best center of balance for the video camera and gives me great control over fluid motion. This head is usually used for SLRs with very large lenses. The Wimberley head weighs as much as the tripod! But, 7 total pounds is acceptable to lug through a forest.

Visit this link to see the wimberly head: http://www.tripodhead.com/products/wimberley-main.cfm

Sorry to have you repeat all that on your head-setup Jeff. I remembered reading that post earlier and had looked at the web page, but forgot that it was your post. Very interesting head setup and even more interesting locations for shooting.

your idea of foam around the cam plus a stuff sack seems workable. i have only ever packed my camera once for multi-day use (primarily, i drag it around on long day trips in a weird backpack designed for EMS, which is equipped with internal compression straps which i use to stabilize the camera in the pack), and i just stuffed my sleeping bag around it in a larger stuff sack (also waterproofed it with a heavy duty trash bag) and then corded the whole thing to the top of the pack so that nothing sat on it. this worked fine with a GL2, which is a smaller cam. it is a good question, though, and i wonder how other folks have handled this....

should work for an FX-1 and maybe save you some room and weight. for a tripod on a longer trip, i am trying to perfect my beanbag technique. now *that* is a huge weight savings.

Sorry to have you repeat all that on your head-setup Jeff. I remembered reading that post earlier and had looked at the web page, but forgot that it was your post. Very interesting head setup and even more interesting locations for shooting.

Don't worry about it. This thread is getting very long!

Any one out there who does underwater, filmed dolphins, manatees etc. May have a job for 2-3 months. I do wildlife check the link below for using Nikon Lenses on the new JVC GYHD100 HDV camera.
Pls email to vfxstudio@gmail.com

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=53380

Hello,

I'm a french videographer, so apologize for my poor english.

I'm filming the wildlife with the Sony FX1 and editing on Final Cut 5. On my website
http://ronanfc.free.fr
you can see some samples of my work and some pictures, too. I hope you'll enjoy it !

Regards,
Ronan

ronan, thanks for sharing. i got a big laugh out of your zoom-out on the squirrel pensively looking out over the vast canyon. very cute.

the fx-1 is undoubtedly the best landscape camera in its class, i think.

Maybe we should petition Chris to start a forum just on wildlife, we have one for weddings right? There are a lot of us that do wildlife for fun and maybe profit. Bob

excellent suggestion, bob....this thread is unwieldy, hard to refer back to, but full of fabulous info! i think we could squeeze a whole lot more out of the topic if we could break it down into component parts. three are other threads out there, too, which could be consolidated.

howzabout it, chris?

Really good idea Bob. It's a wide-ranging subject within itself.

So much videography is about social or commercial events that manual focus and tripods are assumed as normal equipment. Even shooting field & track sports frequently allows pre-settings & a tripod (Example: Last week a well-publicised shot from about 100 yards of a stumbling cricketer parting company with his 3 stumps & 2 bails being scattered by a ball travelling at 85+ m.p.h. ... all items appearing in excellent focus only because manual focus was simplified by the fixed position of the point of ball-contact.)

Several on this thread have shared their delight in close-up videography and will hopefully continue to do so.

Questions about wildlife videography that interest me a lot include:
'How to get the best out of auto-focus at various distances?'
'Tips on how to shoot "run+gun" at distance?'
'How to prepare for videography among mountains, cliffs, gorges, seashore etc?'

... then there's a host of questions about equipment to use and editing the footage? (But let's not get bogged down in discussion of patience & timing & a steady hand, none of which can be learned through discussion.)

And wouldn't it be bloody marvellous if the Editor insisted that the purpose of the forum was to open up but also simplify the whole subject while attempting to identify best practices worldwide from all-comers?

Where does one begin, Chris?

Maybe we should petition Chris to start a forum just on wildlife, we have one for weddings right? There are a lot of us that do wildlife for fun and maybe profit. Bob

I'll second that suggestion. In addition to special circumstances regarding equipment and its operation for wildlife video, there's other areas that could be discussed.
Good locations for wildlife photo ops, both specific and general, could be shared. Those who have needed clips of hard-to-get wildlife subjects could make contact with whoever wanted them. In wildlife video, there aren't nearly enough means to get your footage into the right hands. If interested parties learned they could make contact on such a forum, the membership would grow. There's also the big topic of capturing good wildlife audio for video, which can be very difficult.

Steve McDonald

I would love to see a forum specially dedicated to wildlife videoing as opposed to 16mm film. I am sure that with this forums worldwide membership it would be well supported. It would also enable those with a need for specific animal/bird/plant footage to contact a person that location to obtain it for you or to help you location details etc

Yep, great idea.

Regards

Mick

finally, someone read my mind and manufactured my almost-ideal backpacking tripod. i just ordered one today.

http://www.kirkphoto.com/MightyLowBoy.html

i have a question for jeff sayre. in a different post on a different thread, lauri kettunen said that the wimberley head was not a good fit with XL cams and long lenses because that combo is too heavy for a friction-based system. but you say on this thread that you are using the wimberley head. what camera/lens combination are you using on the wimberley head?

the reason i'm asking is because kirk is now making a wimberley-like head (the king cobra head) which seems sturdier than than the wimberley (at least in its photos):

http://www.kirkphoto.com/cobra.html

i have a 516 head which works well with an XL2/long lens, but it weighs a ton and is hard to pack and needs big legs. i'm thinking something wimberley-ish might work better, but the reports seem somewhat conflicting on whether wimberley heads are good with this combo or better reserved for DSLR usage only.

can jeff or anyone else enlighten me?

note to Chris: WILDLIFE FORUM WILDLIFE FORUM WILDLIFE FORUM!

...i have a question for jeff sayre. in a different post on a different thread, lauri kettunen said that the wimberley head was not a good fit with XL cams and long lenses because that combo is too heavy for a friction-based system. but you say on this thread that you are using the wimberley head. what camera/lens combination are you using on the wimberley head?

the reason i'm asking is because kirk is now making a wimberley-like head (the king cobra head) which seems sturdier than than the wimberley (at least in its photos):

http://www.kirkphoto.com/cobra.html

i have a 516 head which works well with an XL2/long lens, but it weighs a ton and is hard to pack and needs big legs. i'm thinking something wimberley-ish might work better, but the reports seem somewhat conflicting on whether wimberley heads are good with this combo or better reserved for DSLR usage only.

can jeff or anyone else enlighten me?

Meryem:

Thanks for the question. I use two different lens/camera combinations on my Wimberley Head. First of all, I have the full-sized Wimberley Head, not the smaller Wimberley Sidekick Head. (http://www.tripodhead.com)

I use:

*Digital Canon SLR with various high-end telephoto lenses
*Sony HDV Z1U--with built in lens--cry :( [Yeah, maybe a canon XL H1 with interchangeable lenses is in my future]

Both combinations work very well with my Wimberley Head--no weight, lens length, or friction issues.

When you consider that a Canon Telephoto EF 600mm f/4.0L lens + digital camera can weigh over 15 pounds and be almost 2 feet in length, it is hard to believe that Lauri Kettunen said that "the wimberley head was not a good fit with XL cams and long lenses because that combo is too heavy for a friction-based system."

The beauty of gimbal mounts (like the Wimberley Head) is that it allows the user to find the center of gravity of the lens/camera system and virtually make it seem weightless when adjusted properly. There are four ways to adjust the head system to establish a perfect weightless feel.

Now Lauri might have been talking about the Wimberley Sidekick Head which is intended for smaller and lighter systems. However, the full-sized Wimberley Head is a fabulous system that works extremely well. However, beware that it is a heavy head (it adds another 4+ pounds to your tripod) and is bulky to pack (although it breaks down into three parts). Wimberley has just introduced a reengineered version of their full-sized Wimberley Head. It weighs about a pound less and I believe has two not three parts.

If you can stand the extra weight, I would consider buying the Wimberley Head. I do not have any experience with the King Cobra head but it looks like it is trying to compete with Wimberley's Sidekick and not their full-sized head.

Check out this Wimberley webpage for an example of a setup with a high-end 600mm lens: http://www.tripodhead.com/products/wimberley-main.cfm

The only issue I have using my Sony Z1U with the Wimberley head is that is is sort of difficult to access the mounting-plate release since the video camera is almost too wide for the mount. I have to remove the side-mounted hand strap from the camera to successfully mount it on the head.

Good luck!

thanks very much, jeff. i always appreciate how thoughtful your responses are.....

my main concern remains that i still would like someone to weigh in on the XL2/EF adapter/long lens combo with the wimberley head, because there's three connecting parts which makes for an oddly balanced system (the Z1, by comparison, is a very balanced cam with fewer moving parts, so to speak). it's more of an issue of the unwieldiness than the actual weight which concerns me. i wonder how that mess would balance, compared to the Z1.

i need a demo, but i don't know anyone who owns the wimberley. it looks potentially promising, but would be a pricey mistake to purchase blindly, especially since my 516 does a fine job--it's just a brick to carry!

...my main concern remains that i still would like someone to weigh in on the XL2/EF adapter/long lens combo with the wimberley head, because there's three connecting parts which makes for an oddly balanced system

The issue is with the fulcrum point. If your camera-lens system is attached to the head via a plate on the camera, then the combination would create an unbalanced lever. However, if the system is attached by a foot off of a lens ring, balance can be created by moving the position of the fulcrum closer to the axis of rotation of the head.

This latter set up is exactly what is done with the very large (and heavy) Canon 600 telephoto lens systems. The system is attached to a plate via a lens ring and not on the camera. (see the Wimberley product catalog for examples: http://www.tripodhead.com/WimberleyProductCatalogue.pdf)

What kind of a lens are you using with your XL2? Does it have a lens ring to which a mounting plate can be attached? If so, you will need to purchase a sliding mounting plate that allows you to adjust the position of the camera-lens system so that the system's center of gravity is centered at the axis of rotation of the head.

As I mentioned, there are four adjustments with the full-sized Wimberley Head that allow you to precisely position your camera-lens system to achieve the weightless feel. However, your system must allow you to attach it to the head in such a way that the center of gravity can be successfully manipulated.

that makes a lot of sense. i get what you're saying about creating a fulcrum system based on finding the unit's center of gravity. my canon 70-200mm lens has a tripod collar to which a long sliding lens plate can be attached. my concern is that the range of available adjustments, even with a long lens plate, will not be adequate to find the still point, so to speak, of such a bulky and unevenly balanced camera/lens unit with so many "moving parts", so i was hoping to get some idea of how you were using yours and with what systems. and wondering if anyone else here has tried the wimberley head with XL2/long lens combos. i can see where this would work nicely with the Z1, because it is already a very evenly balanced camera and the lens does not have a separate attachment, which could be weakened by the weight-bearing of a fulcrum system. and a dSLR, compared to an XL2, does not put much weight stress on the point of connection between the lens and the camera.

ron armstrong has this issue solved, and his system looks really nice, but i am trying to find a more portable solution. but "portable" and "XL2/EF adapter/long lens" are completely antithetical!

Meryem:

I would suggest calling the Wimberley people directly and describe your situation. I've called them on several occasions before. They were always nice and very helpful. I believe they would tell you if they felt your set up would not work with their systems.

Jeff

I would love to see a forum specially dedicated to wildlife videoing as opposed to 16mm film. I am sure that with this forums worldwide membership it would be well supported. It would also enable those with a need for specific animal/bird/plant footage to contact a person that location to obtain it for you or to help you location details etc

Yep, great idea.

Regards

Mick

I don't have much to offer Mick, but I have begun to use XM2 to shoot griffon vultures in flight at 2 gorges in Crete, Selinari and Seli Ambelou and at Pena Falcon in Extremadura, Spain for black stork, griffons, eagle owl and imperial eagle. Good close-ups were brief indeed but the XM2 was quite good for footage from above of griffon gliding at c.100/200 metres particularly from top of east-facing edge of Seli Ambelou. With practice and patience I should do much better at these 3 locations.

Lumbier, east of Pamplona, Spain also has a resident population of griffons but their daytime haunts there are on lowland with no cliffs nearby and any flight is a matter of flapping away from me which does not facilitate good stills or footage.

What have you been up to and what are you using? Have you tried digiscoping?

chris mentioned today that he is considering opening a special interest forum for wildlife videography at this thread:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?p=396643#post396643

go there and encourage him!!!!! we need another display of public interest!

solidarnscz....

I don't have much to offer Mick, but I have begun to use XM2 to shoot griffon vultures in flight at 2 gorges in Crete, Selinari and Seli Ambelou and at Pena Falcon in Extremadura, Spain for black stork, griffons, eagle owl and imperial eagle. Good close-ups were brief indeed but the XM2 was quite good for footage from above of griffon gliding at c.100/200 metres particularly from top of east-facing edge of Seli Ambelou. With practice and patience I should do much better at these 3 locations.

Lumbier, east of Pamplona, Spain also has a resident population of griffons but their daytime haunts there are on lowland with no cliffs nearby and any flight is a matter of flapping away from me which does not facilitate good stills or footage.

What have you been up to and what are you using? Have you tried digiscoping?

Hi Brendon,
I'm sorry for the delay in replying to to the above, returned yesterday from filming a train journey across the Andes in Peru( Cucso to Puno) not much footage on wildlife unless you want Alpaca's, Lama's and wild Guinea Pigs. To reply to you, I don't think you need to have a lot footage, but more importantly its the fact that if somebody requires a particular or specfic shot they can make request for it , hopefully on the new forum that Chris is going to set up.
Incidently my main interest is Bristish Wildlife and in particular Red Deer , but I do have quite a lot of footage on exotics mainly from Africa ,Asia and Central America.
I am at present useing a Z1 usually with a 1.6 century converter. I tend to research the subject I'm after and position myself so it comes to me, rather than use a camera with a long lens. Does require a lot of time and patience.
No, I have not tried digiscoping.
regards

Mick

Well it sounds like Chris is listening to the group and may do a Wildlife forum. That would be great. I have videoed all over the US as well as Africa, Amazon. Patagonia and places in between. However, my best macro shots of insects were done in my yard in Atlanta. As I have said in other posts, you don't have to go halfway around the world to find wildlife, wildlife is all around you, just go look for it. Bob

Well it sounds like Chris is listening to the group and may do a Wildlife forum.Done: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisplay.php?f=111