If it can go wrong, it will go wrong!! Pilot Error!
 

Well, I had 2 days of trouble-free Pilot use, then something went weird with my gimbal! The day it arrived I adjusted the Pilot so it was both statically and dynamically balanced. I used it in my house on 2 nights, and left it on the Steadistand each night. Last night, I was about to use it, when I had the idea I'd try to rebalance it to see if I could get the gimbal a little closer to the camera. After achieving static balance again with the camera pointing to the right, I turned the camera 180 degrees. To my amazement, the front lifted about 15-20 degrees and the bottom spar swayed out by 30 degrees! I rebalanced again, and rotated the camera 180 degrees again. Same result!

Balanced - Unbalanced - Unbalanced

I shot an email to Tiffen technical support and had a reply by 8Am this morning... they said it was possible one of the screws in the gimbal may not have been tightened enough, and they'd send me the special screwdriver required for the job and detailed instructions, or I could send it back to them for a warranty repair. Since I live about an hour's drive away, I asked if I could drop it off at the Tiffen factory and wait for it. "No problem" was their response.

This morning, I drove to Tiffen, in Glendale, where I met Robert Orf. Robert took me onto the factory floor where I met pretty much everybody who has anything to do with making the various Steadicams. I was teamed up with a young guy named Moe, who checked out the problem with my Pilot. It stumped us, so we got backup. After about an hour, we had about 6 people all trying to figure out what was wrong with it. If you're waiting for a Steadicam and its production has been delayed, I'm sorry... they were probably trying to fix my Pilot! :-) Moe swapped out the yoke and that appeared to fix the problem so I drove back to south Orange County. I took my Pilot to a local community center where I used one of their Activity rooms, with mirrors along one wall. I set up the Pilot on its Steadistand and... urrgh... the same problem!

Since I was there, I spent 3 hours practicing with the Pilot. My girlfriend came over and was good enough to allow me to chase her around for a while, going along corridors, up and down stairs etc. I showed her the problem, just to make sure I wasn't imagining it. She confirmed she saw the problem, so I called Robert Orf again. Looks like I'll be going back to Glendale again tomorrow morning to have the entire gimbal replaced.

While it's a pain to have these problems, I have been nothing but EXTREMELY impressed with Tiffen's technical support. From their very fast email responses, to the friendly greeting you get when you walk in the door, and the happy, smiling workers who all took an interest in what was going on. Good job Tiffen!

Follow Up...
 

I went back to Tiffen, Glendale this morning and met up with Robert Orf and Michael Craigs. We had all come to the same idea, which was to make sure I (the newbie operator) was not doing something dumb during the setup of my Pilot. Other than placing the Pilot on the docking station incorrectly (doh!), it appeared I was doing ok, so we checked out the weird balancing problem. Thankfully we were able to replicate the problem. A detailed visual inspection gave no obvious indication of what might be wrong or how to correct it. Michael and Robert agreed that the best course of action, in this case, was to replace the gimbal, a task which basically involves taking apart the entire rig, including the wiring harness, and rebuilding it. Michael did this and the Pilot was back to its smooth, perfectly balanced self. Problem solved.

I'll admit that it can be frustrating when a new piece of equipment doesn't work or breaks, or what-have-you, but in this case, I actually really enjoyed this bit of "misfortune"! I got to go to Tiffen and saw Steadicams of various shapes and sizes being built. I got to meet some very cool people who were smart, helpful, had good senses of humor and who genuinely wanted to get my Pilot's issue fixed. I had many of my technical questions answered and Michael even gave me a mini-workshop on operating technique which will help me enormously until I can get to one of Tiffen's 2 day workshops. I met Frank Rush, Tiffen's VP and Steadicam General Manager and got to spend some time picking his brain about many things Steadicam-related. I was very impressed with their level of service, and all-in-all, it was a great way to spend a few hours. I would certainly not have any problems buying Tiffen/Steadicam in the future and look forward to the time when I'm ready to purchase an Ultra2! :-)

So, if you'll excuse me... I'm going to suit up!

Nice you hear you got it working - and you got to meet everyone - very nice.

Two questions:
1) Did you make the composite video cable?
2) Have you taken the plastic off the monitor yet?

Ah, Dave... it's like you know me so well!!

Yes, I made a composite cable from the one you suggested in your Pilot Primer that's available on Amazon... I just cut it down to size and soldered it back together. I used some heat-shrink tubing to make it look half-way decent.

Um, no... the plastic is still on the monitor! I'm sure all the guys at Tiffen thought that was pretty funny, but they were kind enough not to make fun of me to my face! :-)

Julian,
I've been getting to know my new pilot this week and hope we can learn some things from one another. It was quite a thrill flying a steadicam for the first time and I look forward to taking it outdoors soon.

Out of the backpack the vest had me confused for about 10 minutes but it is comfortable.
Still haven't reached perfect dynamic balance but I'm pretty close, (using my canon A1).

How were you docking the pilot wrong?

By the way, here is a picture of my Pilot. Looks like we're using the same Manfrotto Tripod adapter.

One thing I've found that really makes a difference is the extra weights. Noticeably more stable. I use 4 up top (2 back, 2 front), 4 on the bottom (2 back, 2 front), plus the round end weights at the bottom (1 back, 1 front).

But your XH-A1 is about 1 pound lighter than my HVX, and you don't show any wireless stuff, so you would probably want to try even more weights up top. This will move the gimbal much closer to the camera (click on my picture) which also seems to increase stability. So for your rig, I would use 10 weights up top (5 back, 5 front), 4 on the bottom (2 back, 2 front), plus the round end weights at the bottom (1 back, 1 front).

The extra weights are 4 oz. each, cost $6.25 each, Tiffen part# 801-7920-05. I ordered 12. Cheap! Maybe you can even pick them up and save the shipping.

Hope this helps.

Nice rig dave! Have you maxed out the weight limit?

I've found the best way to get dynamic balance with the Pilot is to move the whole bottom crossbar. There's a hex screw in the middle where the vertical post joins in. Loosen that with your yellow-handled hex driver and move the whole bar forward or back (be careful) to get a coarse static balance, then tighten the screw. This works a lot better than moving the battery and/or monitor around. I always leave the battery and monitor in the same place and just move the whole bar.

Another thing that really helps me with testing dynamic balance is PERFECT static balance. When you spin it, if the static balance is just a hair off, it will wobble, even if the dynamic balance is right. So I use the pole of the SteadiStand to judge static balance, and then I turn it around and do the same thing with the lens pointing in the opposite direction. If you can't get both right, then the post of the stand is a little off. In this case, you split the difference to get perfect static balance. In other words, you do the static balance so it looks the same against the post with the lens pointing in opposite directions. I use this method for both front/back and side to side static balance. In other words, I check static balance with the lens pointing in 4 directions. It gets fast after you get used to it, and it definitely helps with your sanity when you're doing dynamic balance.

Yeah, I did that once by mistake. Normally, I weigh everything with a postal scale:
Product: USPS 10lb Digital Scale
and use a spread sheet to calculate total weight. But one time I screwed up and went over max. What happens is that the arm won't go up to level, even when you turn the blue thumbscrews all the way clockwise. So I quickly realized that I had mis-calculated the weight.

Thanks for the tips

Dave:

Just curious why your monitor is dialed back a few inches from the end of the post? If you drive it out to the end and then slide the crossbar back to re-balance, you would be adding a bit more inertial stability.

I was placing the gimbal on the dock, rather than resting the top stage on the docking plate.

Yes, it looks remarkably similar!

I spoke with Michael about getting the gimbal higher (closer to the camera). He advised against using many weights on the top stage as it can actually cause the metal top stage to bend/distort slightly. I may have found someone who can make me a box for my FS-C, something akin to the Bebob Box FS. If he's able to make me something useable, I'll likely add that on the top stage, under the camera. That will add about a pound to the top. Right now, there's about 4" between the top stage and the gimbal. If I keep my weights at the bottom (for now at least), I'll be maximizing the inertia, which I think will help me as a beginner, no?

Hi Charles,

I started with the monitor in that position so I could spin it easier for dynamic balance. I guess it's also a little easier to see with the lens pointed over your left shoulder. Also, I kind of felt like it would be safer if the weights stuck out further than the monitor.

I haven't worn a big rig like you, but it seems like there's plenty of pan inertia with 1.25 pounds of screw-on weights at the ends of the bottom crossbar. In fact, I have to feather out the end of the pan to keep it from bouncing back. Also, in order to keep the gimbal close to the camera, I've added extra weight up top, which may increase the inertia as well, but I'm not sure how much.

But hey, I'm no where near your experience level, so I would be really interested in your impression of how the Pilot flies with 1.25 pounds of screw-on weights at the ends of the bottom crossbar, and some extra weight up top to keep the gimbal close to the camera. Maybe even more pan inertia would be better.

Dave:

More inertia should actually help the "bounceback" factor when stopping a pan (less inert rigs will be easier to influence and over-control). All Steadicams require feathering in any axis for this reason.

I would be inclined to maximize the inertia of the Pilot whenever using it and would have done so for the article I wrote except that I ran out of weights, needed all of them for the top stage to weigh down the bare A1 that I was using. But I am also used to a 60lb sled, which of course has more inertia than the Pilot could ever have (except perhaps if one had a 6 foot long camera on top!) The "ideal" setup is one where the three axes are as close together in feel as possible; of course the reality is that tilt exhibits the most inertia and pan the least, so that's why it's great to add the weights at the ends of the spar and camera platform to help slow things down.

Julian, glad you had a good experience with customer service at Tiffen. I was actually due to go in there myself today and thus we might have met--will be going in tomorrow morning as it turns out.

By the way, speaking of docking "wrong"...this isn't the biggest deal and you may have figured this out, but for dynamic balance it is best to mount the docking bracket on the stand using the hole furthest from the balancing pin, so that you can get the rig as far from the stand as possible which will allow a 360 degree spin (this observation based on the third of your pictures from an earlier post in this thread).

That's what that hole is for - duh! I was just using the hole with the thumb screw in it as shipped.

OK, so now that I know how to get dynamic balance with the monitor all the way out, I just tried it, and it's nice - thank you! The pan inertia feels better, not a huge difference like with the weights, but a little bit more. The biggest improvement is getting the monitor more forward, so I don't have to worry about my right hand (gimbal angle off the arm post) blocking my view. It also feels like I can see where I'm going a bit more, as opposed to looking more down at my feet.

In Don Juan position, the monitor is a little further back, but that forces me to walk more sideways, which should help keep my left shoulder out of the shot (a problem I have sometimes), so that works better as well.

The only down side is that the back of the crossbar is a little longer, so I have a little more to get around when changing positions, but that's not a big deal.

Thanks!

By the way, where can I get one of those 6 foot long cameras? (LOL)

That's a bummer. I thought 5 weights on each side of the stage would be OK. Did Michael give any hint as to how many weights would be OK?

I'm pretty sure 3 weights on each side of the stage would be OK, since this is equivalent to the "all weights up" configuration in the manual and in Charles' review. The smaller, round "end weights" are 2 oz. each. The normal "middle weights" are 4 oz. each. So 2 "end weights" are equivalent to 1 "middle weight".

The FS-C weighs 1 pound by itself. The Bebob box is another 1 pound, so that's 2 pounds total. I recommended 5 middle weights on each side of the stage (10 total), which would be 2.5 pounds. So I would still get some additional weights and add a couple to the stage. For example, 6 weights would cost you $38. This will get the gimbal closer to the stage. For example, I think my gimbal is 2-2.5" from the stage.

By the way, as I understand it, the image seems more stable when your left hand is closer to the lens, so that's why I suggest adding weight up top to move the gimbal closer to the stage. But adding a FS-C box under the camera will have the opposite effect, moving the lens away from your left hand. Is there any way you can place the FS-C behind the camera? I could be all wet on this, so maybe Charles can chip in here...

Having more pan inertia will help, beginner or expert. But I think it also helps to have your left hand closer to the lens, and putting the weights at the bottom will move the gimbal away from the lens. So if you do add weights at the bottom, add some at the top also to counter-act the bottom weight, and make the whole rig more stable. That's why I suggest buying more weights.

Your ears must've been burning today. Your name was mentioned once or twice. :-)

It's a shame you didn't make it there today. It would have been great to meet you. I guess I could go back tomorrow, but then I think the good people at Tiffen would think I was moving in and might start charging me rent!

Dave Gish said it best... "Duh!" I didn't even see that hole in the bracket, but now I know it's there, I'll start using it. Thanks for that!

I don't remember specifically and wouldn't want to give out misinformation, but I think if you used the 8 supplied weights on the top stage, you'd probably be ok, but if you added more than that, you might be risking bending the frame.

Yes, that was exactly my thought, too, so I asked Michael to show me how high we could get the gimbal with what I had. We tried putting all the weights on the top stage and extending the post to compensate (which I know is not exactly what you've been suggesting as there are no weights on the bottom), and neither of us liked the way the rig flew. We briefly discussed putting the FS-C on the bottom spar and how that could be accomplished without some kind of accessory shoe. I think you're right though, the ideal place would be behind the camera. My original thought was to get the machinist to build a simple "L' bracket which would screw between the camera and the Manfrotto QR plate. The FS-C would screw to the vertical section of the L-bracket behind the battery compartment. The problem I saw with this design was that it would be difficult to change the battery in the camera. But now that I've just described my idea to you, I had another idea... attach the L-bracket underneath the Manfrotto QR *base*, not the camera plate! All I'd need would be a slightly longer mounting screw to go through the top plate and the L-bracket and screw into the Manfrotto base. The camera could be slid *forward* off the Manfrotto base when the battery needed to be changed.

I also used an aluminum L-bracket I got on eBay for my wireless transmitter, but after a while, I just velcroed the transmitter right to the side of the camera. Maybe something like this would work for you:
For Steadicam / Steadycam operators - eBay (item 320293927939 end time Sep-08-08 09:28:52 PDT)

In any case, if you use a round-head or pan-head 1/4-20 screw, you might need to file the screw head down some, otherwise it will scrape the inside of the stage when you adjust the stage position knobs. This happened to me. Not a big deal, but it took some time to figure out what was going on.

I wonder what adding the FS-C to the side of the camera would do to the stability of the system? I know Tiffen recommend not adding accessories to the side, but rather the front or back because of the dynamic balance issues (see the Dynamic Balance Primer). I would think that it could move the c.g. of the camera far enough to the side to put the lens significantly to the right or left of the center-line of the sled. Psychologically at least, that might have an impact on operating because the camera isn't pointing where you think it is due to parallax. Again, this is just an assumption on my part as I have no experience one way or the other.

Not sure. If you can get someone to make you a custom bracket that puts the FS-C behind the camera, that might be better - more pan inertia, and no side balance issues. Also, one of the reasons I stopped using the bracket for wireless is that when you hold the sled nice and close on your left, the bracket sticks out close to your head. I never had a problem hitting it, it was just annoying to have it that close.

But if the bracket is too long and the FS-C is too far back, it could be annoying clearing the FS-C with your head as you switch positions - like when you change from lens pointing forward to lens pointing backwards over your left shoulder, all within the same shot.

Whatever solution you end up with, if you need a longer screw, make sure the head of the screw is thin enough to clear the innards of the stage.

You guys are going through all the right mental paces with the gear, it is good to hear. Steadicam does require (and inspire) a lot of tinkering and experimenting to find the "sweet spot" where the rig functions in the most desirable way. What is interesting is that this is not always the same from person to person. I myself love a really inert rig but I have colleagues that like to keep theirs short and "whippy".

Dave, glad the monitor-out idea opened up some new possibilities for you. Regarding you caveat about the battery extending out (and later, the FS making for a longer camera) which requires moving it further from your body as you do side switches, these lengths are still quite short relative to the amount of movement that the arm affords you so I wouldn't consider them a problem, one spends very little time with the rig actually in front of your body (just momentarily during side switches or going through doorways) and the added inertia of length should otherwise be a worthwhile tradeoff. With certain cameras such as the Panavised F900, we have to contend with almost inconceivable configurations where the camera can be 3-4 feet long! Try getting that through a doorway...

Being such a small rig, the Pilot is going to be that much more responsive to small changes so all of the things you guys are working through are relevant, although they shouldn't get in the way of the real focus which is practice practice practice, of course. And the better you get at operating, the less small issues in balance or configuration will affect your operating--you might notice the difference but not see it in the results. I have occasionally had to muscle through takes where the rig is all fakakta until I had a chance to correct it.

Onto Julian's FS mounting dilemma. Julian, I think your idea of having it rear-mounted is probably the best and easiest, especially with the Manfrotto QR allowing you to drive the camera forward to change batteries. Personally I think it a shame to have to use the camera's own battery while there is a perfectly good one at the base of the rig, but being that there isn't a voltage regulator in the rig that can spit out the requisite 7.2v to power the camera and FS, I guess it's something to live with for the time being.

However, side mounting is not a bad idea either. The inch or two that the lens is shifted would be imperceptible to your operating (in fact, many motion picture cameras do not have the lens in line with the center of gravity due to the side-mounted motor). The other advantage of this configuration is that you are extending the mass of the camera side-to-side, which gives you some more inertia in the roll axis, which helps with the dreaded horizon issues. It would be good to give it a try in both side and rear configurations (lash it all up with tape etc) before you get anything fabricated.

Just make sure that the L bracket you use is very rigid, and is not going to vibrate under the weight of the FS. This could have a diabolical effect on the Steadicam as you can imagine.

Here's my current dilemma: I'm having a heck of a time getting the Pilot and XH-A1 dynamically balanced. When I first got the rig and set it up, I must have miraculously found that sweet spot, because it was in fantastic dynamic balance straight away. Now I can't get it dynamically balanced to save my life! Charles, I know you've told me to spin the rig and look to see if it's spinning lens up, or eye-piece up, but my rig currently does both, so I'm not sure which way to move things. Nothing really seems to help! With this dilemma and your earlier statement about "practice, practice, practice" in mind, should I stop worrying about dynamic balance and spend more time flying, or will this just reinforce bad habits?


I agree completely. At least I can run the FS-C from the IDX battery, if and when I get it mounted.

Hey - thanks for all your advice - it really helps! It's also good to hear we're doing something right...

Tell me about it! This is a big problem for me. Sometimes it's quite good, but often my horizon is off level or wobbly.

Don't fret too much about DB, you are still in the "honeymoon" period with your rig and while it always helps to have it dialed in as much as possible, it won't get you into bad habits if it is a little off.

1) Remember to breathe. Seriously, I got frustrated with dynamic balance at first, and had to really concentrate on relaxing. Just make sure you allocate plenty of time.

2) Make sure you have the rig in PERFECT static balance before you spin it (see my post #8 in this thread)

3) Put the battery all the way back, and the monitor all the way forward, and leave them there. Just use the hex screw in the middle of the crossbar to re-balance the weight at the bottom.

4) Try to prevent any oscillations or external forces when you spin it. Spin it carefully with your thumb and first finger level level right under the gimbal. Hold the bottom of the post loosely with your other hand as you spin it, and then let go carefully so as not to push it. Don't spin it too fast. Lightly touch the mounting yoke if it is moving after you spin it. Let it spin for a little while so any side to side swinging dampens out.

5) It also helps me to look at the rig and imagine where the center of gravity of the whole sled might be. It should be right through the vertical post. Sometimes you can get perfect static balance, but the CG of the whole sled is somewhere in the air, like between the monitor and the lens, or maybe between the camera battery and the Pilot battery. As I understand it, this is why the dynamic balance is off, because the CG of the whole sled is somewhere in the air in front of, or behind, the sled post. This can give you a clue on which way to move things.

6) Once you get dynamic balance, remember where you put things so it's easy next time. For example, after unpacking the sled from the backpack, I always extend the post by a measurement of 4 fingers. I also carefully line up the tripod plate in the tripod adapter.

And yes, I think it's important to learn with a reasonably balanced rig. You'll have to learn how to balance it sooner or later. Might as well be sooner. On the other hand, if you use the stage knob to trim the tilt of the post for proper framing, the dynamic balance will be off, so don't count on always having perfect dynamic balance.

Charles, please correct me if I have any of this wrong...

Good notes Dave.

The only thing I would correct is that when static balance is good, it means that the CG of the sled is indeed centered at the gimbal (really, slightly below of course since we make it bottom-heavy). What may not be the case however is that the line that one draws from top to bottom happens to coincide with the direction of the post. If the camera is too far forward and the battery at the bottom too far back, the rig may statically balance but the imaginary line between the battery and the camera will be a diagonal that happens to intersect the rig just below the gimbal. Dynamically balancing will bring that line straight down the post, which is what allows a flat spin. Another way to think of that is that when you spin the rig, it attempts to make that diagonal line a vertical line and that is why the rig tilts or precesses.

Thanks Charles. I guess I got the explanation from the workshop kind of jumbled up in my head. But I guess the main point is that the line of balance goes straight down through the post.

Dynamic Balance! I have achieved... Dynamic Balance!
 

Dave and Charles, thanks for your input on the whole dynamic balance issue. What I was seeing as I slowly (15-20 RPM) spun it was the lens would tend to point slightly up for a couple of turns, then it would tend to point down. Mostly though, the entire rig seemed to lean in or out sideways!

I initially had the battery and monitor fully extended away from each other, but after re-reading the DB Primer, I decided to move the battery in a bit, adjust the bottom spar to compensate, fine tune the static balance and spin test. No matter what I did with the battery (moving in/out per the instructions) and rebalancing, the DB got worse, so I moved everything back! :-)

Finally, following your directions, I just moved the entire spar. As the general trend seemed to be "Lens Up", I figured the battery was having the most effect on the system and was being "pulled down" by centrifugal force (ok, for you physics purists, "pushed towards the center of gravity by centripetal force"!). I moved the spar so that the battery was moved closer to the center post, rebalanced, and bingo... DB was achieved in about 2 minutes. Cool!

Julian,

Great to hear you got it working.

Now that you have achieved dynamic balance, maybe you could pair up with another steadi-newbie as practice partners...
SteadicamForum.com - A Community of Motion Picture Camera Stabilization Specialists
matthew pearce seems to be in your area.

This way, you don't have to bug your wife/girlfriend to get moving subjects to practice on, and you can have the other guy shoot you working your rig, which might be useful for your reel. In any case, it would get you more motivated to practice.

I'm looking to pair up with a steadi-newbie practice partner as well, only in the NYC area.

Hi Dave,

Just to make sure it wasn't a fluke(!), I set the center post all the way back in, checked for static balance, and went through your DB procedure one more time. A couple of minutes later, it's spinning flat again.

I'm a member of the Steadicam forum already and have been following that thread. As I work Friday thru Monday, it can be quite difficult to meet up with people who have "normal" schedules, unfortunately.

You never know what other peoples' schedules are like. Worth a try...

Dave,

I checked with Michael at Tiffen about the possibility of causing the top stage plate to bend by adding extra weights. In their testing, they noticed bending began to occur when 6 mid-weights were placed on each side of the top stage plate. Michael advised me not to add more than one pound of weights to each side of the top plate (for a total of 2 pounds), which is 1 start weight and 4 mid weights on each side. Further, Michael says having this many weights on the top stage could induce a "bounce" to the top plate during heavy use, where the mass of the weights cause the plate to flex and spring back.

I'm going to order some extra weights to see if I can get the gimbal a bit closer to the camera.

P.S. I'm *almost* ready to peel off the plastic from the monitor!

Hi Julian,

Thanks for asking them about this - good to know.

One question: I thought each mid weight was 4 oz, and each of the smaller rounded weights are 2 oz.. So if you had 1 small rounded weight and 4 mid weights on each side, that would be 2.25 pounds total. To be clear, did Michael say 2 pounds max, or 1 start weight and 4 mid weights on each side max?

Thanks, Dave.

I checked my email correspondence and Michael says he believes the 2-pound limit would equate to about 4 mid weights and one start weight on each side. If the mid-weights are 4oz each, then maybe we should forego the end weights to be on the safe side!

Hi Julian,

Not sure if you're still having this problem, but I just saw something similar.

It turned out to be the bottom crossbar sliding around. The hex nut in the middle was a little loose. This threw off static balance every time I moved the sled. Now when I tighten it up, I test to make sure the bottom bar can't slide easily.

Not sure if this is your problem though.

Hope this helps.

While at Tiffen, we checked everything for tightness and movement, but found nothing which was loose. But that's definitely good advice anyway... always check to make sure everything is locked down correctly.

AGHHHHH

I i think i have just come across the exact same problem as Julian had with his Pilot while trying to dynamically balance mine with my new EX1... never had the problem with my HVX however.. which is strange..

I can statically balance my rig 1 way.. and then spin it 180 degrees and the nose tilts forward.. the horizon does stay horizontal however..

I cant think of any other things that might be causing this..

Running 2 middle weights and 2 end weights on the stage.. same as my HVX setup - the cameras weigh about the same. 4 middle weights and 2 end weights on the cross bar.. 3 second drop time. Monitor and battery extended all the way out dynamically balancing (well trying) just by moving the cross bar and the top stage.

When i spin the rig the nose tilts forward and the battery goes arse up. Which is the exact same thing that happens when i spin the rig 180.

Im going to keep playing but if i cant get anything by the end of the day i'm going to have to give tiffen and my dealer an email.

What really sucks is i have a New Years eve shoot and was meant to be flying.. and it has to be an EX as we're shooting everything with them.

Right now being so isolated in NZ really sucks.

edit - photos attached. Not as bad as Julians.. but still present.

That looks like a gimbal linearity issue, Joe. Definitely contact your dealer and/or Tiffen (your dealer will likely have no clue what you are talking about).

There's no reason why you can't continue to work with the rig though. Under most circumstances you won't have to pan more than 45 degrees from straight ahead, you just rotate your body to keep within that range. Going into Don Juan and back to Missionary during a shot is relatively rare, that's when this might bite you a little but it's entirely possible to overcome this with a little more influence. Certainly the problem should be fixed but I wouldn't call this an operating dealbreaker.