7D Camera Stabilization Options (e.g. Glidecam, Flowpod)

drewmaw

drewmaw

Well-known member
Hi,

As I mentioned in the title, such examples like the Varizoom Flowpod and Ultralight (which a little too expensive for essentially a glorified monopod), are there any cheap and effective alternatives to these products for camera stabilization?

Here are the links to the Flowpod and Ultralight if you don't know what I'm talking about.

I'd like to get something that was capable of some on the fly monopod action, like the flowpod.

Thanks!
 
Some things to try before spending any serious money (or effort):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1aPbwcqquk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMmIpmOBSyg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2QmcAYOxvc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JW6AWmqa8ZM

To get any better results, you'll need something with a gimbal. You can either make it yourself (with various plans online) or spend hundreds of dollars on a commercial rig. For something as small as a DSLR, though, I'm not so sure that it's worth the effort or money (if you can't afford it).

EDIT: Just to be clear, each of those videos shows a different technique to try.
 
Last edited:
The problem with all of these techniques, is that 1) they make the owner look ridiculous, 2) This could only work with light, consumer weighted cameras. While a DSLR is light, with it decked out wth rails, mattebox, monitor, heavy lens, this just isn't a viable option, 3) the examples of each setup aren't that steady.

Thanks for the links though. I'm looking for of something that's made for prosumer equipment.

Drew.

ydgmdlu said:
Some things to try before spending any serious money (or effort):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1aPbwcqquk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMmIpmOBSyg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2QmcAYOxvc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JW6AWmqa8ZM

To get any better results, you'll need something with a gimbal. You can either make it yourself (with various plans online) or spend hundreds of dollars on a commercial rig. For something as small as a DSLR, though, I'm not so sure that it's worth the effort or money (if you can't afford it).

EDIT: Just to be clear, each of those videos shows a different technique to try.
Click to expand...
 
drewmaw said:
The problem with all of these techniques, is that 1) they make the owner look ridiculous, 2) This could only work with light, consumer weighted cameras. While a DSLR is light, with it decked out wth rails, mattebox, monitor, heavy lens, this just isn't a viable option, 3) the examples of each setup aren't that steady.

Thanks for the links though. I'm looking for of something that's made for prosumer equipment.

Drew.
Click to expand...
The problem is that you want "cheap." I don't know how much you're willing to spend, so maybe you should make that clear first.

The minimum of quality that you should want is Glidecam, either the HD-2000 or the 2000 Pro, which will support a payload of up to six pounds. That will cost you around $300.

A much better option is the Blackbird mentioned above, which is around $650. The best option is, of course, the Steadicam Merlin at $700+.

If you can't afford the $300 for a Glidecam, then: First of all, if you want something "prosumer" grade, then you should be expecting a prosumer price, which won't be "cheap." Second of all, you can always take your chance with one of the Indian knock-offs of Glidecam and Steadicam that you can easily find on eBay (by just searching for "Steadicam"). From firsthand experience, and also from reading other testimonials, I can tell you that the Indian stuff is very poor in build quality, but it might get the job done. The results won't be as good or as predictable as the real deal.

Honestly, though, I doubt that a Glidecam will give you much better results than the "tripod Steadicam" solutions that I linked. A large part of getting smooth results is practice, and you could get as good with a "tripod Steadicam" as with a Glidecam. The only rig that is very smooth out-of-the-box without much practice (that I've seen) is the Merlin.

An important consideration with stabilizers is the weight of the payload. With a handheld rig, the heavier the payload, the harder your job will be. It seems obvious, but you have no idea how hard operating such a rig is until you've tried it for yourself. The stabilizer adds a few pounds; e.g. with a five-pound payload, you're looking at around eight pounds total. Then you have to hold that weight in front of you, with your arm bent, and without moving your arm as much as possible. Handheld rigs simply can't be operated for more than a few minutes at a time.

Cheap designs like the Glidecam present an additional difficulty. They place the center of gravity in front of your wrist, wrenching your hand downward. Bow-shaped designs like the Merlin and the Blackbird place the center of gravity over your wrist, which is much less fatiguing.

If you plan on using a handheld rig, then you really need to ask yourself what items are necessary parts of the payload. The truth is that the only things necessary are the camera and the lens. Why do you need a mattebox, rails, and monitor (with a battery for the monitor)? The camera itself is two pounds. The lens might be a pound. (I don't know why you'd want a heavier lens. Steadicams work best with deep DOF and wide FOV, which means shorter and therefore lighter lenses.) The mattebox and rails will another couple of pounds. Same with a monitor and battery. So you're looking at a payload of at least seven pounds. Few handheld rigs support that much weight (not even the Merlin does), and I think that it's too heavy to even be worth operating handheld.

The only "handheld" set-up where a lot of weight is important is when you're using a shoulder brace. The heavier, the more stable. But a shoulder mount won't give you the results that you want, certainly not any more stable than a "tripod Steadicam" could be.

I'm beginning to think that you put too much stock in "looking good." You really should be more concerned about whatever works. I'm of the opinion that, in most cases, a mattebox and rails are superfluous and are mostly just intended to make a rig look more impressive. But you already look silly enough in trying to use a still camera for video in a "professional" environment. How would using a tripod as a handheld stabilizer make you look any sillier? It doesn't make any difference, in my opinion. It's probably just all in your head. I would think that clients would be more concerned with you having the equipment that you need and using it however you need.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the amazing reply! It's not that I care about the way I look per say, but it's that I care about how my clients perceive me on set, as professional or not. Yes, I'm looking for a cheap solution, and yes, the Blackbird is very good looking. But I disagree with what you said about a DSLR looking unprofessional on set: I attended a workshop with Shelley Johnson A.S.C. at Mole Richardson in Hollywood, we used the 5D Mark II, decked out. It's very professional, and doesn't look unprofessional at all with pro gear attached.
 
drewmaw said:
The problem with all of these techniques, is that 1) they make the owner look ridiculous, 2) This could only work with light, consumer weighted cameras. While a DSLR is light, with it decked out wth rails, mattebox, monitor, heavy lens, this just isn't a viable option, 3) the examples of each setup aren't that steady.

Thanks for the links though. I'm looking for of something that's made for prosumer equipment.

Drew.
Click to expand...


what kind of weight are you expecting to be using?
 
drewmaw said:
But I disagree with what you said about a DSLR looking unprofessional on set:
Click to expand...
What I mean is a subject that has been discussed here a few times in the past. There is a clear issue with showing up to a videography gig with a still camera instead of a real camcorder. Yes, the accessories help a lot, but in the end, you're still proposing to a client that you're going to use a still camera instead of a real camcorder. You'll still have to convince people that you're serious and that you can deliver the results that they want with the camera that you have.

BTW, you still haven't answered my questions.
 
I'm hoping to stay around 6lbs, but then again, the monitor and monitor battery could be mounted at the bottom of the rig, but what the other guys have said, Steadicam Merlin might be the only way to go for the price range.

BradM said:
what kind of weight are you expecting to be using?
Click to expand...
 
If you intend to mount a monitor and battery to the bottom, then you should be considering a Glidecam. Neither the Blackbird nor the Merlin will let you use an external monitor.
 
BTW, you need to be aware that you can't control focus on a Steadicam rig unless you have a wireless follow focus unit. If you get the GH1 instead of the 7D, then you can take advantage of the well-engineered autofocus that it offers with the kit lens.
 
drewmaw said:
I'm hoping to stay around 6lbs, but then again, the monitor and monitor battery could be mounted at the bottom of the rig, but what the other guys have said, Steadicam Merlin might be the only way to go for the price range.
Click to expand...


ah ok cool:). I was going to say stay below 7 lbs or a vest system will be almost a must. I found the merlin worked pretty decent with the 5D, 16-35 f2.8 and small monitor on the spar bottom. It was very heavy on the arms for any length of time but worked well.
 
It is a shame that there isn't a way to angle the monopod leg backwards to move the center of gravity when flying the camera. Monopods are very useful for stills but I don't want my wrist to need surgery. However, stripped down it might be a little over 3 lbs. depending on the lens!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top