Extra cheap merlin style stabilizer

It's a decent looking unit for sure. I see the front to back adjustment on both the camera and the gimbal -- they can hit each other it appears, but no side to side adjustments. The shots of the top area don't show offset placement holes/slots either. I'm probably missing something. Anyone with one yet?

Would be nice to see footage shot on the unit as I see all sorts of camera angle changes in the demo video on eBay.
 
Wrote to the seller, Bulent, and got a reply. You will have to find your camera's center of gravity and drill your own hole(s) if you need to position your camera off to one side or another to balance it.:

"Side to side balance ( for minidv types ) is very easy with this, middle weights can slide side to side and this is work perfect. For DSLR, it is little harder but results are perfect. All you need find your DSLR's center of gravity. You can drill holes top of the camera plate for this. All my customers choose this solution, and all satisfied with this.

And you can drill the gimbal rails for attach weights -- under top plate - you can see 2 alum. bar.

Weights simply washers, you must read description."
 
As I said, look at more costly version if you want fluent adjustments.

All cheap strabilizers have problems with top platform.
I don't get why this is, as this is most important thing.

If fact I know solution on this.
Buy two 2-way macro rails at ebay. It works good.
Better than FlyCam Nono awful top platform.
 
Well, yes. However, this unit becomes a DIY for DSLRs. Maybe in a later version he'll drill some holes. Granted, I had a Steadicam Jr. that had a top plate with a slew of holes in it and it wouldn't balance to the camera I had at the time. Found a Glidecam 1000 used on eBay for $50 that I was able to use it with.

You're right, micro rails and sliding/lockable quick release setups will work, too. Adds to the price and weight though.

The $215 one does have a multi-hole top plate and nice front/rear knob controlled adjustments. This one has front/rear adjustments as well.

One thing people should know is that your camera balance changes with lenses, filters, anything you add to it or change on it -- even if your lens extends/contracts when focusing/zooming. All will require some tweaking to get the unit balanced again. The easier it is to make the adjustments the happier you'll be.
 
Last edited:
I watched a few of the Sturdycam videos and read some of the other forum posts. The Steadicam forum didn't like the looks of it: "if only it didn't look like it was built from random parts off a disassembled Huffy I bought in the early 90s" and I'm not crazy about the eye-poker in the front -- looks like you could even get it in your shot with a wide enough lens.

However, the test footage I saw from it looked pretty good and the how to balance it video made it look a lot easier than some I've played with:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlOea2fZz2A

Granted, you can buy a Glidecam 2000 for not much more -- Glidecam is not as easy to balance though but has some options.
 
Crosby! said:
Granted, you can buy a Glidecam 2000 for not much more -- Glidecam is not as easy to balance though but has some options.
Click to expand...

Glidecam HD is much much easier to balance than this thing.

I really do not get your affgection to this thing.
Not long ago I provided link to professionally build stabilizer for about $215.
And it is on other planet compared to this.
 
I've never used the Sturdycam, only going by what I saw. I have a Glidecam and the Sturdycam balancing video made it look easier to balance to me. I like the outboard weights compared to the sliding top and the knobs on the Glidecam -- I know, sliding QR plates or a macro rails to the rescue.

The one for $272 (incl. shipping -- again, you can buy a Glidecam 2000) did look decent and I liked the adjustments on the top but haven't seen any video from it showing how well it works, adjusts, etc. There's a lot of stabilizer designs out there and some don't work well at all from what I've seen/read. Demo videos go a long way in helping us see how well things work.

I'm not in the market for another. I have two setups that work for my needs. Just inputting my thoughts from what I've seen. The demo videos for the Sturdycam looked pretty good. I'm not buying one though, just checking what's out there.
 
Balancing Act

Balancing Act

Greetings,
I have been doing a lot of research on these type stabilizers. I currently have the Hague MMC. I really would like to be able to use it with the GH1 and kit lens, but I feel it just too heavy to safely use, due to the plastic ball and socket type joint that can easily become disconnected. I know many people are ok with doing this, but the horizontal screw that it threads into is under a lot of stress and even bends a little. I have successfully balanced it with the kit lens, but it took way too long IMO. In experimenting with the balancing I made a top crossbar yoke that fastened at the center of gravity, that had counter weights to control the roll or (cant). It was roughly 18" long with 4 " on the ends bent downward at roughly 15 degrees or so. This made a huge difference to me in the time it took to balance and the overall stability, but made the weight problem worse. I am in the process of building another Hague style stabilizer that is a little heavier duty. My weak point now is the plastic Traxxs u-joint. Too much play for real precision adjustment. I have tried a heim joint, but the one I had, had too much friction. I saw a build on You-tube that had a work table roller bearing that someone had actually welded a stud onto. It also used the top crossbar design that looked very cool, but I can't find that link again. I am going to continue with the experimentation until I come up with something.
I agree that the top plate is very important. It looks like the GH1's mount is about 3/8" offset from COG. I'll probably stick with the top yoke style as well. The ability to use a threaded weight system on the wings would speed things up.
I saw the newer Hague for the 5d, but am not a fan of that style joint.
Keep in mind that I realize that many of these are DIY devices and not real Steadicams. That said I have seen some good results with some of the builds.There are some people with CNC machines making some great ones, but unfortunately they are not for sale. If I could justify it right now I would probably get a Merlin, or Glidecam, and still may get a Steadytracker just for fun shots.
My 2cents.
EWS
 
Last edited:
EWS:

This page might give you some ideas: http://www.birkbinnard.com/photography/stabilizer/

In particular, the Aurora Bearing Co. CM-8 Ball Rod end might be a workable alternative for the plastic ball/socket joint.

It is interesting that there are so many approaches for building an inexpensive handheld stabilizer. Hopefully someone will come up with a clearly superior design Real Soon Now.
 
Thanks for the link Birk,
I had previously looked at your sight. Nice job of putting all this info together, and sharing it.
I currently have a spare handle assembly made up with a ball end joint similar to the Aurora one in the link. It still has a little too much friction. I did however find this link for a roller ball for a work table which looked similar to the one I mentioned in the You tube link. http://www.woodcraft.com/Product/2000905/1486/Work-Roller-Ball-Bearing-58--1.aspx
The guy welded a threaded stud to the bearing itself. I like the idea in that it is simple with less connections, but I will pick some up tomorrow and start experimenting. I will keep you posted if it works out.
Thanks
 
Last edited:
EWS said:
Greetings,
I have been doing a lot of research on these type stabilizers. I currently have the Hague MMC. I really would like to be able to use it with the GH1 and kit lens, but I feel it just too heavy to safely use, due to the plastic ball and socket type joint that can easily become disconnected. I know many people are ok with doing this, but the horizontal screw that it threads into is under a lot of stress and even bends a little. I have successfully balanced it with the kit lens, but it took way too long IMO. In experimenting with the balancing I made a top crossbar yoke that fastened at the center of gravity, that had counter weights to control the roll or (cant). It was roughly 18" long with 4 " on the ends bent downward at roughly 15 degrees or so. This made a huge difference to me in the time it took to balance and the overall stability, but made the weight problem worse. I am in the process of building another Hague style stabilizer that is a little heavier duty. My weak point now is the plastic Traxxs u-joint. Too much play for real precision adjustment. I have tried a heim joint, but the one I had, had too much friction. I saw a build on You-tube that had a work table roller bearing that someone had actually welded a stud onto. It also used the top crossbar design that looked very cool, but I can't find that link again. I am going to continue with the experimentation until I come up with something.
I agree that the top plate is very important. It looks like the GH1's mount is about 3/8" offset from COG. I'll probably stick with the top yoke style as well. The ability to use a threaded weight system on the wings would speed things up.
I saw the newer Hague for the 5d, but am not a fan of that style joint.
Keep in mind that I realize that many of these are DIY devices and not real Steadicams. That said I have seen some good results with some of the builds.There are some people with CNC machines making some great ones, but unfortunately they are not for sale. If I could justify it right now I would probably get a Merlin, or Glidecam, and still may get a Steadytracker just for fun shots.
My 2cents.
EWS
Click to expand...


This is the post for the Steady Cam I designed and made.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=220386

This was made on CNC, with grood materials. Let me know what you think.

Thanks
 
Yes indeed! This is the one Vitaliy mentions in this thread. Nicely done. I think this is great and I agree with him that the top platform is well made. Your video links helped me get a better picture of it . Thanks.
IMO at this price point you should do well because I think there are a lot of DSLR shooters that would like to have it.
One concern that I have is the no return policy. I understand your time and sweat that went into the design and the actual shop work and milling involved, but for any reason if I purchased it and was dissatisfied then I would put this on the shelf with the Hague MMC that I have.
Although by the looks of it , I am sure it performs well. Any plans for maybe a black powder coated or anodized finish ?
I would like to see some footage with maybe a GH1 and kit lens or even a heavier 5D and see how it does.
I have another question. I was wondering if it actually made any difference having the handle and gimble moving on the X axis instead of having the top plate move to offset the camera. It probably doesn't make a lot of difference but I would think it may be easier to balance if the handle, gimble and the body were all on the same vertical plane. Not sure about this though. Anyway, great job, and hope to see some footage with it real soon.
Thanks
EWS
 
EWS said:
Yes indeed! This is the one Vitaliy mentions in this thread. Nicely done. I think this is great and I agree with him that the top platform is well made. Your video links helped me get a better picture of it . Thanks.
IMO at this price point you should do well because I think there are a lot of DSLR shooters that would like to have it.
One concern that I have is the no return policy. I understand your time and sweat that went into the design and the actual shop work and milling involved, but for any reason if I purchased it and was dissatisfied then I would put this on the shelf with the Hague MMC that I have.
Although by the looks of it , I am sure it performs well. Any plans for maybe a black powder coated or anodized finish ?
I would like to see some footage with maybe a GH1 and kit lens or even a heavier 5D and see how it does.
I have another question. I was wondering if it actually made any difference having the handle and gimble moving on the X axis instead of having the top plate move to offset the camera. It probably doesn't make a lot of difference but I would think it may be easier to balance if the handle, gimble and the body were all on the same vertical plane. Not sure about this though. Anyway, great job, and hope to see some footage with it real soon.
Thanks
EWS
Click to expand...

Thank you for the kind words.

This is a video Steady Cam with a DSLR.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UR3TihKdbZ8

As for the camera plate moving instead of the gimble, I am not sure it would make a difference. I would say what ever is easier to adjust, and as long as you have full control in both directions (X and Y).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top