C100: Flying C100 on Ronin M (Lightest base plate and FF)

The problem isn't the weight it's the height. The c100 II barely fits on the original Ronin. The evf interferes with tilt. Looks like the helix might be the way to go
 
It really doesn't matter what the weight of the gimbal is. What matters is your technique and walk and how the gimbal is tuned.
I have 3 gimbals. The Ronin, Defy G5 and the Nebula 4000.
The C100 will fly on the Ronin M with light lenses. You probably won't get the 24-105 and C100 on the M.
Somebody said they could get the FS700 on the M with pancake lenses. Why? Why be limited to pancake lenses? You're gonna spend money on a gimbal to be limited?
On the clips above we had the Fs7 on the Ronin with a light lens. And it was a beast to hold. It didn't even fit well. I got it working but tilting up was limited. I would have needed the extension arms to properly fit the Fs7 on the Ronin. Thank the Lord above that the director saw what I could do with the N4000 and after one take and review he said, "We're using that for the rest of the shoot". On the first clip above, there is ZERO way to have used the Ronin or the Ronin M on that clip.

I get smoother footage out of the Nebula 4000 than I get out of the Ronin. And I can go all day with the N4000. It all depends on how the gimbals are tuned. Keep in mind that I usually fly the Gh4 and 12-35 on the N4000. I can adjust the lens from 12 to just past 25mm without touching balance and re-tune.

My suggestion. Don't buy a gimbal thinking "Man I can just get this camera on it as long as I use a light pancake lens".
Click to expand...


Very well said , That is why I cancel my order . There is only one problem from 2 days I do not getting confirmation of my cancel, no any answer , I make order in MARCOTEC.DE .
 
Murph100 said:
Dusty, as always, straight up great info ! :thumbsup: BTW how do you rate the Defy G5 ?
Click to expand...
G5 is my least favorite gimbal. But I was a preorder guy. Im sure their newer devices are better. The Ronin M will be a nice gimbal in that weight category.
 
I still say that looks REALLY tight in there. Ideally you want more space to the rear of the camera.

If the C100/C300 is going to be an "occasionally" on this gimbal while you use it primarily for something smaller , it's probably fine. If the C100 is your usual camera for gimbal work, I'd buy the bigger one.
 
crewboston said:
My Ronin M was delivered yesterday and it seems to work fine with my C100 Mk I and a Tokina 11-16. I had to remove the handle and grip. Here is a test on Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/128145555
Click to expand...

Brilliant, thanks!

This set up looks like it wouldn't work with the longest and heaviest lenses (my 70-200mm f2.8 IS and be-freaking-loved 200mm f2 cry) but I feel like a Sigma 18-35mm with a lone FF could work. Which means an Isco 36 and a small lens could work, which means I'd take the flexibility of using a light rig over the compatibility of using a heavy one.

jbregar is the best, completely right and conservative, but I have to weigh my own needs and it seems he's too conservative. If an ISCO and small prime works and an 18-35mm and wireless FF works, I'd value the lighter rig far over the added flexibility.

Great discussion, though. Seriously one of the best I'd had and I hope to contribute in detail once I get my own Ronin M, and if I have to update to a Ronin after all but whatever... not that big a price to pay.
 
Policar said:
Brilliant, thanks!

This set up looks like it wouldn't work with the longest and heaviest lenses (my 70-200mm f2.8 IS and be-freaking-loved 200mm f2 cry) but I feel like a Sigma 18-35mm with a lone FF could work. Which means an Isco 36 and a small lens could work, which means I'd take the flexibility of using a light rig over the compatibility of using a heavy one.

jbregar is the best, completely right and conservative, but I have to weigh my own needs and it seems he's too conservative. If an ISCO and small prime works and an 18-35mm and wireless FF works, I'd value the lighter rig far over the added flexibility.

Great discussion, though. Seriously one of the best I'd had and I hope to contribute in detail once I get my own Ronin M, and if I have to update to a Ronin after all but whatever... not that big a price to pay.
Click to expand...

I'd be extremely surprised if the C100, Sigma 18-35mm and a wireless follow focus will balance on a Ronin M. If you look at the photo that was posted above, they're using a Canon 24mm f/1.4 L II which weighs 650g and is 3.42" long. The 18-35 Sigma is 161g heavier and about 1.5" longer. Both of these will combine to require the C100 be scooted back further in the carriage... where things are already tight. Including the weight of a wireless FF on there and I'd guess you're going to be outside of the adjustment range of the Ronin M.

I don't really understand buying something that JUST BARELY works with the camera you intend to fly on it often. Why not buy something bigger and not have to worry about it?
 
jbregar said:
I'd be extremely surprised if the C100, Sigma 18-35mm and a wireless follow focus will balance on a Ronin M. If you look at the photo that was posted above, they're using a Canon 24mm f/1.4 L II which weighs 650g and is 3.42" long. The 18-35 Sigma is 161g heavier and about 1.5" longer. Both of these will combine to require the C100 be scooted back further in the carriage... where things are already tight. Including the weight of a wireless FF on there and I'd guess you're going to be outside of the adjustment range of the Ronin M.

I don't really understand buying something that JUST BARELY works with the camera you intend to fly on it often. Why not buy something bigger and not have to worry about it?
Click to expand...

I'll wait it out then. It does seem close, but the videos posted here:

https://vimeo.com/128215617

Indicate a lot of freedom with the 11-16mm (at least if the screen were flipped close). You're right though. I will wait to see. The HDMI port would stick out and is necessary to use for a wireless ff anyway. Maybe with a right angle adapter. But those are the largest lenses I'd use for sure and I'm not that strong, nor are most of the people I collaborate with going to hold such a heavy rig all day.

I'll wait and see. If it works with the 18-35mm and a wireless ff and right angle HDMI it's all I need. If not, I would need a Ronin and an easy rig realistically.
 
The Tokina is even lighter (100g) than the Canon 24mm in the photo posted earlier. The Sigma is 261g heavier than that Tokina. It also carries its weight further forward because it's an inch and a half longer.

The Sigma MIGHT balance. I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't though.

Adding more forward weight by adding a wireless FF is going to make it pretty tough to fit.

I hope it works for ya, but I have my doubts.
 
I'll wait it out, you're right it would be foolish not to spend the extra money if it's a half-assed solution. But I know my needs and they're right on the edge of feasibility it seems. Hence this thread!

Based on the above video it looks like it will be close, but I'll avoid being the first one to try. For my needs it would be a big deal saving the weight, hence if it's on the edge it's ok, but obviously if it works poorly it's not. Thanks for the advice. I'll just wait and see, but I'm encouraged by what I see above. The camera is pretty far forward.
 
jbregar said:
I don't really understand buying something that JUST BARELY works with the camera you intend to fly on it often. Why not buy something bigger and not have to worry about it?
Click to expand...

You don't have to understand it, you just have to accept the fact that it works :) It's portable, built well, weighs less and costs half of the original Ronin. Very important factors for a lot of filmmakers. When the M5 was initially released Movi themselves said the carriage would not support cameras like the c100. Guess what, people found a way.. Given the portability, build quality and base cost, I see many folks doing the same with the M regardless of initial carriage dimensions.
 
LeoGrey said:
You don't have to understand it, you just have to accept the fact that it works :) It's portable, built well, weighs less and costs half of the original Ronin. Very important factors for a lot of filmmakers. When the M5 was initially released Movi themselves said the carriage would not support cameras like the c100. Guess what, people found a way.. Given the portability, build quality and base cost, I see many folks doing the same with the M regardless of initial carriage dimensions.
Click to expand...

Oh, I fully accept the fact that it works. That's fine. I just don't see the point in spending $1400 on something that's going to limit you to using only a specific lens because it really wasn't designed for the size of camera you're putting on it. Like I said, if the C100/C300 was a "once and a while" on the M while using it mostly for a camera that's more in its size range... that makes sense. But if your primary use of the gimbal is flying a C100, why limit your flexibility?

I'd rather rent a full-size Ronin and be able to use what I needed to with it than own a $1400 gimbal that just barely works and limits my lens choices and whether or not I can use a wireless FF.

This is like buying a tiny tripod that can just barely support your C100 and the lightest lens you own because "hey, it's cheap and lighter, right?" It's the videographic equivalent of this:

lumber.jpg

I mean, it's your money and time... so to each his own... and I fully understand it seems to work if you do this, that, or the other thing... but it just seems like a relatively inflexible solution.
 
There is no problem when you using c100 with ronin-m , no any issue with weight , engine will not overheat , just size of ronin-m not support bigger cam .
 
Just a follow-up.

I have the C100 Mk1 and the original Ronin, which work great together. Bought a Ronin-M and used it on my last shoot. What I found was that the C100 doesn't balance perfectly on the RoninM w/the motor off. I was using it w/the Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC, which is one of my go-to lenses for gimbal work.

That said, I balanced it pretty close and turned it on and it worked just as well as my original Ronin.

The motors in the M are powerful enough to make up for the size IMO. I won't have a problem using the C100 Mk1 w/it and it will likely replace my Ronin on any job that doesn't require a FF, or additional kit on the camera. I did have to remove the top handle, my Wooden Camera top plate and the viewfinder. But I leave my viewfinder permanently off so that wasn't an issue.

EDIT: One of the reasons I like the 17-50 w/the Ronin combo is that I can zoom in w/out rebalancing the gimbal. The motors are powerful enough to compensate for this.
I did try this w/the RoninM as well and had no issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top