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

traviswears said:
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.
Click to expand...



Thanks
good news , so canon 17-55 should work as well , I still wonder how with tokina 11-16 or newer version 16-20 .
Please share with us if you get chance to try .
 
My C100 mk1 with the Tokina 11-16mm was slightly top heavy even in its lowest position. I found that I could drop it another 1/4 inch or so, and achieve vertical tilt balance, by slightly loosening the threaded bolts at the bottom of the two rods. I was thinking of getting extension rods but this seems to be enough. I also balance out a Canon 24-105mm.
 
Tim Nitsch said:
How did that combo work out? That would be my first setup until I pick up more lenses.
Click to expand...
The 24-105 worked ok. However, every time you change the zoom you have tweak the balance.

Warning:
On another issue, I mounted my Small HD DP6 on the Ronin M, which worked great. However, I tried to make it lighter by removing the Small Hd battery and using the P-tap on the Ronin M. It fried the monitor. I don't know why. I rechecked the polarity and voltage and it should have worked.
 
Policar said:
http://cinemilled.com/shop/dji-ronin-m-tilt-arm-extensions/

Looks like these might be great for top-heavy rigs. Still holding off on the Ronin M until someone tries the 18-35mm, though.

Thanks for the heads up on the faulty p tap. Condolences on the broken monitor.
Click to expand...


Speaking of the Cinemilled, I saw that they now have a "Ronin M" quick plate, but I thought that the mount on the Ronin M was the same as the original Ronin. Anyone know if that's true?

http://cinemilled.com/shop/dji-ronin-m-quick-plate-universal-ronin-m-mount/
 
Just pulled the trigger. Planning on flying the A7s but also have both C100 mk1 and mk2 and will be purchasing the cine milled extensions. I will report back.
 
The Mark II is a pain in the ass on the big Ronin. The EVF smacks the back of the carriage when it's tilted back.

I used extension arms on my full-size Ronin to get it to work correctly with the C100 Mark II.
 
I just got the helix jr for the c100 mark ii and wow what a huge difference from a usability standpoint. I can hold it for a good long time and not struggle like I have been with the Ronin. Getting pid setting dialed in is for sure nowhere near as easy as the dji system but I think it's worth it
 
The Ronin-M is out of consideration for me. I will buy a Helix or something newer that will come out soon since new gimbals are being introduced at a rate of what seems to be once a week. Someone will step in to fill this niche with something a bit larger than the Ronin-M with more weight and size capacity without weighing a ton or costing a fortune. I agree with the others, I don't want to invest in gear that barely works on the bleeding edge. Just not worth the risk when a paying gig is on the line.
 
Those who have used both: is the Ronin M as smooth as the original Ronin?

Most reviews I've read have indicated that it is significantly less smooth, but I've seen good and bad footage on everything...
 
Policar said:
Those who have used both: is the Ronin M as smooth as the original Ronin?

Most reviews I've read have indicated that it is significantly less smooth, but I've seen good and bad footage on everything...
Click to expand...

Honestly I did not see any great footage from ronin M , even a promo video does not show that . The more I watch you-tube with ronin-m , the less I want it .
 
tom1 said:
Honestly I did not see any great footage from ronin M , even a promo video does not show that . The more I watch you-tube with ronin-m , the less I want it .
Click to expand...

I'm wondering if it's user error, most people getting them are getting their first gimbal. I've seen some decent stuff on Reduser with the Ronin M.

It might also be the double-edged sword of a lighter rig. When you walk with a heavy object it's more stable than a light object. And obviously the gimbal design is not stabilized for Y translation.
 
Some one test it and seems to work

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ds3ZAb9QGBY

there are other test on the C300 on you tube


I tried it with the 1DC, it seems to work all the way to 24-70L EF28-135 with restricted angle, and I can mount a 70-200 2.8 MK2 on it and balance it but cannot get it to tile more than 10deg either way. ( PS I might not have it balanced properly yet)

Still playing around, it is quite good with lighter weight/size cameras like A7 or GH4 or FZ100 or RX10
 
AndreeOnline said:
In the manual that you can download, it mentions cameras as the 1Dc and C100 as tested (and working).

I've ordered one for my 1Dc and expect it to work.
Click to expand...


I got mine early this week trying it out all day today, it just barely fit the 1DC, because of the the extremely heavy weight and size of the 1DC it have to be fairly balance to get it working properly. ( it was only seconds to get the A7, GH4 etc to balance and working)

my physical setting with a 16-35L 2.8 was

horizontal marker Left 2.9 right 3.9
Vertical all the way down to 3.0 ( may be I am wrong)

Depth using the second hole from the back on the back plate, the zero on the plate is at the 0.5 mark on the mount towards the front.




smoothness was acceptable. Ronin Original was too heavy for me.
 
cookinghusband said:
Some one test it and seems to work

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ds3ZAb9QGBY

there are other test on the C300 on you tube


I tried it with the 1DC, it seems to work all the way to 24-70L EF28-135 with restricted angle, and I can mount a 70-200 2.8 MK2 on it and balance it but cannot get it to tile more than 10deg either way. ( PS I might not have it balanced properly yet)

Still playing around, it is quite good with lighter weight/size cameras like A7 or GH4 or FZ100 or RX10
Click to expand...

That footage is acceptably smooth. More translational bounce, but I think that's true with any light gimbal held in that configuration (Nebula 4000 does a little better since it's braced differently).

I would buy that and use that.
 
I've been looking at the ronin-m for a purchase at work but the mixed reviews are making me have 2nd thoughts. We are only shooting on the Nikon D750 and Canon 6D so weight and size are as big as an issue as the Canon c100 but some of the footage and reviews are making me wondering if the Ronin-m is worth the money for the quality. Again it could just be operator error as the video cookinghusband posted didn't look to bad. Just don't want to have my work buy something and have major issues getting it to work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top