GLIDECAM 4000 Question

Y

Young Gun

Member
This question was probably answered already somewhere, but I need to ask.

I've read on websites that the Glidecam 4000 can hold up to 10lbs and can hold the XL2 and the DVX camcorders. So, I assume it can hold the HVX.

BUT...

...can it hold with the 35mm adaptors, lenses, etc added?

Has anyone used or have experience with the Glidecam?

Much appreciated. Thanks.
 
Regardless of the capcity of the Glidecam, you will not be able to safly handhold that much weight on a stabilizer. Look for a system with an arm & vest.

Also; don't forget to add in the weight (and cost!) of a radio follow focus system for your 35mm lenses.


- Mikko
 
Very true. I operate the HVX200 and glidecam 2000 and even it takes a toll on the arm. I cant imagine upgrading to the 4000 and adding 5 more lbs.
 
Hey there,

I am atually trying to balance my HVX200 to my Glidecam 2000. Can you you offer any config advice? Where to mount the base plate, how many weights? telescope all the way or none at all. I'm just shooting in the dark here, so any help would be great.

Best,

MJ
 
The glidecam 4000 says it works on cameras up to 10 pounds.

I just got done working on a feature using a lot of steadicam. Our rig weighed 12.5 pounds. I wouldn't want to put more than that on the rig.
 
Hey there,

I am atually trying to balance my HVX200 to my Glidecam 2000. Can you you offer any config advice? Where to mount the base plate, how many weights? telescope all the way or none at all. I'm just shooting in the dark here, so any help would be great.

Best,

MJ
Click to expand...
Well first of all you must know you are pretty much maxing out the 2000 with the HVX. I have used it several times with success and great looking shots, so I will try and give you all i know.

First of all, before I ever begin to balance my camera I remember to do a couple of things:
1) I have the HVX loaded with the battery, a tape, and one p2 card. (two if you have them)
2) I also have the LCD and viewfinder in shooting position.
3) Last of all I have the lens cap removed.

These things are a must, because if you balance the camera first and then insert tape/p2, remove lens cap, or pop out LCD the balance is ruined.

With that said I have 6 weight discs on the front and 7 on the back. I believe those are all of my weights. Anyway, I have the post of the glidecam 2000 a little less than an inch above the 'sled'. I found that telescoping the post is only relevant for lighter cameras (remember the drop test from the glidecam cd?) and since the HVX is a beast on the 2000, it is best to not extend it.

After these issues are addressed, it is a matter of slightly altering the weights at the bottom and fine adjusting the camera position at the top.

Any ?'s PM me.

-Ryan

EDIT: This is to help those who have a glidecam 2000 and HVX wanting to utilize their equipment. If you own an hvx and are looking to buy, please look at a glidecam 4000 or higher model for use with camera.
 
Extending the post gives the weights more leverage for balance, and therfore allows you to carry less of them.

With a handheld rig like the Glidecam, you want to ALWAYS have the post extended as far as possible to minimize the amount of counter weight necesarry to balance the camera.

- Mikko
 
Ditto on not trying to use the Glidecam without a vest. It probably is OK for a
60 second shot here and there- but when I first got mine (an Indian knockoff)
I used it for two or three hours straight per day sometimes for about two weeks. I thought there was no problem - no apparent soreness, etc. Then a couple of weeks later, shoulder pain. 2 months later, I still can't extend my arm out to the side without pain. I bought a vest.
 
mikkowilson said:
Extending the post gives the weights more leverage for balance, and therfore allows you to carry less of them.

With a handheld rig like the Glidecam, you want to ALWAYS have the post extended as far as possible to minimize the amount of counter weight necessary to balance the camera.

- Mikko
Click to expand...

I can't argue with the steadi cam guru, but tell me if this is just my imagination: It seems the camera is more 'steadi' with full weights and no extension vs extension with less weights.

If you take strength of operator out of the equation, it's either weights and no extension provides better performance... or it's an illusion.
 
Well.. you're right, but only partly! It's not an illusion, but it's very important to understand what you are experiencing.

Extending the post gives the weights more "stabilizing leverage" over Tilt and Roll. - However it doesn't affect resistance to Pan. The weight's effectiveness over Pan is adjusted by sliding them out from the post on the base. - Of course for maximum stbaility you want them fully out from the post whenever feasable.

So, by removing weights and telescoping the post to match while reducing overall weight, doesn't effect Tilt & Roll stabilty, it does reduce Pan stabilty.


So yes, operator strength aside, it is more beneficial to stabilty to carry the extra mass for the benefit of Pan. However due to the design of the Glidecam, you really want to get as much weight off there as possible initially so that you can concentrate on a good shot and not breaking your wrist.


Which is the "best" approach? Try them both and see what you prefer.
It's almost always the case that having a lighter rig is more important.


- Mikko
 
Last edited:
mikkowilson said:
So yes, operator strength asside, it is more beneficial to stabilty to carry the extra mass for the benefit of Pan. However due to the design of the Glidecam, you really want to get as much weight off there as possible initially so that you can concentrate on a good shot and not breaking your wrist.

- Mikko
Click to expand...

"Which way to the gun show? I've got two tickets and you're invited!"
I'll keep on trucking the extra weight :)

steroidsguy.jpg
 
=Prodigy= said:
Very true. I operate the HVX200 and glidecam 2000 and even it takes a toll on the arm. I cant imagine upgrading to the 4000 and adding 5 more lbs.
Click to expand...

recently bought the 4000 from a fellow dvx-er & the thing kills to support it w/o the brace (after a few mins)... since i'm using it for a documentary i'll stick w/ the cheaper arm brace. but for bigger jobs i'd go for a steadicam.

i do believe the 2000 would be unable to balance a hvx.
 
r_dahl said:
i do believe the 2000 would be unable to balance a hvx.
Click to expand...

I've done it. The 2000 can be used with the HVX, but I would ONLY do it if you happen to own one. I am 100% sure the 4000 model would be a better choice. The 2000 is really pushing the limits. I shoot with a tape, 1 p2 card and the battery. I'm convinced balancing would become impossible if I added a single accessory to the mix. (mattebox, monitor, so on)

I do it because I happened to own a 2000 before I got my hvx.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top