Glidecam HD1000 vs HD2000 for 5d mark 2 ?
- Thread starter Fellipe
- Start date
Throwback
Well-known member
I can't claim experience of this model (though have been using similar stabilizers for years), but this week I have been exchanging emails with (the very helpful and friendly) Tom Howie at Glidecam about the HD1000 vs HD2000, prior to placing an order (in my case, to fly a Nikon D7000 and Sigma 8-16mm). I'm more concerned about overall weight and stability than size, but it is clear from Tom that the longer column of the HD2000 allows use of fewer counterweights, if extended, than on the HD1000, so that the overall weight (i.e. camera + Glidecam) can be lower on the bigger model despite the fact that, on its own, it weighs a bit more. Tom cites the following figs (lens not specified, but is a constant: looking at the specifications for the HD1000 and its counterweights, it looks as if the lens used weighed around 1.35lbs/610g):
'The Glidecam HD1000 in its shortest mode with the Canon 5D = 6 lbs and 7 ¾ Oz.
The Glidecam HD2000 in tall mode with the Canon 5D = 6 lbs and 3 ¾ Oz.'
Of course, a longer column and wider spread of the counterweight wings means that the moment of inertia is increased too, which should be a considerable advantage, altho' those with actual use of both models, or one model balance with different length/weight combinations, will be better able to advise on any operational differences. Tom also mentioned that the performance of the HD2000 gimbal is slightly better: again, others may be able to comment on whether this is noticeable.
Hope this helps,
Roland
'The Glidecam HD1000 in its shortest mode with the Canon 5D = 6 lbs and 7 ¾ Oz.
The Glidecam HD2000 in tall mode with the Canon 5D = 6 lbs and 3 ¾ Oz.'
Of course, a longer column and wider spread of the counterweight wings means that the moment of inertia is increased too, which should be a considerable advantage, altho' those with actual use of both models, or one model balance with different length/weight combinations, will be better able to advise on any operational differences. Tom also mentioned that the performance of the HD2000 gimbal is slightly better: again, others may be able to comment on whether this is noticeable.
Hope this helps,
Roland
HansSteinert
Well-known member
Get the 2000.
deltoidjohn
Veteran
Definitely the Hd2000. I've used the 5dmkII with a 17-40 on the HD4000 and it was a little bit of overkill, but only just. I wouldn't want to go too much smaller than that. If you are using decent glass it's almost certain you'll go over the 3 pound limit of the HD1000.
Pookie
Veteran
No offense intended, but the Indian knockoff Glidecam is not worth the money (glad you like it, but...).There's no comparison between the knockoff and the real thing, the workmanship, lack of quality control etc, there is a reason the price is where it is...As far as the 1000 vs the 2000 is concerned, it depends on how you're using the 5D. The only realistic add-on to put on any camera on a stabilizer tends to be a shotgun mic, and as they don't add much weight, the 1000 is a good choice for a DSLR. You don't use telephoto lens on a stabilizer, and a grip just adds unwanted extra weight, so the 1000 is probably your best choice plus as you already mentioned, the smaller size of the 1000 makes it easier to use and gives you more opportunity to shoot lower or in tighter spaces, without having to lug around extra weight.Just keep away from the knockoffs (sorry Martin).
Huh?
The glidecams are known for not being superb quality gear. Besides, they're not even expensive -- just the knockoff that's even cheaper.
The more interesting question is, have YOU compared them? I have, otherwise I'd be quiet...
HansSteinert
Well-known member
I completely disagree.
Pookie
Veteran
Where exactly is the information to show that "Glidecams are known for not being superb quality gear"?You seem to be speaking of a "proven" fact, I'd like to read it.Now if you're comparing a Glidecam to a Steadicam, then the Steadicam will always come out ahead, although (if we're just looking at hand held) the field is tighter.Now here you're comparing a Glidecam (I'm assuming a hand held model) to one of the Indian knockoffs, and saying they are the same, only cheaper.... I get the idea that you haven't a great deal of experience with stabilizers in general, other than the knock off versions in which case you wouldn't have too much to compare one to the other.The Indian knock offs are very well known for their lack of quality control and attention to details. If you were to spend a not insignificant amount of time in correcting the issues with them, you could come up with a nicely working stabilizer, but it does take time and some money to get them up to an acceptable level of performance. A Glidecam on the other hand is workable straight out of the box, training time not included.If you were talking about the full body rigs the Indian knock offs sell, then the problems are much greater and require too much work getting them to a useable condition that could be considered "professional", and able to repeat shot after shot without the need to be constantly re-adjusted on virtually every take, not to mention how uncomfortable the vests are to use for even a relatively short period.Now, yes I am familiar with stabilizers, from the small handheld up to The Steadicam Archer 2, my present primary rig.If you are happy with your Indian version, then that's great, but in terms of usability, they aren't a good investment, and it's better to hold out and buy a Glidecam, and avoid the inevitable issues that arise. I assume we're talking hand held here, if we're looking at full rigs, I will always say to get a Steadicam over Glidecam every time (Basson have some very nice rigs available now as well) and keep away from the knock off versions.
Michael Carter
Veteran
Google the Blackbird Stabilizer; I've been researching various solutions out there, it's the one I'll likely get when the time comes.
Pookie
Veteran
I keep forgetting about Blackbird, they have come up with a very nice stabilizer indeed, let's just hope they expand their line a little more though.
Postmaster
Dark Side of the Camera
I second that. I have the big model with a full blown arm, vest and all.
1. the vest is a PITA
2. the Arm needs at least a 35 lbs camera, otherwise the springs are to strong (no mater what you dial it in) and it keeps bobbing.
3. the gimbal is not made precise enough - dynamic balancing can drive you nuts.
Glidecam from HD2000 upwards are not perfect but workable.
I did a job with a Chinese rig (not mine - production rented it) that worked surprisingly good - was about the same price range as the Glidecam rigs.
Frank
Well, there's dvxuser right there.
You be a steadycam operator contracted with LucasFilm for all I care. I have NOT clamied ripoffs are generally better --- they're crap -- except the proper Glidecam ripoffs. Now that's all I actually stated in the first place --- did I not?
The previous (non-quick release) versions of Glidecam have been critized for prize<->quality ratio. Now of course THAT is relevant in the case of me claiming that my Indian knockoff is, if not identical, working flawlessly for it's inteded purpose with similar build quality as the original. Now I know you US peeps have issues with buying anything not actually made in the USA, fine, whatever bro.
HD4000 is 369 on B&H. That's a price drop since I had it/also bought Indian copy/sold original. If in USA that's a obvious choice: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/193814-REG/Glidecam_GL4000_4000_PRO_Camcorder_Stabilizing.html
Think I paid about 250 for mine, so if living in Europe/Asia there's still a few bucks to save on a ripoff. And, maybe we should clarify the fact the there's a million companies making ripoffs -- again, I've never stated chinese/indian/whatever copies are better -- if you look through my posts you'll rather find me saying they are s**t -- but not the cinecity 4000 proper copy. Because it's great. And, if it wasn't, I wouldn't have bothered to open my mouth in the first place.
Last edited:
Throwback
Well-known member
Getting back to the original question, as I said in my response to Fellipe, the HD2000 seems the better bet: unfortunately supply is so poor here in the UK that - with no stock of HD2000s due here until end of Aug/mid-September, and a project before that - I had to go with the HD1000. That said, at full extension of the column and wings it has plenty of inertia and, moreover, with the Nikon D7000 (780g) and Sigma 8-16mm (555g) and a Manfotto 394 quick release (280g) it only requires 6 of the 8 supplied counterweights, giving a total weight (i.e. inc. HD1000) of 2.97kg (6.55lbs), which is lower than I anticipated (the comparison of overall weights in my earlier posting quoted the figures from Glidecam for the HD1000 at its shortest extension) and suggests, at full extension, the HD1000 can be lighter overall than the longer HD2000. Just like the cheesycam review suggests, the HD1000 flies well, and, as Tom Howie at Glidecam said in my earlier email correspondence with him, it works far better with a 3lb-ish load than a much lighter load (not that with any of these Glidecams sans vest you would want to add weight for the fun of it: I am used to using other stabilizers, but this is the first for me with an offset handle and it really doesn't take long to feel the pain). As other posters have suggested, whether the HD1000 would suit a Canon 5d mkii (only 30g/just over 1 oz heavier) will depend on the lens, and room wanted for growth - balanced against the very small size. I am conscious that Fellipe may have made his choice by now (have you?), but this may help someone else...Roland.
homestar_kevin
Well-known member
I have been using the hd1000 with my t2i and it works perfectly.
For a 5d though, I would say the extra money for the hd2000 would be worth it
For a 5d though, I would say the extra money for the hd2000 would be worth it
It's worth watching the video for pointers about using the Glidecam, but as far as "she she explains why she went for the 4000 over the 2000" you can sum that up in one sentence "cause the 4000 takes more weight", so bear that in mind, because that sentence comes near the beginning of the video and the video is 15 minutes long. She says nothing else about the 4000 vs 2000/1000, it's just down to weight, basically she thinks it's really easy to go over the weight limit of the 1000/2000 with an 5D the second you put on anything extra like a battery grip, bigger lens, mic etc.
G
Guest
Guest
If you have you own custom weights to add on to the sled base, then it doesn't really matter which one you go for.
JoeJITSU
Veteran
I have had and tested the indian copy as well and I must say that the Glidecam Hd2000 is of better quality...the Glidecam 2000 pro , I didn't really like the build but it did fly effectively. It just all depends on how you feel with it, as you can see there are a little bit of operators that prefer the indian copy. My copy was not good, I was having stripped bolts and it was much like my indian shoulder Rig, Poorly built. DONT get the shoulder Rigs for sure...The flags strip and get loose and I just hate using that rig.
Anyways, it also depends if you are going to throw an LCD and so forth. My wife has the Steadicam Flyer and she is in love with it...Shes been flying for over 10 years and I always get her take on Stabilizers.
Anyways, it also depends if you are going to throw an LCD and so forth. My wife has the Steadicam Flyer and she is in love with it...Shes been flying for over 10 years and I always get her take on Stabilizers.