Halo Rig HD vs The Fig Rig - Whats your take on them or a better solution

Superfresa66 said:
everything you can do i can do better,
i can do everything better than you,
no you can... yes i can...

they both look great to me, but I still prefer my DVMultiRig Pro by DVTEC
http://www.dvtec.tv/id33.html

I have work with that unit 3 full days nonstop and i could still keep on going... I love the fact i don't have to carry the weight of my camera and extras on my arms, I only use y arms to frame the camera. The weight goes to the shock mount that rest on my waist. And I have a great amount of mobility as well!
Click to expand...


It does say one VS the other in the title :)

lol, that thing is pretty nifty... for $500

The mini is actually just like a "figrig" type stabilizer. You do get a lot more to hold on to with a Halo Rig. Superfresa... wonder if you can attach the hip brace to the bottom of the halo rig hd, then of course use the atlas support to support the halo rig and hip brace, and then you have.....

SUPER RIG!
 
Last edited:
what do you mean, what hurts is inserting that rod in your skull :cheesy:

lol stole that from hbsboards.com
 
CameronMcC said:
how is the build quality for the top shoe mount? metal? plastic? How much for extras, and holes drilled?
Click to expand...


Top shoe mount is made of solid metals which are purchased from a retailer, very rigid. They are not made by Halo Rig themselves.

The accessories are listed here: http://halorig.com/index.php/halo-rig-d-rig-video-camera-stabilizer-shop

There is no extra charge for installation, so customers have been getting from 1 to 3 extra top shoe mounts installed on their rigs. Any other reasonable customization would be included at no charge.

They ship fast so make sure you email your requests when ordering. You will receive a confirmation shortly after.
 
Last edited:
Superfresa66 said:
everything you can do i can do better,
i can do everything better than you,
no you can... yes i can...

they both look great to me, but I still prefer my DVMultiRig Pro by DVTEC
http://www.dvtec.tv/id33.html

I have work with that unit 3 full days nonstop and i could still keep on going... I love the fact i don't have to carry the weight of my camera and extras on my arms, I only use y arms to frame the camera. The weight goes to the shock mount that rest on my waist. And I have a great amount of mobility as well!
Click to expand...

ive never used a fig rig type of gizmo so i cant say whether it effective or not for me but there are people that like it.

i persoanlly love my Multirig Pro as well. this thing is so versatile and with the monopod attached you can go for ever leaving your hands to grace along the camera for simple operation without having to hold the weight.

david
www.davidprobst.com
 
so far I'm leaning towards the Halo. I know Manfrotto makes a great product, but I don't see what the extra cash is worth that i can't do by adding a pistol grip to the bottom and having them drill a few extra holes on the crossbar (which according to an earlier post is free) .

Now I have to decide to with the round bottom or the flat bottom.
 
Like the man said.. if you can't see the difference, why pay for the difference? Buying the Halo will leave you a lot more beer money in your pocket!
 
I've never used a genuine Fig-Rig, but I have experimented with a number of home-built cpvc pipe rig-ups all based on the same physical principle (http://exposureroom.com/members/DavidCheok/reviews/post/270/), including simple handle bar configurations, squares, rectangles and near-circular octagons.

Frankly, provided the rig is well balanced, I've found that a simple handle bar arrangement performs just as well a closed ring-type structure.

It seems to me that the the main conceptual principle behind a circular configuration is that, in its vertical axis at least, it more evenly distributes the gravitational forces exerted on the rig when accessories are attached unevenly at various points i.e. helps to keep the centre of gravity central. Added to which, a circular structure is intrinsically stronger than a square and 25% lighter than a square of the same diameter.

I've often wondered why Manfrotto decided to eliminate the vertical struts in Mike Figgis's original design (Wheel-Cam) which allowed the cross bar height to be adjusted vertically, but I guess they considered the ergonomic trade-off between total weight and fine balance, and elected to fix the bar at a point that would be suitable for most cameras, considering also that the rig will be most often used within 90 degrees from the upright position. Of course, with a rectangular rig it's relatively easy to introduce a mechanism for adjusting the position of the bar....well not so easy with glued pvc pipe, but certainly with aluminium using threaded rods or some sliding screw clamps.

Probably for similar reasons Manfrotto chose not to provide means (slot or otherwise) of lateral adjustment of the mounting plate on the bar (would need to be wider etc), which appears to be fixed at a central point. Still, it would be a nice feature to have, and for handle-bar or rectangular rigs, I would say is a must.

The cross-bar on the new (cut-down) version of the Halo-rig looks quite wide. Maybe you could consider adding some slot or serial hole arrangement for lateral adjustment? Just wondering though, whether in cutting off the bottom portion of the rig, you are not actually destroying the basic fig-rig concept? Why then bother to have the rest of the structure semi-circular?

It might also be stressed, when considering relative price and durability, that the halo hoop is made of pvc pipe, whereas the Fig-Rig is all aluminium. For sure, the lighter the better. Not sure how much the Halo weighs - the bare Fig Rig is about a Kg (2.2 lb). Carbon fibre of course would be a great alternative, but I shudder to think what Manfrotto would charge for that.

The main drawback, as I see it, of this type of rig, is the tendency to dip/judder when walking. No doubt experienced fig-riggers have mastered the art of the Groucho/stealth walk whilst keeping the arms extended with a firm grip, but it sure isn't easy - maybe I need to work-out in the gym more, or take up tai-chi.

I have experimented with a fish-pole suspension arrangement (similar to the Atlas support), which helps alleviates arm fatigue, but frankly, in my opinion, does little or anything to reduce dip/judder when walking, and of course looks super silly. Hanging weight to the bottom of the rig (monopod or whatever) might (seem to) add a little more stability, but again, in doing so one is effectively destroying the closed loop dynamics and introducing a pendulum effect. Then you start getting into consideration of counter-weights here and there and the whole thing becomes unmanageably heavy, for little added benefit. Better to keep it simple and light, and as far as possible attach accessories on the inside the frame, where space allows.
 
Last edited:
For me,

The Fig Rig and rigs of similar design are not akin to steadicams, and it's wrong to thing of them as such. Really, they are for slightly smoothing out the handheld look. Best when you WANT a hand-held look, but not shaky-cam. In that use, they are brilliant. They allow me to make some large combination moves in a relatively smooth fashion. They are also terrific for running shots either on flat ground or up/down steps, etc. It conveys the motion without driving the picture over the edge.

I really battled over whether to get one or a glidecam, but for most of my work, I want and need the look of reality. Not the rather "dreamy smooth" look of a real counterbalanced stabilizer.

People really need to consider their use before purchasing a stabilizer. I can lay the Fig down when I go on sticks and not worry that anything is going to break. It's just a piece of metal. I balance it on the curb. I brace it against a wall, I can hold it above my head or near the ground. I can dutch angle it inches off the ground (try that on a steadicam). I can put it in my lap while someone pushes me on a dolly or I ride in the back of an SUV. These things are very flexible tools.

Anyway, I had seen Figgis' early ideas, and frankly, I like the way this unit is implemented very much. I think Manfrotto made excellent compromises.
 
I fully agree with the above mentioned. I have a glidecam 2000, and rarely do i use it, as more often than not i need the handheld look.. Personally i'm looking for tools that are capable of multiple needs and this circular design seems like it has a lot going on.

I'm leaning more towards the full Halo, but may wait for a sale to match the price of the Halo HD
 
BTW - I would have to agree with PerroneFord's earlier comment that the flat base plate of the new Halo rig hardly constitutes a self-support, when the camcorder itself forms part of that support, and liable to rock back and too......ouch. Maybe you could consider some flip out leg arrangement.

For round bottom rigs, the Quick-Base unit obviously does the job but I'm thinking that you could also use or adapt a folding guitar stand, maybe not whilst loading accessories, but as a portable support in the field. Possibly more convenient than a tripod also.
 
With the Halo Rig HD, we have opened up a lot more possibilities to do whatever works best for you.

I also appreciate your comments and suggestions too.

We have tried a few things from a flip out bottom, to adding permanent supports. We are always open to suggestions. With the 1/4 mount you are able to attach anything you would like to support your rig. Tripod is my favorite since the long quick release plate of my tripod becomes a pretty decent base to set the rig down. When I was filming run and gun the monopod is perfect. It gives you a variation of height when you need ground support - or helps stabilize when you lift off and are moving around.

I have access to either styles, and would prefer the options with the HD over a full halo. But thats why we carry both each person has their own shooting style and needs.
 
Still, I dont really understand how you can justify the price when the hoop frame is made from PVC pipe, albeit a single piece that has been heat bent. Cost of raw materials must be what $10, maybe $15 if the cross bar is solid aluminium, which I suspect it's not - from the photo, looks more like aluminium square tube or maybe two-sided angle, at least on the full halo rig ?
 
Last edited:
I could give you a list of reasons to help you understand... but most likely the same reason the figrig charges $359 for about $20 in 'supplies'. There are a lot more factors that add to the 'cost' of supplies, manufacturing, marketing and delivering a good quality product.

We use hardened aluminum for all our cross supports. The design is solid and there hasn't been any concerns yet. Aluminum is not as ridged as other materials out there, it could bend or dent which is rather permanent. The outside Halo of the Halo Rigs is virtually indestructible...

Most important - we keep our cost down so we can help anyone afford a good stabilizer. This is hard to do these days from products made in the USA.
 
Last edited:
Jumping in here because I'm now considering buying Fig Rig or Halo HD (or Halo Original) in the next day or two. (When renting a Fig Rig for a week here is $75, and I may have to do that twice...)

I know WorBry commented on this in part but would like to hear from others as well:

Does the Halo HD's flat bottom adversely affect the stabilizing effects of this type of design? Please comment on any case -- panning, tilting and rotating the camera on its side (to turn the image 90 degrees left or right, for example).

What's the weight of each? Fig Rig, Halo Original, Halo HD? Does greater weight in this case help or hurt stabilization?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top