Beike BK-45 Gimbal Tripod Head
- Thread starter bledyn125
- Start date
- Messages
- 7,085
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I bought one of these last August from Amazon. I would say it's ok for the money but don't expect it to be brilliant. I use it will a 300 f4 and a70-200 f2.8, weight wise these lenses are ok but I probably wouldn't trust it with more. A friend uses it with a 300 f2.8 and seems to get on ok.
When I first got it the movement (pan and tilt) was a little stiff so I loosen the bolts a little. The problem now is it's easier to move but the tilt is a little too loose. The pan gets stiff in places but it's pretty useable in the arc I mainly use. When you see the gimbal videos on you tube don't expect the same with this.
To be honest for the price new it's a good product as it's nearest rivals new are double the price and the wimberley is about £500. If you are willing to look used then there are a few options about in this price bracket (393 manfrotto). I bought a 393 used a month ago in preparation for upgrading to a longer lens next, they don't seem to come up very often in great condition. I tried the 393 with the 300 f4 but it's seems as if it's too big for this lens. I had tried the long nikon telephotos at focus on imaging and the 393 seemed to work well with them.
In short, it kind of depends on the lens you are going to use, how stiff the movement you are willing to accept and not expecting it to spin freely around on your little finger.
When I first got it the movement (pan and tilt) was a little stiff so I loosen the bolts a little. The problem now is it's easier to move but the tilt is a little too loose. The pan gets stiff in places but it's pretty useable in the arc I mainly use. When you see the gimbal videos on you tube don't expect the same with this.
To be honest for the price new it's a good product as it's nearest rivals new are double the price and the wimberley is about £500. If you are willing to look used then there are a few options about in this price bracket (393 manfrotto). I bought a 393 used a month ago in preparation for upgrading to a longer lens next, they don't seem to come up very often in great condition. I tried the 393 with the 300 f4 but it's seems as if it's too big for this lens. I had tried the long nikon telephotos at focus on imaging and the 393 seemed to work well with them.
In short, it kind of depends on the lens you are going to use, how stiff the movement you are willing to accept and not expecting it to spin freely around on your little finger.
- Messages
- 7,085
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Sorry if I've put you off, if I wasn't planning on upgrading to a bigger lens then I would probably not have got the 393 (bought here used), I'm currently still using the gimbal until I get a bigger lens in the future, it's just a more practical size. I've probably made it sound worst than it really is, ok it's not a wimberley but then it's only 1/8 of the price, and 1/2 the price of its nearest rivals.
The 150-500 would be ideal on it.my friend uses his 300 f2.8 on his and he finds it good. His seems to move pretty well and he didn't loosen up any bolts, that is probably part of my problem because I did that and it's now a little sloppy. I'm thinking of tightening the bolt up again as that may help.
When I was looking it was out of the lens master rh-1/2, the manfrotto 393 or the £65 gimbal. To be honest I'm probably too critical regarding movement for the price difference, for a hobby it's pretty good as it only receives occasional use. I would rather use it over my ball head with longer lenses. It also take arca Swiss plates too which is a bonus.
The 150-500 would be ideal on it.my friend uses his 300 f2.8 on his and he finds it good. His seems to move pretty well and he didn't loosen up any bolts, that is probably part of my problem because I did that and it's now a little sloppy. I'm thinking of tightening the bolt up again as that may help.
When I was looking it was out of the lens master rh-1/2, the manfrotto 393 or the £65 gimbal. To be honest I'm probably too critical regarding movement for the price difference, for a hobby it's pretty good as it only receives occasional use. I would rather use it over my ball head with longer lenses. It also take arca Swiss plates too which is a bonus.
OP
- Messages
- 708
- Name
- bleddyn
- Edit My Images
- Yes
rob you didnt put me off i found a couple of reviews and they pretty much said the same thing about them.
i suppose its got to be better than useing my ballhead.i might order one next week and see how it goes
thanks for you input its a appreciated
bleddyn
i suppose its got to be better than useing my ballhead.i might order one next week and see how it goes
thanks for you input its a appreciated
bleddyn
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,099
- Name
- Douglas
- Edit My Images
- Yes
To be honest, a GOOD ballhead is every bit as good as a gimbal head. I have a gimbal head, but prefer using my ball heads, even with long lenses. With the heavier telephotos I use an Arca Swiss ball head. With the friction screw set properly, I can push the lens around with a light touch, and know that it will stop, and stay where I've set it, without giving me any cause for concern, and it's brilliant when using the cameras set to video.
