Interesting new gimbal mount recently arrived at B&H:
Gepe SK-GH01 Gimbal Head Mount. Reasonably priced.
Does anybody have experience of this?
#1. "RE: Gene Gimbal Mount" | In response to Reply # 0jamesvoortman Nikonian since 06th Sep 2004Tue 25-Jun-13 03:31 AM
It looks like a rebadged version of a Benro GH2 gimbal head. Exactly the same and apparently based on a Wimberley WH 200. I have not used the Benro gimbal but I have a Benro tripod and happy with the quality.
If you get a chance to try before buying check the smoothness of rotation in all directions and also, check to see that the tension in the locking knobs can be gradually increased so that a touch of drag can be introduced into the mechanism.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#2. "RE: Gene Gimbal Mount" | In response to Reply # 1Aubrey Nikonian since 07th Jun 2007Tue 25-Jun-13 03:53 AM
Thank you for the information.
I already have a Wimberley and I am pleased with it.
The mention of the head was in a newsletter from B&H . I simply wondered if any Nikonian was using one.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#3. "RE Gepe Pro Gimbal Head SK-GH01 PERSONAL REVIEW" | In response to Reply # 0
>Interesting new gimbal mount recently arrived at B&H:
>Gepe SK-GH01 Gimbal Head Mount. Reasonably priced.
>Does anybody have experience of this?
I did get one 3 days ago. $212 was the lowest price delivered, on Ebay. I could not find any reviews online. There is also a $100 gimbal head that had numerous poor reviews online. A couple reviewers said that one could disassemble and lubricate and/or modify parts to make it work adequately. I have a fair amount of experience working on bicycle, motorcycle and car bearings, so I opted for the pricier unit, figuring it would work better than the cheaper one out-of-the-box and maybe I could make it work even better than that.
Both the panning bearing and elevation bearing did not work smoothly. The friction knobs did not operate smoothly and there was no gradient between the minimum and maximum friction settings. When the friction knobs were left loose for quick reframing, both of the two bearing wobbled.
The panning bearing has an adjustment bolt that could be adjusted to improve the feel, but it made little if any difference. That bearing comes out easily, so I inspected and lubricated it. The cone bearings are TINY, maybe 1.25mm diameter. It was comical. I wish I had photographed it. Lubrication made a significant improvement, but on a 1-10 scale, if Wimberly is 10 and 5 is "adequate", I would call it a 4.
The elevation bearing had even less feel and more excessive friction than the panning bearing. Even when I intentionally unbalance the load, the weight of my 11 pound rig would not tilt by itself with the friction at minimum. I could not disassemble that bearing. On the same scale it is a 2.
In summary, I felt that this head was 2 steps down from my current, inadequately small ball head and Wimberley Sidekick. I took 100 bird photos in an hour. It was frustrating and if I got any decent pictures, it was only because the gimbal head configuration had a lower center of gravity, compared with my Sidekick.
So I returned it and purchased a used Wimberley locally.