Hey, Check Out This New Stabilizer: STEDDIEPOD

[Dave Largent]

Hi,
Any opinions? Like a Flowpod with tripod feet.
Anyone tried it yet? Let us know how it works.

It's at www.ezprompter.com.

Dave

[Boyd Ostroff]

I like the little radio-controlled truck on their site with a DVX-100 mounted on it - the "RC-CAM"....

[Charles Papert]

Dave,

Since it doesn't have a gimbal (unlike the Flowpod, Glidecam, Steadicam JR) etc., it would have limited axial stabilizing ability, especially for slow moves. You could easily achieve the same effect using a lightweight tripod with the center column extended and the feet spread out (but not extended).

[Dave Largent]

Hi Charles,
Could you briefly explain what a gimbal is? (I hear it referred to all the time but am unsure of the meaning.)
And do you think the Flowpod would be a better way to go
to get those "floating" shots?
Oh, and what problems did you see with the Magiqcam?
Thanks,
Dave

[Charles Papert]

Dave,

The gimbal isolates the operator's movements from the camera assembly. It does this by allowing each axis to swivel on bearings, meaning that you can move the support handle around in any direction and the rig will remain unaffected. With a non-gimballed system, any rotation of your own wrist will translate directly onto the frame. Because of the weight in the hand, this effect will be minimized but not nearly as much as with a gimballed system.

[Dave Largent]

Thanks Charles,
I was wondering if you could name a couple hand-held
stabilizers you feel are well designed (quality gimbal and so forth)and that would be appropriate for the VX2000 (w/wideangle, mic, light) for getting those floating shots. My use here is for slow- paced walking (no running) and for moving slowly in a small room.
Also, what is your opinion of the arm braces?
Dave.
P.S. I would understand that your mentioning particular models
doesn't mean other models aren't as good. Just would like
to know a couple models that come to mind "off the top of
your head".

[Dean Harrington]

is an important element if you're going to use the mono-pod as a stablizer. I made a monopod with a leg attachment that does the same thing as the steadipod and costs much less. It works well in a crowd as a replacement for a tri-pod and that's about it.
I'm not sure how the flow-pod by varizoom compares but having a gimble is better than not.

[Alan Craven]

There is a commercial version of the monopod with a foot support called the Duopod.

The origins of this are Swedish, I think, but it was originally manufactured and marketed by a firm called Uniloc in the UK. Uniloc was an off-shoot of Benbo going bust, and now seem to have gone into oblivion themselves.

There are two versions of the device, of which the Pro is a very substantial and rigid device. Details are available at:

http://www.16x9inc.com/duopod/pro.shtml

[Dean Harrington]

looks pretty good. Site is down - don't need it as mine is working well but wonder what it costs?

[Alan Craven]

As far as I recall, mine cost about UK£120 about eight years ago. These days I use it with a Gitzo 1238 head and a Manfrotto sliding plate to balance my Canon XM1 with Sony 1.7X convertor on the front.

I have got away with using it in situations where tripods are prohibited - that was how it came to be developed, so the stry went - but for me, it is at its best in public bird-watching hides. I can wedge it between my knees and the woodwork and it is as rigid as a tripod, but far less cumbersome in the confined space of a busy hide.

I use a carbon fibre Gitzo Mountaineer tripod whenever possible.

[Mike Rehmus]

Do you get to the train museum often?

[Alan Craven]

Not since just after it opened!

One frightening event on the same lines (sorry!) though. They just had the 100th anniversary celebrations at the locomotive works at Doncaster, thirty miles up the line towards London. I can remember all too clearly visiting the 50th anniversary there!

[Gints Klimanis]

So, is the Steddiepod no better than a poor man's stabilizer: add 1/3 camera weight to each of the three legs.

http://www.ezprompter.com/steddiepod.htm

After axial stability has been acheived, what is the next improvement? Some sort of shock mount to deal with displacement along the three axes ?

[Charles Papert]

Gints:

Because of the principles of leverage, you do not need to equal the camera's weight at the bottom of the rig, unless you were gripping it in the middle. By gripping it towards the top, you can use a fractional amount of counterweight (think of the system horizontally, and this becomes more apparent).

The secondary isolation after axial is spatial, i.e. the up-and-down, side-to-side and fore-and-aft movement. The most jarring of these in a handheld situation is up-and-down. A handheld stabilizer uses the innate ability of the human arm to stabilize (carrying a full cup of coffee, for instance), while a larger system recreates the effect mechanically with a sprung arm and support vest. Interestingly, many of the lower-end arm and vest systems do not do as good a job isolating the vertical movement as a handheld system, so you may actually see better results from a quality handheld stabilizer.

I saw the Steddiepod today at Birns and Sawyer in Holllywood, it didn't do much for me, as suspected. I honestly feel like that sort of thing can be easily jerry-rigged.

While there, I also saw some literature on the new ABC product, the not so sexily named Clip and Go. It seems like a smart and solid design. I haven't seen it in person so I can't truly recommend it, but it might be worth checking out.