Many years ago, I picked up my first gimbal head to use for wildlife photography. Most bird and wildlife photographers, who often use long and heavy lenses in their pursuits, consider the gimbal head as a mainstay for supporting heavy gear packages that enable easy and rapid movement while tracking fast-moving quarry. While I sometimes go hand-held in my photographic chases, I quickly discovered that a gimbal head was a necessity for much of what I was doing.
After discovering the potential for and my desire to get into wildlife videography, it soon became apparent that the camera support I was using for still photography was not going to be the most appropriate for shooting video of quickly moving subjects. Gimbals are perfect for fast-action still photography, but they fall short of providing the smooth panning one needs for capturing high-quality video.
After investigating my options, most signs pointed to a video fluid head, designed specifically for videography. Additionally, it had to be functional with the relative heavy load of camera, super telephoto lens and accessories. At the time I was looking into this, there were very few quality options in video fluid heads that would handle the kind of weight I needed at an affordable price point. Also, I was hesitant to try a dedicated video heard because of the prevailing opinion that they are not well designed for still photography.
At nearly the exact timing of doing my research on this, Gitzo announced they were going to release the GHFG1, a fluid gimbal head! Could this really be true? A fluid gimbal head that delivered what Gitzo promised would be the perfect support for a hybrid still and video wildlife photographer like myself. Additionally, it was going to be launched at a respectable price point (I believe I paid close to $475 for mine in 2017), especially for Gitzo. Gitzo is considered among the best of the best when it comes to camera support systems, and their tripods and heads reflect this in their purchase price. At the time, the cost of the GHFG1 was competitive with the other leading models of regular gimbal heads and was actually lower than several competitor’s models.
For the rest of this post, I will provide an overview of what is different about a fluid gimbal head compared to a regular gimbal and give my review on different aspects of the GHFG1.
Gimbal vs. fluid video vs. fluid gimbal heads
A gimbal head is a camera support that allows for smooth and stable movement of a camera and lens. It consists of a tripod mount and a gimbal mechanism that allows the camera to move via panning (horizontal rotation) and tilting (vertical rotation). These different axis of rotation combine to allow movement in nearly any direction while maintaining balance and stability. Both pan and tilt movements can be adjusted with knobs that are designed to increase or decrease the amount of friction, or drag, that can be applied to each movement. For still photography, most are not concerned with drag and prefer to have quick action in the tilt and pan movements. For videography, being able to control the amount of drag and the capability to provide smooth movement in both orientations is critical for getting smooth video without jerky stops and starts. While possible for some to get acceptable quality movements in their video by using a typical gimbal head, most photographers would agree that in the majority of video applications, this is not a feasible option.
A typical gimbal uses metal on metal connection points for adjusting drag during panning and tilting movements. Even among the top quality gimbal supports, the amount of drag across the entire range of movement in both panning and tilting directions will vary, creating uneven movement speeds as you track the subject. Additionally, to break the drag when force is first applied to your movement, there will be a tendency for the mount to stick, creating unwanted rapid movement before you are able to get the rig under control for the smooth motion desired.
A fluid video head solves the problems I mentioned above with the use of “fluid cartridges” to control drag. Instead of metal on metal friction, a fluid cartridge allows the photographer to control drag by adjusting pressures applied to a hydraulic fluid, like grease. This fluid creates the desired amount of precise drag force, slowing the camera’s movements, thus resulting in smooth, controlled motion that is free of jitters, vibrations, and varying speed.
There are other fundamental differences in how gimbal heads and fluid video heads are designed and function, and there are pros and cons to each type. However, it is not my goal in this post to fully define a video head, other than describe the benefits in function when referring specifically to videography.
It is probably obvious that a fluid gimbal head is designed as a typical gimbal, but with the exception of replacing the metal on metal friction adjustments with fluid cartridges. I had very high hopes that the GHFG1 from Gitzo would be the perfect combination I was looking for – something that would be perfect for tracking both for still wildlife photography as well as giving exceptional panning and tilting for videography. Would this head meet my demands, or would I be forced to find another solution? Read on to find out.
The Gitzo GHFG1
As I mentioned above, I have been using the GHFG1 as my primary support for wildlife photography since 2017, so I have had plenty of experience using this unit. Here I will provide my opinion of the GHFG1 in the areas of build quality, materials, design, hands-on use in still wildlife photography and my experience with using it for videography, and finally price and value.
Build quality, materials, and design
At first glance, you can immediately recognize the GHFG1 as a Gitzo product, due to the mottled grey paint job flecked with silver and black that perfectly matches the fit and finish of their tripods and other heads. It is a bit more bulky looking than comparable models, but the use of aluminum and magnesium keeps the weight down. At about three pounds, it weighs about the same as competitor products in the same payload capacity and price points.
I consider the overall quality of materials and design good but not great. The cradle clamp that is used to mount the lens foot to the head is kind of funky, but appears to be replaceable if desired. The cradle-clamp is Arca-Swiss compatible, but not exactly standard. It opens much wider than most clamps I have encountered on other gimbal heads and I suppose this allows for a variety of widths of plates to be incorporated, including the giant plate that comes in the box with the GHFG1. My main complaint of the GHFG1’s cradle/clamp is the cheaper feel when compared to similar knob-controlled clamps from competitors like RRS, Kirk and Wimberly. I’ve never had a problem with it, but it does not give me the same amount of confidence when I have it tightened down as do the heavy duty options from the above mentioned competitors. I do really like how the cradle can be adjusted up and down via the use of a small locking lever. Most gimbal heads allow for the cradle to be adjusted in this direction, but many require the use of an Allen/hex key to do so.
I found the panning handle, which can be attached on a port located on one side of the cradle, to be pretty much useless because of how short it is. With a 500mm or 600mm prime lens attached, it barely sticks out past the back of my camera. I solved this problem by purchasing a handle that can be clamped to my camera’s L-bracket. Having the panning handle attached on the camera probably does not work as well as having it attached to the cradle assembly, near the center of gravity, but it is something useable. Another problem that I faced with the panning handle is that because the handle is so close to the cradle clamp, there are some instances, like when using a pro camera body or a body with a battery grip is connected to a shorter lens. In this type of setup the camera will interfere with installing the panning handle. With the gimbal design, I doubt there are better placement options the designers could have gone with that allows for the handle to be near the center of gravity, so I do not fault the designers too heavily for this.
The tilt knob is quite large and covered in ribbed rubber, making it easy to use even when wearing heavy gloves. I did have a quality control issue with this knob. The cradle arm developed significant side-to-side play shortly after I began using it. After I figured out how to remove the Gitzo-branded plate on the outside of the knob, I was able to tighten the anchoring screw and have had no problems with it since.
The panning knob is smaller, but large enough to use in winter gloves and is covered in the same ribbed rubber. The action of this knob is disappointing, however. There is an obvious wobble as it is adjusted, and there is no real negative-resistance stop. All resistance is gone after about a half of turn and then it is able to be turned for quite a few rotations afterwards, providing zero change in the panning resistance.
Many gimbal head manufacturers are now installing bubble levels on the plate immediately above the tripod mount. Unfortunately, Gitzo did not include this. I find this to be a rather glaring omission in a product that is partially designed for videography, where leveling your base is critical. This would have been an easy value-added addition.
Use in still photography
I believe there is a good deal of copy to copy variation in the GHFG1, or, Gitzo has significantly changed something in the design of the GHFG1over time. I have read a few reviews where the writers do not recommend this unit for still photography due to the minimal amount of resistance in the pan and/or tilt being too high, thus not providing enough speed to track fast-moving subjects. With my copy, this is not the case at all. I actually prefer a bit of resistance in panning for still photography and often wish for a slower and smoother action while tracking subjects. When both pan and tilt knobs are fully loosened, there is no resistance at all when using the GHFG1. My copy seems to perform just as well for still photography as the other gimbals I have used. I would give the GHFG1 top marks for use as a traditional high-end gimbal head for use in still photography for the fastest moving subjects.
Use in videography
For videography, I find using the GHFG1 to be disappointing. This is due to the lack of precision in controlling the resistance in the panning direction and the uselessly short control handle provided. I’ll start first with the tilting resistance and control knob. I found the tilt mechanism on my copy to be very smooth and the resistance control to be precise. I was easily able to make the resistance adjustments to my liking and was quite pleased at the ability to make smooth movements in the vertical direction.
As is probably obvious, when tracking wildlife, the photographer is going to mostly rely on panning movement. In my copy, the panning knob has little-to-no precision in controlling resistance. There may be a half-turn or less in controlling the resistance from completely locked down to no resistance at all. When I try to modify resistance with the panning knob, I find that the motion is quite variable, not smooth, and no better than a typical gimbal head. Additionally, on the rare occasion that I do find a sweet spot in resistance, this will usually fall off in short order, changing to very low or even no resistance within seconds of beginning movement.
In combined panning and tilting movements, the lack of usable resistance in the pan combined with the desired resistance in tilt combines to form an unpleasant user experience.
Price and value
Gitzo tripods are expensive; however, I find them to be competitively priced when compared to other leading competitors like Really Right Stuff. I do find what they charge for most of their accessory products, like heads, bags, replacement feet, etc., to be completely ridiculous. This is why I was surprised at the price point they chose for the GHFG1. It is now much more expensive than when I purchased it – B&H now lists it for $639. I really expected a unit like this from Gitzo to be much more expensive than it was. Perhaps they should have considered a roughly 50% price increase, if this would have given them the ability to make a true all-in-one fluid gimbal head that they claim the GHFG1 to be.
Conclusion
As I said, the performance of the GHFG1 in still photography use with the heaviest of rigs is comparable to any leading gimbal on the market. However, in just the past few years, the number of great gimbal head options has increased dramatically. Without doing a lot of research, I would argue that there are plenty of other gimbal heads currently on the market that are just as good or likely better than the GHFG1 and at better price points.
With my copy at least, the performance of the GHFG1 for wildlife videography does not rise to the claims that Gitzo has made. The importance of the smoothness of pans in videography is somewhat subjective. I know of several photographers who are completely happy with the results they get from handholding their video footage. But most serious videographers would claim that having smooth camera movements in video footage is one of the most important aspects in their applications. In recent years I have had several video projects that I have yet to work on or share because I am not happy with the panning movements I made. Sure, there are definitely aspects of technique that come into play. But even with practice and refinement, I do not see myself being able to create the kind of footage I desire using the GHFG1 for video applications that require any movement of the camera.
It should be apparent that I do not recommend the Gitzo GHFG1 fluid gimbal head as the solution for hybrid wildlife photographers who want exceptional results from their support during both still and video applications. Is there such a head that would make the top wildlife still and videographers happy? Probably not. I think there will always be some tradeoff in one direction or the other depending on whether one is using a traditional gimbal or a fluid video head. However, as a hybrid wildlife photographer who desires to get the best possible results for both types of photography in a single support system, I feel there must be better options.
Next steps
What is my plan to get the most appropriate support head for the type of hybrid still and videography work I am interested in? Something I probably should have done from the start. I have recently acquired a leveling base and fluid video head that, on paper at least, should serve my needs. I really don’t like the idea of hauling two relatively heavy heads into the field and swapping them on the fly for the two different applications. My hope is that this new setup will work well enough for both still and video. Several top wildlife photographers are using fluid video heads and seem satisfied with their performance for high speed still photography. Hopefully this will be the case for me as well. If this does turn out to be the hybrid solution I am hoping for, I will be happy to sell the GHFG1. When I have had ample opportunity to get the hang of my new support system, I will be sure to review this setup here in the future.
A Thousand Acres of Silphiums 