Companion C-202 vs Wimberly Side Kick

I was interested in knowing if anyone out there has had a chance to compare

the Companion C-202 with the Wimberly Side Kick panning device. Both seem to

have merit. I currently use Arca Swiss and Kirk Ball Heads and a Wimberly

Head but was thinking about something smaller like the SideKick. The

Companion C-202 seems smaller and more versatile. I have a variety of Nikon

long lenses including 300mm f2.8 that is the upper limit for this panning

device but see the C-202 as useful for macro and for panoramic set ups. Any

thoughts? Andy

<I> The Companion C-202 seems smaller and more versatile.</i><P>

 

Smaller perhaps, but I can't see why it would be more versatile in most respects. Both

work in exactly the same way as far as I can tell: they let you match the rotation axis of

the mount system to the center of mass of the lens. Both will work best with fairly large

lenses that have a center of mass for lens+camera near the tripod foot. The Sidekick is

almost the same price and can handle much bigger lenses (I use one with an 8.5 pound

500/4 and a heavy camera). The C-202 offers a little more discretion in mount position,

but it is not offset like the Sidekick, so you may end up with a lens being quite off-center

with respect to the vertical (panning) rotation axis.<P>

 

For horizontal panoramics typical for landscapes, I don't think devices like these gimbal

heads are of any use, although they might be handy for vertical panoramics. Not sure

about macro but the general problem there -- at least in my experience with macro

photography -- is not horizontal or vertical rotation, it's in-and-out adjustments.

Mark thanks for the good thoughts. Perhaps the versatility that I perceive is a less than perfect compromise to begin with. My original post was done in the vacuum of not having ever seen the Companion. I own a Wimberley head and have tried the Sidekick. I was hoping to get easier use from the Companion with non collared lenses and have noticed that Wimberley is carrying gimbaled head adapter for cameras to mount to the Wimberley head. I am probably asking too much of the Companion and agree that for its stated purpose and price the off set aspect of the Sidekick is probably better and would allow me to use my 500mm as well.

My impression of the C-202 is that it doesn't carry quite the weight load that the Sidekick does. I used the Sidekick for about three years with my 500 f4, the old Wimberley Head for a brief period, and now use the new Wimberley Head WH-200.

 

Note that the Gimbal Head Adapter, which can be used to mount a camera to your old or new Wimberley Head, is a product by Visual Echoes (the Better Beamer manufacturer), not by Wimberley itself. I have one and it's not quite as versatile as a ballhead, but for long hikes on the off-chance I'll need to use my tripod for landscapes, it's good to have (and easier to carry along than a ballhead).