Anatole Sloan
Member
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2013
- Messages
- 21
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Hi,
Until recently, I've been principally shooting on an Alexa mini with Alura light-weight zooms – and occasionally hiring in other lenses as needed. (I love this forum though!).
However I've suffered a shoulder injury, so will need to go for a much lighter package on my next documentary project. Which prompted me to consider... what governs camera stability on a shoulder-rig?
The obvious thing is of course weight. But it seems to me that the distribution of the weight should itself have an impact.
For example, a rig with a V-lock on the back and a front-heavy lens should presumably have more inertia in certain aspects of rotation than a rig with the mass principally located much closer to the centre-of-gravity.
But that also only impacts pitch and yaw. If we call the length of the shoulder rig the z-axis, then roll seems to be about the distribution of weight on the x-axis and y-axis – i.e. how fat the camera is / how built up it is with accessories.
Finally, the translational movements (horizontal – x-axis; vertical – y-axis; and along z-axis) seem to be a factor of just total mass, rather than distribution of mass.
Does this seem right? And which of this movements (pitch, yaw, roll, translation) seem to be the most problematic? I find it interesting that the times I've shot with something like an FS5 with a still lens, I've really struggled with camera shake – probably to a greater degree than when shooting with a rigged up A7s.
Until recently, I've been principally shooting on an Alexa mini with Alura light-weight zooms – and occasionally hiring in other lenses as needed. (I love this forum though!).
However I've suffered a shoulder injury, so will need to go for a much lighter package on my next documentary project. Which prompted me to consider... what governs camera stability on a shoulder-rig?
The obvious thing is of course weight. But it seems to me that the distribution of the weight should itself have an impact.
For example, a rig with a V-lock on the back and a front-heavy lens should presumably have more inertia in certain aspects of rotation than a rig with the mass principally located much closer to the centre-of-gravity.
But that also only impacts pitch and yaw. If we call the length of the shoulder rig the z-axis, then roll seems to be about the distribution of weight on the x-axis and y-axis – i.e. how fat the camera is / how built up it is with accessories.
Finally, the translational movements (horizontal – x-axis; vertical – y-axis; and along z-axis) seem to be a factor of just total mass, rather than distribution of mass.
Does this seem right? And which of this movements (pitch, yaw, roll, translation) seem to be the most problematic? I find it interesting that the times I've shot with something like an FS5 with a still lens, I've really struggled with camera shake – probably to a greater degree than when shooting with a rigged up A7s.