First Video - Trying Out A Gimbal Stabilizer

[Sinistar]

Okay, its nothing special but had to give it a try. Definitely not a @motoadve video

We flew over to Menonomie to meet a retired friend of ours. He was donating a NIB US Divers scuba unit to my buddy. The same type Jacques Cousteau used to dive. It barely fit in the back seat of 182. But then again, that what 182's do

I purchased a knockoff action camera and a handheld 3 axis gimbal stabilizer. My friend started shooting video clips after we were cleared into the Bravo and until we landed. So you get to see my first ever filmed landing (yikes!). Bonus: at around 2:16 on a straight in final one bird goes port, then another starboard (that's left & right ).

The gimbal makes for some interesting shots. Everything outside the plane remained level and stable. We had some chop and thats mostly why the inside seems to move around a lot. In a few shots he panned using the gimbal using the stabilizers joystick and the pans turned out really smooth.

My biggest screw up was using the wrong whitebalance. But being in the bravo, i wasnt about to mess with a camera until i landed. Sorry, no awesome audio track or babes....this time

 

[NordicDave]

What’s interesting about using a gimbal, is the viewer sees the pitching movements of the plane. Hard mounts create smooth appearing videos as he camer moves with the plane. Keeping the camera stationary the viewer gets an interesting sense of motion.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Interesting view. Also interesting the gimbal costs much more than the camera

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

Menonomie

And, there is a reason that one, and only one, of my landings is on youtube.

 

[Sinistar]

What’s interesting about using a gimbal, is the viewer sees the pitching movements of the plane. Hard mounts create smooth appearing videos as he camer moves with the plane. Keeping the camera stationary the viewer gets an interesting sense of motion.

Yeah with the fixed mount everything inside the plane moves together and horizon bops around. I guess if anything this gives people a better idea of what "chop" is actually like during flight.

What lead me to try this was the first time we used the knock-off action camera my daughter was hand holding it. So it was the worst possible case of the camera moving and the plane moving. I had wanted to try this gimbal to see if handheld video in the cockpit would be worth it or maybe even an alternative to a fixed mount. Probably not.

Now I wonder what night flight video would look like! The outside skyline might actually be somewhat sharp but the panel would probably be all blurry. Maybe if it was held right up to the windshield a person could get good stable night video without a exotic camera. Oh well, not on the top of my list.

 

[Sinistar]

Interesting view. Also interesting the gimbal costs much more than the camera

Yeah I think that is funny too. Around xmas time I got the knock off camera from Amazon and it was about $75. But the Gimbal is around $150. That gimbal is sweet, a replaceable, rechargeable battery that lasts over 4 hours. Probably best for shots walking around the plane and maybe shots looking outside where the plane is not visible like a less wide angle mode.

 

[Badger]

link to gimbal you used?

 

[Sinistar]

link to gimbal to used?

Sorry, I oops'd the stabilizer price ($180).

Here is the amazon link for the gimbal stabilizer: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B074K3JYPT/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o03_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

And here is the amazon camera link (it was on sale over the Holidays at $75, now $90):
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B076DD5JNS/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o08_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

[Badger]

so the video was shot with your friend hand holding the gimbal. I wonder how the video would look if the gimbal was "mounted" to the plane? Like via clamp, suction cup etc.

 

[Sinistar]

so the video was shot with your friend hand holding the gimbal. I wonder how the video would look if the gimbal was "mounted" to the plane? Like via clamp, suction cup etc.

My first thought is...mostly no different. But I could see it being better in a few places and worse in others.

For example, a person hand holding will absorb some of the abrupt up/down motion that this gimbal does not have enough axis to cover. The flipside being the gimbal would not rise and fall with their hand and instead remain fixed with the airplane's sudden up/down motion.

Where it would definitely be better is that all shots would not have any unwanted forward/reverse/sideways movements. Like the landing clip. He moved the camera as I was about to level off over the numbers. The scene really changed a lot, more that I would have wanted.

Another place it would definitely be better is if you zoom the action camera to avoid any of the plane in the shot, you could probably get awesome outside footage of the ground...or another airplane

If you are thinking of mounting it, they make wearable 3-axis stabilizers. Much lower battery life. But much smaller with 1/4"x20 standard threaded camera mounts, etc.