I don’t really do ‘tests’ as such because I’m not a tester first of all, and don’t have the rigour to perform the kind of analysis and comparisons you need to have any kind of authority or credibility. I also don’t think tests can really replicate the demands of production work, the time pressures, client pressures, shooting challenges you face when on a real job, you have way too much time and control. So, for me, the testing I do is always ‘live’. If I go and shoot with the Merlin in the park for an hour I’ll learn a little bit for sure, but if a client says ‘can you do this?’ and I’m forced to make it work somehow, then I’ll learn way more. And so, to the Glidecam 2000 vs the Merlin, two products many people consider when getting into the DSLR thang. Finally I’ve had a chance to work with both of them in the field and can actually write a proper and in-depth comparison of the pair. It’s a bit long, granted but you need to know what you’re getting into with these bastardos.

Even with a tache, somehow it works

Looks like a joke doesn't it?

Way back when I was a total moron with DSLRs (let’s call that yesterday, shall we?) and was looking at ways to get a bit more wow factor out of the gear I started digging around any info and videos I could find about handheld stabilisers. Please ignore the hype you read on their websites because you ain’t going to be able to get the same results as a $50,000 rig, it’s just not possible. I’ve always been a bit of a cynic when it comes to that stuff, especially when I’ve seen Z1s with matteboxes and follow focus units, or the fig rig (don’t get me started on that). There were, however, some encouraging results I found from people flying both the Glidecam 2000 and the Steadicam Merlin with DSLRs. Those really are the two viable options at the budget end of the spectrum and I know many many people struggle to make a choice between the two when they’re buying because there just aren’t enough straight comparisons from people who’ve used them in the field. Well, I’m writing this on the way back from Sheffield where I’ve been shooting building sites, shopping centres and other fun things using the Glidecam 2000. There were the usual corridor fly-bys, but also some more challenging shots involving complex moves, tracking, hitting marks and finishing on a frame, all of which are tough to achieve even with their big brothers. So, I now feel qualified to make an informed comparison of the two units and hopefully help those of you who are undecided to make a better choice.

The first thing is, are handheld stabilisers a waste of time? It’d be easy to dismiss them out of hand as probably not worth the bother but I’d urge you not to. They take time to master and you lose the ability to adjust focus and exposure as you shoot but they will add a real wow factor to productions as well as giving you options in storytelling for drama, or music videos that you cannot achieve any other way. For the money, there are few bits of kit that can make such a difference to the work you put out.

Traditional Steadicam units work by using an arm and weights to counteract movement using a vest to help support the massively increased weight of the camera when it’s levered away from the body. Handheld stabilisers dispense with the mechanical arm, using your own puny human arm instead. The weights on the rig counter-balance the weight of the camera with a slight bias towards the bottom to give you enough inertia to guide the unit. It’s pretty basic stuff but surprisingly effective. You do spend a lot of time working on the balance, adjusting the settings, nudging the rig to the optimal settings so the way you accomplish that has a massive bearing on the user experience. The other major factor in user experience is simply the ‘flight control’, how easily it lets you achieve your shots and how comfortable it is to do so.

So here are the headlines, and you’ll quickly discover these for yourselves if you dig around forums on the web. The Glidecam 2000 is cheap, half the price of the Merlin, it’s designed using very similar principles to big Steadicam rigs using a post, a weight, sled and a rotating cuff. The Merlin carries the Steadicam name, it folds away very neatly, it’s much easier to adjust and set up than the Glidecam and the weight of the camera sits directly over your wrist rotating around a gimble with a tail dropping down in an arc away from the camera. The Merlin looks like a total joke when you see it for the first time, the Glidecam looks pretty cool actually. Does that matter, not really, but it’s true!

Canon 7D with Steadicam Merlin (Tokina 11-16) (not tests) from Robin Schmidt on Vimeo.

Getting up and running on the Merlin was something I nearly gave up on. I raged at it for three weeks, cursing its name and playing with every weight combination under the sun because I just could not get it to work. Finally I stumbled on a cookbook setting which just worked brilliantly (four mid weights on the bottom, two in the middle, z adjustment -8 and off you go). By using that setting I suddenly understood exactly what was going on and why every adjustment worked the way it did. Once you get your head around the physics at work (and believe me, it’s not obvious) then suddenly it’s a lot easier. It’s all about drop time. You start with that, making rough adjustments to everything else to enable you to judge it properly, then tweak all the other settings to taste. My own starting settings are posted below this so you can spare yourself the torment I went through. While it may be a bastard to get setup perfectly, actually adjusting settings is really really easy. The trim rollers at the back and side of the sled are very easy to adjust, and the spar arc adjustments can be made very quickly and easily, and these are the ones that give you control over the drop time. You can also slide the doveplate forward and back on the stage of the Merlin, which has handy marks to give you a repeatable setting once you’ve got it dialled in. The Merlin’s tail is jointed so it can fold up into a very compact little unit. This is both good and bad. Practically it’s great but in terms of balancing it’s a nightmare. The hinge has a lot of give in it up and down and any time you want to balance you have to make sure you’ve pulled the tail down as far as it will go to give yourself any certainty. It can be easily knocked and every time that happens you have to retrim the balance. That’s very annoying. The Merlin’s actually designed for cameras with a locating pin hole on the base where you screw your tripod plate in but DSLRs don’t have that hole. What this means is that, even though you tighten the screw that attaches the doveplate to the camera as tight as it can go the camera often rotates around that screw and, yes, you have to rebalance. All in all though it’s very quick to get the Merlin out of the box and up and running on a shoot, less than ten minutes most times. As I already mentioned the Merlin is twitchy, but once it’s balanced properly you suddenly start to feel the whole unit become incredibly rigid, almost as if it’s set in plasticine and it’s incredibly easy to manage. There’s a very small sweet spot but once you’re in it you really know.

Merlin balance controls

That hinge is a bit annoying

The glidecam foot, no calibration marks

Getting up and running on the Glidecam was a lot lot easier I have to say. It’s almost certainly down to the fact that the design is a lot more stable than the Merlin which can be a twitchy so and so but DSLRs just seem to sit on the Glidecam a lot better. The unit is also quite a bit heavier, rated to work with heavier cameras and in this line of work, weight equals inertia equals control, so that makes a difference. The camera attaches to the sled plate using the same single screw system as the Merlin, but you can’t adjust it backwards and forwards on the stage, so once it’s on it’s on. That’s actually fine with me. Now’s where it starts to get annoying. Putting weights on the bottom is slow and annoying, but I recommend two weights front and back, that seemed to work well for me. In order to get the drop time right you need to adjust the length of the post with an annoying thumb screw that allows you to extend the foot. This is crap, plain and simple. The foot rotates and there are no calibration marks so you’re literally flying blind when you adjust it and you need to align the foot with the sled above otherwise the unit will list to one side. Adjusting the sled itself is done with screws and again you have to learn which way to turn to achieve the result you want. Nowhere near as easy as the rollers on the Merlin which are a delight. However, you really don’t need to be anywhere near as precise as you do with the Merlin which means that you can actually get there pretty quickly as long as you don’t demand perfection. Once you are balanced you have no sense of that gloopy plasticine feel of the Merlin with the Glidecam, it’s just a heavy lump and you can do what you want with it. They’re both good systems (though I actually prefer the Glidecam in that regard).

Glidecam sled

Now, operating the two units. The Merlin is treachorous and flighty and will bite your hand off if you don’t treat it right. It takes a long time to master and the subtle dance between your feet and the light touch of your fingertips on the guiding hand is something you really have to work at. However, like driving a race car, once you get the knack of it you’ll be surprised how precise you can be, and how complex your moves can be. The Glidecam is a lot easier to get along with, somehow the design just seems to make a lot more sense, and be a lot more intuitive. There’s something reassuring about the way the cuff rotates around the post and the post itself is just a nice thing to operate with. Doing walk and talks, operating on shots where you’re dealing with straight lines, like corridors I find the Glidecam to be much easier to use, but anything where it involves rotating round an object or person, tracking sideways (surprisingly one of the toughest moves to accomplish with a handheld stabiliser), the Merlin has the edge for me. I suspect this is because the Merlin sits directly over your hand, whereas the handle on the Glidecam is an inch away from the post to allow the cuff to rotate and that’s great for forward and back but seems to unsettle it going sideways.

Give it time but one day you could look as cool as this guy

That issue leads me to the big kicker when looking at these two bits of kit. I’ve shot forty five minutes to an hour with a Merlin non-stop, shooting shots as long as ten minutes no problem and been perfectly happy. These last couple of days I’ve struggled to string together takes of more than three minutes with the Glidecam because it feels like my wrist is about to break. The handle is only an inch and a half away from the post but it significantly increases the relative force of weight acting on your body and your wrist is doing so much work to control the unit that it starts to shake, very badly. That doesn’t transmit to the camera thankfully but it’s damn hard work. I think with some practice and some more time on it I could probably do six seven minute sequences on it but the thing is really uncomfortable. And that’s a shame. I love my Merlin and the reason I paid all that extra money for it was because of that handle being where it is on the Glidecam. But I’ve enjoyed using the Glidecam and it’s a great bit of a kit, especially given the price point. Incidentally you can buy an arm and vest for both of these stabilisers that would significantly improve your level of control, but who’s going to shell out for those, honestly?

So, which one do you buy? Both have pros, both have cons, but I would have to say the Merlin is the better unit. Double the price but still worth that extra money. If you can’t afford the Merlin, the Glidecam is no joke and you’ll get great results, just expect your wrist and forearm to take a proper beating.

PRICES: Glidecam 2000 £317, Steadicam Merlin £605.13

Technorati Tags: 550d, 5D, 7D, Canon, glidecam, glidecam 2000, handheld, merlin, smooth, stabiliser, stable, steadicam, T2i