Glidecam or Flycam?

j-cal

j-cal

Member
Hey,

I was wondering the main quality difference in the Gildecam and Flycam. I know when balanced both will perform the same. But lets face it every one wants to save money where they can. So for the money is the Flycam an alright product? Or should i go with the glide cam? Im shooting with light dslrs and some other light cameras.

Thanks a Bunch,

Jacob Calaghan
 
glidecam for sure, i bought a flycam once and the quality was so terrible. Do not recommend
 
well, the real thing is technically a steadicam, glidecam's are a knockoff of them, and fly cams a knockoff of a knockoff
 
I've heard about alot of people who had their bottom plate broken by nothing..I have a glidecam and I can tell you that the build quality is super and its very easy to balance, I think you should invest in a glidecam that will last for several years instead of buying a flycam that may not survive the winter (if youre shooting skiing and snowboarding+++)
 
the newer flycam dslrs are shit, the older flycam nanos were okay

glidecam is still far better regardless
 
Glidecams are defiantly more expensive. But the quality is much more superior than the flycam. If you are on a budget but really want a flycam, Email someone at glidecam and tell them about your situation and they might hook you up with a deal! Worked for me at least
 
please do not ever buy a flycam. I had the flycam nano or as I like to call it: the Jiggle cam Crapo!

it was fine for a few weeks until I realised that the screws seem to be made of butter and will all become loose causing unstopable jiggling. I tried tightening every single screw multiple times only to discover that their material seems softer than your moms belly fat, causing it to loosen right back to its jiggly state.

horrible piece of crap that was, now I need to save up for a glidecam and I know I wont regret that.
 
I just told them having a glidecam would really help with my filming but i am on a budget. He's sending me glidecam 2000 pro demo model for 175$
 
Ive got a Flycam 3000 and it works pretty darn well, the build quality isnt great though. If youre looking into a long term steadicam then definitly go with a glidecam, im gonna get one soon.
 
I have a flycam nano and it is definitely a good choice if you are on a low budget. But the glide cam is noticeably better in build quality and probably a better investment for the long term. It think it all comes down to how soon you need a stabilizer and what your budget looks like. Take a look at these videos:
https://vimeo.com/17350491
https://vimeo.com/17618357
 
Wondlan... might be picking one of those up soon.

But glidecams always work great and seem to be the independent ski filmers go to.
 
this is the one I want to get http://www.wondlan.com/product/260-magic-carbon-fiber-stabilizer-wondlan-0d3e/

wondlan-magic-carbon-fibre-stabilizer-monopod.jpg


Wondlan-Carbon-Stabilizer1.png
 
only 100. and also lighter, and can be used as a monopod. and What's wrong with trying something different.
 
haha 120cm? that shit is huge! why would you ever need a 4ft tall glide cam? i dont think the stedicams used with vests/arms are that long
 
Just all personal preference really, I just don't understand what you would ever use a mono pod for when filming. If you want a stable shot from one spot, use a tripod, if you want a smooth hand held shot, either hold it well or use a glide cam, the mono pod for video seems pointless to me.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't it be a lot easier to film in the trees with? Just stick it in some deep snow to some what stabilize it? It'd be a ton easier to carry
 
Times I've filmed trees: 0

Times I plan to film trees: 0

If I did film trees, I would use a tripod or go hand held. Also, just sticking a mono pod into the snow is NOT stable.
 
Flycams are cheap as hell, and won't give you the best results, but they can give you pretty good results if you set them up right. I shot a wedding using a flycam nano and a 60D. Came out just fine.

Glidecams are better in just about every way, but obviously cost more. it's worth it though.
 
I understand that this thread is almost 2 years old, but this is a good question to answer/provide alternatives for. Obviously, the glidecam is the best option, but also very expensive. If you want something extremely similar, check out the glidegear DNA 50/50. From what I've read, it is the same build quality, and is the most comparable knockoff to the real thing, and it's $100 cheaper than the hd-2000. The best value out there though, in my opinion, is the Opteka sv-HD. I got mine for $130, and the whole thing is made of metal, with the shaft being carbon fiber. The gimbal is smooth, and it's not too bad to balance. The weights on the bottom are a little narrow, though, and that's my only complaint. Definitely check that out if anyone's looking for an alternative. Way better than a flycam.
 
The time difference in setting it up alone will be worth the Glidecam.

I'd say a Glidecam is barely passable; why would anyone even consider a Flycam?
 
Agree with the older flycams being way better than the new 'dslr' version. Might as well just spend the extra money for a glidecam so it doesn't break in 6 months.
 
12995857:lIllI said:
The time difference in setting it up alone will be worth the Glidecam.

I'd say a Glidecam is barely passable; why would anyone even consider a Flycam?
Click to expand...

I could set up my shitty flycam nano in under 5 minutes. I shot a whole wedding on one. They aren't as bad as everyone says they are, they just need to be handled by one who does research and has even an ounce of 20th century patience.
 
12998412:erikK said:
except this isn't true for most kids in m&a
Click to expand...

Either most kids here are lying when they say they make money shooting video, or they aren't particularly smart business people. Which is it?
 
12998544:lIllI said:
Either most kids here are lying when they say they make money shooting video, or they aren't particularly smart business people. Which is it?
Click to expand...

Most kids here make skiing edits of their friends and make threads asking which lens or accessory to buy. Do you really think the amount of professionals here outnumbers the people shooting for fun?
 
12998573:erikK said:
Most kids here make skiing edits of their friends and make threads asking which lens or accessory to buy. Do you really think the amount of professionals here outnumbers the people shooting for fun?
Click to expand...

No. I think the vast majority of people who give gear advice either lack experience or common sense (or both). But that isn't the point - it doesn't matter if the person in question makes money. If you don't at least acknowledge the merit in buying nice to save time, you are denying that opportunity cost applies to literally every single person regardless of their career.

There are many reasons to buy on a budget. Patience is not one of them. It doesn't address the problem of opportunity cost; it simply ignores it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top