10Dec DSLR Flycam Nano Body Vest Stabilizer
Is it me or is this something new from Flycam? I don’t remember seeing something exactly like this before in their product line. It’s a new body vest support for those Flycam DSLR Stabilizers. It doesn’t look like your typical spring loaded isoelastic stabilizer arm, so it may not be used for walking or running shots. It looks like it’s just a system to help carry the weight, like the Body Pod system available from Glidecam (found here)
(Above) Typical ‘Body Pod’ type stabilizer support
The new Flycam Body Vest / Stabilizer Arm can be adjusted up/down, left/right, and angled in just about any fashion you can think of. The different joints in the arm can be locked in place, but I wonder if it can still be used and redirect some of that weight if it’s left fairly loose.
So far it’s only available as a combo with a Flycam, but it doesn’t look extremely complicated if it’s a DIY build you’re looking to tackle. Found below (click here)
Flycam DSLR Nano Body Vest Stabilizer
Like 
Subscribe 
Follow
16 Comments
Leave a Comment
>> Continue Reading More Articles <<
December 10th, 2011 at 11:30 pm
Without a shock absorption system, it just seems useless. Like the BodyPod, it seems more like a con than anything; people will buy it expecting it to work like a real steadicam arm, and then realize that it just doesn’t do that.
December 10th, 2011 at 11:38 pm
@Rabi – Although the Body Pod systems don’t absorb shock, they’re something many people use ‘in between’ flying shots. A full vest system is great for carrying the load while walking, but not necessary to use with a stabilizer to get steady shots.
These support systems are a handy solution for wedding guys who can’t afford the entire Vest/Arm solution. When using something like these smaller Glidecam or Flycam stabilizers, you’re able to fly without a vest to carry the load, and you’re also not constantly running the entire time. When moving, you would lift the stabilizer off of the support, run around for a while to get some beauty shots, and then re-dock and have a stationary shot maybe when a speech is going on.
December 10th, 2011 at 11:53 pm
Guys i do not want to sound a bid hard but please, do not purchase this. It may work for a time but them this things get just destroyed, idea and design of this brand is not bad, but, manufacture and final quality is not to be used everyday in a production environment.
Just to help you guys save some hard earned dollars
December 11th, 2011 at 1:47 am
I was going to say the same thing as Rabi but I see your point Emm.
December 11th, 2011 at 2:48 am
It looks very “ERECT” no pun intended
December 11th, 2011 at 12:59 pm
And what a good option for a vest with absorption for glidecam hd1000 with a low budget?
December 11th, 2011 at 1:03 pm
@Leo Telles – I tried some cheaper ones, but the Steadicam Merlin vest was the only one worth using.
December 11th, 2011 at 1:58 pm
Hmmm…slap a strong medium sized ball head on it and you’ve got an instant Snorricam. I’ll be experimenting with a diy one tomorrow.
December 12th, 2011 at 1:13 pm
I hope they come out with a better version soon!
December 25th, 2011 at 3:29 pm
A tangent question but has anyone come up with a creative way to keep track of their vertical/horizontal balance settings on the Flycam Nano? I’ve been using masking tape on the sides and underneath with markings on them, but I was hoping someone had come up with a better solution. Also, anyone using the Manfrotto 577 quick release plate on it? I’ve tried it but it seems just a tad too heavy (I’m using a 7D and alternating btwn a Canon 15-85mm or Tokina 11-16mm).
Appreciate any feedback.
Great resource Em!
December 25th, 2011 at 3:30 pm
Oh, and Merry Christmas!
December 31st, 2011 at 1:22 pm
The product looks quite interesting. I’m gonna bookmark this for updates. Thanks for posting!
February 18th, 2012 at 2:20 am
Do you think it would be possiable to remove the center arm and replace it with a diy springloaded arm like those found on the real steady cam systems. This would be great for smaller cams that don’t need such a large rig. Plus i bet it would be easier on the back if you didn’t need the extra weight of the full rigs. Just a thought! what do you think?
February 21st, 2012 at 9:26 am
Hey Emm
Would this fit on a Merlin for speeches and static shots like you said?
thanks
February 21st, 2012 at 9:44 am
@Stephen Webb – The Merlin handle requires a very narrow post as opposed to the Flycam Nano. Not to say that it can’t be modified, but out of the box, it will not fit.
February 21st, 2012 at 3:43 pm
Thanks for the info.
Any thought on the mod? What about a stepping pipe adapter?