11Apr Flycam Carbon Stabilizers CF3 and CF5
Just a few months ago Flycam introduced a Carbon Fiber stabilizer called the C5. (here). To confuse the market even more, they’ve recently released another set of Flycam Carbon Fiber stabilizers called the CF3 and CF5. Although these look much better than the original C5, I still can’t get over the ugly counterweights and painted blue accents. I personally would rather just have plain metal washers in place of those plastic tubs.
The CF5 is a larger and longer stabilizer for heavier cameras, and the CF3 is the smaller version at a max height of 25″. These new carbon fiber stabilizers use a quick release lock to adjust the telescoping post up or down (better than original Nano), comes with it’s own quick release plate, foam padded Carry Bag, and comes in cheaper than the original C5 Carbon.
Flycam Carbon Fiber Stabilizers CF3 CF5
Like 
Subscribe 
Follow
19 Comments
Leave a Comment
>> Continue Reading More Articles <<
April 11th, 2012 at 10:23 am
Doesnt seem to have the fine tuning capabilities that the c5 has, which is the main reason i was thinking of getting one.
April 11th, 2012 at 10:58 am
Being an Indian in India. I hate that they have these demo photos with Indian people but when I called/emailed they didn’t entertain and I tried to track address of ProAim, Cine City etc etc (all look the same) and none of the listed addresses existed. Off topic I guess, but I wonder if these brands are reliable.
April 11th, 2012 at 11:54 am
@Archie, i must say that ProAim is pretty good gear…not perfect but it is great price and durable especially for starting out…it holds up to some abuse and looks the part of professionalism… they were low cost champions for a long time but lately they are acting like the “big boys” and alienating their core fanbase of “have-nots”…that said, i still get bits and pieces from them and the products i purchased i still use.
Now about the new C3 and C5…i was very interested in the original c5 because of the microadjustable topstage but these new ones without it are no better than the regular flycams…and i agree that the blue accents are a turnoff but i have learned to like the weight tubs…
Because the original C5 is more than i wanna pay, i have gone back to using my Steadicam JR and with the 60D and the 550D, it works very well…on the fence with the opteka steadyvid pro but still got my eye on an “OG” C5
April 11th, 2012 at 11:56 am
I have the first generation FlyCam nano and I think it’s great. I just wish there were fine tuning knobs, and it would be perfect!
I just received my Canon 17-55mm 2.8 and I’m going to try to fly a T3i w/ battery grip and the lens mentioned above at 17mm. I hope it isn’t too heavy!
April 11th, 2012 at 1:57 pm
So I have a 60D and Tokina 11-16 will the C3 be good enough ? Or do I go to C5?
April 11th, 2012 at 2:07 pm
@Carlos – The smallest Nano works fine, but if you were looking at the carbon fiber version, the C3 looks like it will work.
April 11th, 2012 at 11:53 pm
yep im more wondlown
April 12th, 2012 at 8:58 am
@Archie
I’m pretty sure the stuff they sell as indian is originating from China.
Why I’m sure? Can’t tell my sources, but the electronic things they are offering are made in China. Also if you look close, there are some chinese manufacturers that have steadycams and those look very similar to the flycam 3000 and 5000 designwise.
April 15th, 2012 at 3:47 pm
Hi Em, I have a general steadycam question that applies to all steadycams.
I have a Glidecam 2000. The max weight is 6lbs. I’m going to get a Sony FS 700 when it comes out. I’ve estimated the weight of my Sony FS 700 with lens, lcd, etc…. to be around 7 lbs, about 1 lbs over the 6 lbs limit.
Do you think I can get away with using the Glidecam 2000 (and steadycams in general) at 1 lbs over the suggested weight limit? I can extend the base if needed.
Basically, even if it’s over the suggested weight limit by X- amount, as long as you can balance the steadycam, it will work properly. Is that a correct assumption?
April 15th, 2012 at 7:31 pm
@Gene – I would go with the largest HD4000.
April 22nd, 2012 at 12:58 pm
looks pretty good to me!!!!!!
HD4000 Defo.
May 26th, 2012 at 6:56 pm
@Emm – I’ve got a canon 5D MKII with 24-70mm 2.8 and 50 1.8 which the lens probably not ideal for flying as I’ve read on your website.
What’s an ideal model to fly with any of these combo for the time being? the original Flycam Nano, Flycam DSLR or one of these newer CF versions?
These new CF vesions don’t have side tuning knobs like the glidecam right?
May 26th, 2012 at 7:00 pm
@des – If you want to fly your 24-70mm, you might need to look into the Flycam DSLR. If you want to the fine tuning knobs, go with the Glidecam HD2000. I haven’t tried the Carbon stuff yet, but it looks like it has more options to balance than just the plain little Nano.
May 27th, 2012 at 12:56 am
@Emm – having a look at the Flycam DSLR and CF version on ebay, design wise looks exactly the same. Probably only change is the material. Are those knobs on the plate for right and left adjustments?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Camtree-DSLR-Flycam-Nano-STABILIZER-STABILIZING-steadycam-for-Canon-Sony-Nikon-/300714522538?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4603fb77aa#ht_6486wt_830
http://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-Hand-Held-Carbon-fiber-Dslr-Flycam-nano-steadycam-for-camera-upto-3lbs-Pound-/280883856384?pt=AU_Cameras_Photographic_Accessories&hash=item4165fb8400
the glidecam HD2000 is 2.5 times the price at this stage which isn’t really my budget.
May 27th, 2012 at 8:53 am
@des – Yes it allows for adjustment on the top stage, but it is not the same fine tuning style as in Glidecam models. On the Flycam you will loosen the knobs and then shift the plate around while it’s loose. The Glidecam moves the plate slowly as you turn the knobs giving you more fine tuning abilities.
May 29th, 2012 at 8:29 pm
@emm – would you rather carbon fibre or flycam nano 3000 or flycam DSLR? I just realized there was the 3000 version. Thanks for your previous response. Cheers
May 29th, 2012 at 10:26 pm
@des – I am able to get enough results with just the Nano. For anything larger, I went with the Glidecam HD models. I haven’t really heard any buzz about the 3000, maybe it’s not so good?
May 30th, 2012 at 4:56 am
@emm – thanks mate i understand. I got feedback from an ebay buyer saying that his friend bought the CF and couldn’t balance it properly. The only thing that worked was a light cam and light prime. So might stick with the original flycam nano or 3000
July 13th, 2012 at 9:28 am
I just ordered the CF3 a few days ago and it arrived today. I put it on a light stand to balance it and from what I’ve been experiencing, this is one of the easiest flycams to balance.
I put on a 5DM2 with a 16-35mm f2.8 on the CF3, full extension on the FC legs with 2 white weight blocks on each side inside the blue holder, and it was quite easy to balance, took just 5 minutes. Then I put on a 60d with a 18-55mm, legs fully extended, with 1 white weight block inside the blue holder on each side, again it was quite easy to balance. So not bad.
As a glidecam 2000 owner, the flycam CF3 is not as stable when during shot making. But by not much at all, 10% worst on the average at most and depending on the operator too. I love my glidecam 2000, but for less than half the price, it’s definitely a bang for the buck and not too shabby to say the least.