View Single Post
Old 04-15-19, 05:24 PM
  #32  
KraneXL
 
KraneXL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: La-la Land, CA
Posts: 2,913

Bikes: Cannondale Quick SL1 Bike - 2014

Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2521 Post(s)
Liked 15 Times in 14 Posts
Originally Posted by enveous View Post
Nah, it will work just fine and he won't have an obstructed view. In addition to being able to adjust the horizontal aim of the camera, he can also adjust the FOV to crop any helemt bits that wander into frame.
Your counterpoints are argumentative but unrealistic. Not all cameras have fine adjustable FOV capability. All of my points make no assumptions and are valid and more practical than not.
If it should weight him down, and his helmet retention system (roc loc et al) can't compensate, it's simple to put a small counterweight on the other side of the helmet. With the Sony being pretty light my bet is that it will depend on his helmet type.
For one, his retention system is designed to fit comfortably snug, not as a tourniquet. Second, I should point out that a camera mounted sideways would also be angled improperly resulting in an unnatural view of the sky and ground rather than to the sides where it would be most needed.

The alternative would be to add an angled mount which would add even more weight (as would a counterweight) in addition to extending the camera further away from the helmet increasing the imbalance even further.
In the real world these limitations don't exist. Another advantage to a side mount vs. a tele tubby top mount is less camera movement/smoother capture because the camera is at the center of the head mass.
Finally, your point of smother movement is completely incorrect since the center mount offers the greatest amount of stability -- its in the center.

In the "real world" limitations, compromises, and exceptions always exist. I hope I've demonstrated that above.
KraneXL is offline