Tonyfly CC1 . looks a great idea

[sky-pimp 0]

I just came across this new fella

TONYFLY CC1 HELMET

Has anybody got one and if so what do you think??
The idea looks great and i was on the brink of ordering another helmet untill i saw this.

If you watch the video, how many people out there use a bullet cam as illustrated as a top fitting and if so which one do you use, whats the quality like in comparison to a side / top mount sony pc1000e

YeHaaaaaaaaaaa

[dragon2 0]

Did ya check the camera forum..?

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[nicolesheridan 0]

I have one. I love the lok, the fit, and the functionality. It makes it so easy to angle the box up for belly flying and down or straight for freeflying. You can also mount your still on the side for vertical shots! I got my custom painted by the guy that Giovanni uses and I am super impresed with his skill. The only negative I would have to say at all is that the box did not come as a perfect fit for a PC 1000 like a RAWA or Cookie would. You have to pad it like you do with most bonehead boxes. really a small nuisance though considering.
_________________________________________________

"People often say that this or that person has not yet found himself. But, the self is not something that one finds. It is something that one creates"- Thomas Szasz

[crazyboy 0]

Have a look at this one:

http://www.dkexe.de/x-shut/index.php?menuid=21&reporeid=39
Unfortunately the site is mostly in german, but I am sure the owner will provide english information if you contact him.

Here is a review by Norman Kent:
http://www.dkexe.de/x-shut/index.php?menuid=0&reporeid=41

If your parachute fails to open, remember you have the rest of your live to fix it.

[DSE 3]

hmmm....your links take me to a mostly empty template/incomplete webpage?

HERE is my review of the Tonfly CC1 camera helmet. Not quite finished setting it up, but almost done.

[relyon 0]

I've never even donned a camera and inadvertently clicked on this topic. The usual disclaimers apply, free advice being worth what it is.

I'm a real big on avoiding entanglements (go figure ) and choose a helmet with that in mind. I had a regular full shell Protec ripped off my head once; thankfully the clasp broke before my neck did. This helmet is pretty good, but it could be better (*). Things I look for in all helmets are sharp edges or other discontinuities that could catch a line. Even if the line eventually slips, one's neck is often sore at a minimum. Why the plugs on this one aren't flat or curved I'm not sure, and any ridges for structural stiffness or "styling" (?) should have minimal protruberance.

Other than those things, I'll guess it's a nice camera helmet.

Bob

* - I know all about "better" being at odds with "good" engineering wise. While the point is well taken, I don't completely accept that either or we'd still be living in caves.

[DSE 3]

Quote

Why the plugs on this one aren't flat or curved I'm not sure, and any ridges for structural stiffness or "styling" (?) should have minimal protruberance.

Which plugs are you referring to? On the Tonfly, the hole plugs are rounded off and flat on top. No snag hazard of any kind, until one adds a ringsight and/or a still camera. Are we still talking about the Tonfly CC1, or another helmet?

[jee 0]

Quote

hmmm....your links take me to a mostly empty template/incomplete webpage?

HERE is my review of the Tonfly CC1 camera helmet. Not quite finished setting it up, but almost done.

What is the snag factor when the camera box is mounted? It looks like a line could snag quite easily. Or is the fit tight enough to prevent a line from getting caught between the two?
Even considering the "converter" part I still don't think you can beat a FF2.

[DSE 3]

I dragged a line across the entire helmet. No way could a line be snagged, the way the box and helmet angles are cut, a line could potentially hit that spot, but it won't snag no way, no how. It's no more a snag point than the wide angle lens that might be sticking out of the camera box.
The FF2 definitely has nice lines in the way it's built, for my own use, I can't imagine buying a helmet that locks me into one camera style/model only, and I'm not a fan of the heavier cameras on the side anyway. But...everyone has different needs. One feature I *really* like is the ability to pitch the camera up or down, depending on how it's being used.

[relyon 0]

Quote

Which plugs are you referring to? On the Tonfly, the hole plugs are rounded off and flat on top. No snag hazard of any kind, until one adds a ringsight and/or a still camera. Are we still talking about the Tonfly CC1, or another helmet?

I'm looked at the pictures shown on the web page I get following the link in the original post. The plugs are called closing caps in the photo and appear to be raised ~1/4" above the metal base ring. The rectangular-looking base where the rings are and the camera box attaches also caught my attention. I've found that which seemed like no problem on the ground was quite different in the air with heavily tensioned suspension line going against it.

As I mentioned, I've never even donned a camera helmet on the ground much less deployed with one one. I have been involved in numerous entanglements with snags resulting, the Protec incident I mentioned being one of the worst. Other than that, it looks like a very nice helmet with nice features. I defer to those who know what they're talking about (such as yourself) as to how good it is.

Bob

[DSE 3]

If you can figure out how a line under *any* degree of tension will enter the perfectly flat receiver plate that is perfectly flush with the carbon fiber, I'll concede the point. I don't believe it's possible. The plugs/closing caps are rounded where they meet the metal edge of the receiver plate, and even if a line could potentially snag there (it wouldn't, as I tried this just a moment ago, even though I did this when evaluating the helmet) I'd submit the cap would either break off or pull out under that sort of tension. There is no exposed flat side of the plug. And in my case, the plugs/caps won't be used anyway. They're only there if you don't have a camera or box on the helmet.
I can see how you might be concerned about this if you haven't held the helmet in your hands and run your hands or line over it, but it's not an issue.

I see the ladder straps on the FF2 as being a significantly greater risk than any aspect of the CC1. Once you put a ringsight on either of them, they're both snag-ready. Hence the use of nylon screws.

If you're going to get right down to it, *every* camera helmet is going to have a snag hazard on it somewhere. Ladder straps, fastex snaps, ringsights, threaded knobs, flash mount, camera buttons/knobs/switches/plugs, lenses, helmet latches.... Doesnt' matter how well it's made, how well it's designed, who makes it, or what it's made of. If you need to drill into that level of minutaie, then jumping a camera/camera helmet is probably not for you.
Either way, I have zero concern of any sort jumping this helmet with both a still and video camera on it. YMMV.

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

see the ladder straps on the FF2 as being a significantly greater risk than any aspect of the CC1

With the cutaway option on the FF2, the ladder strap feeds into the chincup so the end isn't exposed. But without the cutaway chincup, I agree... if you've got a lot of excess, snip them off. Just no reason to have those things hanging out there.

Dave

[wonder2006 0]

Got one and love it! Means that you don't have to travel with 2 helmets if you don't want to fly camera on every jump. Very quick to attach and take off again.

Customer service from Tonfly is also top notch, with a 4 week delivery time.

Agree with previous poster who mentioned having to pad up for the camera - a wee bit annoying, and definitely a point for improvement from tonfly, but overall, very pleased.

[jee 0]

Speaking of customer service. Does anybody know what their jumpsuits are like? Their High Tech Suit looks pretty cool. But I wonder what communication barriers exist, if any, considering they are overseas from the USA.

[ringo79 0]

Just got an email from tonfly today saying they have fixed the padding problem in the pc1000 box.

Also a few people have said the CC1 is a light helmet, now campaird to the Cookie and box which weighs at 515grms and the CC1 and box at 920grms it doesn't sound like a light helmet.
Is the extra 400grms noticable?

[monkycndo 0]

Haven't jumped the Cookie, but have jumped the CC1 a few times with a top mounted HC5 in one of their boxes. Willing to bet the extra weight is partly due to the zkulls quick disconnect system for the cameras. I normally jump a side mount and got to borrow the top mount. From the few camera helmets I have jumped, it did not feel heavy. I have a big melon and it fit nicely. If I wasn't looking for a helmet with more real estate on top, I'd seriously consider the CC1.

50 donations so far. Give it a try.

You know you want to spank it
Jump an Infinity