You can rent lenses?

I don’t remember where I first heard of this (I think it was on MostlyLisa), but I do remember thinking it was odd. The idea that you can rent a lens for a few days, a few weeks, months, or more was interesting, but I didn’t see a practical use for me.

Fast forward to months later. I was preparing for a trip to Eleuthera and I really wanted to take a super-wide lens that didn’t have the fisheye look. For the D700, there’s pretty much one solution - Nikon’s 14-24mm 2.8. It’s a super wide, super sharp, all-around super lens. It’s also about $2,000.00. I was pretty sure I’d love the lens, but since I wasn’t sure how often I’d actually use it after the trip I had trouble convincing myself to buy one. All of a sudden, renting a lens made perfect sense!

I hopped over to LensRentals.com to see what they had and was surprised to find a very complete selection including the 14-24 I was after. (BTW, they also rent camera bodies, lighting, and accessories!) I read the terms and fine print and found that if you plan to take a lens out of the country, you need to get special permission from them. All that took was a quick email. No sweat.

After some consideration I decided to get the lens for 3 weeks so I’d have some time to practice with it before I went and plenty of time to get it shipped back when I got home. I still had some time before my trip so I didn’t need the lens immediately. One of the nice services they have is a reservation setup and I was able to lock in my rental for the dates I wanted it. When the time came, they charged my credit card and shipped the lens which arrived a couple of days early. Sweet.

After the trip was over and things had settled down I put the lens back in the box (after a sad farewell) they shipped it in, attached the return shipping label they sent with it, and dropped it off at a FedEx pickup. Done.

I was really pleased with the whole experience. I got to try out at length a lens I am considering buying, I was able to take the pictures I had wanted, and the rental experience was so easy it’s hard to believe. All that for about $200 (which includes a 3 week rental, shipping, and insurance) is a steal. So, scratch your head and come up with a reason to rent a lens. I’m already working on my next one!

Reviewing the Merax GPS Logger

I’ve been using the Merax Photo Finder for over a year now as my geotagging solution. There are some minor annoyances, but overall I’m quite happy with it.

Don’t be confused…
It’s a GPS logger, not a navigational system. Its only job is to know where it is and where it has been. It has no idea about waypoints or how to get back to your car. From time to time people asking me about it will hear GPS and say something like “Oh, so at least we won’t get lost!” to which the response is something like “No. This just gives the news networks something interesting to show while they’re talking about where the bodies were found.”

How does it geocode photos?
It doesn’t. When you get back to your computer a piece of software looks at the timestamp on your picture and looks up your Lat/Long for that time in the GPS log and assumes that the logger and the camera were in the same place at the same time.

Pros:

• Very easy to log data. - Just turn it on a wait a few seconds until the lady’s voice tells you she’s tracking satellites. Nothing else to it.
• Small. - I hang mine from the top of my backpack when hiking/biking or pack it in a small waterproof container for kayaking/snorkeling.
• Good reception. - The Merax picks up very well. The most common signal loss I’ve had with it has been when on steep mountains with high terrain above blocking a large portion of sky (and thus the signal from some of the sats.)
• Long battery life. - I’ve never outlasted the battery on this thing. It goes into low power mode when it senses it hasn’t moved in a while and wakes up again when moved. The battery is rechargeable via USB.
• Not just for photography. - In fact, it’s not really FOR photography either. It just logs GPS data so you can use it for whatever you like. I enjoy taking it on hikes and later using the log file to plot lines on Google Maps to share with friends.

Cons:

• Old, not so friendly interface. - It really feels like the software was an afterthought. More likely it’s a poorly thrown together attempt to pretend that this logger is all about photography. I could go on and on about how poor the software is. However, I only use the software for configuring the unit and downloading the logs so for the most part I avoid the headache. (I recently had an email from a reader who had lost his copy of the merax software. He was finally able to get through to Gisteq support an download a copy from them.)
• Not well documented. - If you decide to configure the Merax to work in a manner other than how it came from the factory you’d better be a self-reliant geek. The documentation is spartan to say the least and their website is no use at all.
• Software reliant. - It would be nice if you could read the Merax as a flash drive and just copy the logs off directly. Too bad. If you want the logs you’ll need to use their terrible software or again dive into the land of geekdom and possibly hack together something on your own. Good luck with that.

Conclusion
If you’re looking for a simple, solid logger and don’t mind a few extra steps in your workflow, the Merax Photo Finder may be the one for you. If you don’t know what a com port is you might be happier with something else.

Sigma 8mm Circular Fisheye Lens (Review & Opinions)

Summary:

Pros:

• 180×180 degree field of view.
• Smart design, smooth operation.
• Reasonably sharp.
• Opportunity to create immersive panoramas.

Cons:

• Wasted sensor space means a low resolution image.
• Not good for high-res landscapes.
• Pricey.

Detail:
The fisheye has a reputation of being a novelty/niche lens (and I won’t argue that it isn’t), but I found myself getting a lot of use out of it, especially for landscapes. I will say that I’ve never been a big fan of the distortion that is typical of a fisheye and usually correct it in post.

Recently, I sold my Nikon D80 and upgraded to the full-frame Nikon D700 and I sold all of my DX lenses along with it. This included my Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye and it didn’t take long for me to miss it. The Nikkor 24-70mm 2.8 along with the d700 is pure magic, but to me, 24mm is just not a wide enough for a satisfying landscape so the hunt was on for a replacement.

It was about that same time that I heard a comment from one of the folks on TWIP talking about how much he loved his Sigma 8mm Fisheye. I’m pretty hardheaded when it comes to the brand of lens I use. Everything else in my bag is pure Nikon so the idea of tossing a Sigma in there wasn’t a decision I took lightly. However, I couldn’t ignore the praise being dished out from TWIP so I looked around and read up on it. The comments I saw were mostly positive, but at around $800 with shipping, plus the fact that it wasn’t a Nikon, I decided not to buy. It was apparently in the cards for me to have that lens, however. A short time later I was browsing ebay and saw a Sigma 8mm Fisheye being sold from Canada and advertised as mint condition/new. With the combination of the global economic implosion causing people to sell their possessions, the exchange rate in my favor, and no one else bidding, I ended up getting the lens for less than $400.

When the lens arrived I was immediately impressed with the 180 x 180 degree view, though it took some conscious effort to keep from having fingers/feet/elbows in the shot. I also thought that the slip-off ring/cap was a great feature as it offers both protection for the glass and the ability to add a front filter if desired, though having the ring on will reduce your field of view. It also accepts gel filters in the back if you prefer not to lose the FOV.

One of the oddities that I had read about, but not yet seen, comes from this lens producing a circular image on the sensor. I’ve found this to be positive and negative. The physics of it makes sense. If you’re going to have a 180×180 view and you don’t want crazier distortion than you’re already getting, you’re going to have a circle. The problem with laying a circle down on top of a rectangular sensor is that you’re wasting a whole lot of horizontal sensor which means a smaller image (once you crop out the black) and effectively less resolution in your image. This is not a good thing when you’re shooting a landscape. There is also an additional ring around the image which is a bit odd (and can be cropped out of course.)

The best use for this lens that I’ve found has to be its ability to make immersive panoramas with very few shots. (If you’re not familiar with those, it’s the thing you’ve probably seen on a realty website where you can take a virtual tour of a room like you’re standing in the center and looking around inside a sphere.) With the actual 180+ FOV, you can technically do a complete sphere with just two shots (however, I have found that three or four work a little better.)

In Conclusion:
Knowing what I know now, the Sigma 8mm Circular Fisheye lens is not something that I would recommend if you’re looking for a new landscape lens or if you’re stuck paying retail price. However, if you spot a deal on one and want to get into the world of 360 Panoramas and equirectangular images, or you just enjoy the goofy distortion effects of a fisheye, definitely give it a look.

To see many more photos from many more photographers using this lens, check out the Sigma 8mm Fisheye group on Flickr at:
http://flickr.com/groups/75097097@N00/pool/