Coin Photography: f/2.8 105 mm v. 150 mm v. 180 mm lenses

[coinman_23885]

I have noticed that many coin photographers use a 105mm macro lens. Would a 150 mm or 180 mm lens offer enough advantages (e.g. more light on the coin) to justify a much higher cost? The 180 mm lens is about double the cost of the 105 mm of the particular lens I am considering.

[brg5658]

A 105mm or 100mm lens is sort of a "sweet spot" for imaging coins -- decent working distance from the coin (for lighting), but not un-manageable in terms of needing to mount your camera down the block.

 

I don't see that there would be any advantage to a 150mm or 180mm lens. But, there are plenty of disadvantages to lenses like that.

 

To shoot a Morgan Dollar on a Full Frame camera and a 105mm lens, you need to have a copy stand that will let you get the sensor (back of the camera) around 17 inches above the Morgan dollar. That's generally plenty of room to move around lights and what not.

 

To shoot a Morgan dollar on a Full Frame camera and with a 180mm lens, you need to have a copy stand that will let you get the sensor (back of the camera) around 30 inches above the Morgan dollar. That is (IMO) pretty darned far away, and makes photography a bit cumbersome. Not to mention, it's harder to keep your vertical axis completely perpendicular to the coin the higher your copy stand needs to extend over the coin. The 150mm lens would require 24 inches working distance -- also too long IMO.

 

The larger the lens focal length, the farther away from the coin you will have to mount your camera. To a certain extent, you do want a reasonable working distance (at least 8-10 inches for lighting, etc), but I think a 180mm lens is too large. Remember also, the farther away from the coin your lens is, the more a little tiny bit of "shake" in your system (at the camera) appears at the focusing plane (at the coin).

 

In summary, I don't think 150mm and 180mm lenses offer any benefit for macro coin photography. So you'd be paying a much higher cost for a less useful tool...seems like a no-brainer.

 

 

[RWB]

Other than more working distance and greater weight, the slight differences in image curvature probably won't matter.

[physics-fan3.14]

Mark Goodman seems to indicate that the bigger the better. By pulling the lens farther away, you can get more light on it. However, as Brandon mentioned - you will then need a bigger copy stand (expensive), you will need bigger lights (expensive), you will need to buy the bigger lens (expensive).... you get the picture. I don't think the expense is justified by the marginally improved quality, especially for the level that most of us play at.

 

I use a 100mm, and I am extremely happy with it.

[RWB]

"...you can get more light on it..."

 

Uhm...nope. It allows space for better lighting, not brighter light.

[wdrob]

 

Anyone reading this thread has to keep in mind one camp here is talking about a fixed lens 100MM Macro and the other is speaking of bellows and an enlarging lens.

 

Big differance. Both in weight, setup, and cost.

 

The bellows approach (and a little ingenuity) can be had relatively cheap.

 

 

 

[coinman_23885]

Thank you all for the detailed explanations/posts. I very much appreciate it.

[brg5658]

Anyone reading this thread has to keep in mind one camp here is talking about a fixed lens 100MM Macro and the other is speaking of bellows and an enlarging lens.

 

Big differance. Both in weight, setup, and cost.

 

The bellows approach (and a little ingenuity) can be had relatively cheap.

 

Actually, no, I was talking about a fixed lens for the sake of Kenny's question.

 

The fact that I use a bellows system has nothing to do with the question of the OP.

 

 

[wdrob]

Anyone reading this thread has to keep in mind one camp here is talking about a fixed lens 100MM Macro and the other is speaking of bellows and an enlarging lens.

 

Big differance. Both in weight, setup, and cost.

 

The bellows approach (and a little ingenuity) can be had relatively cheap.

 

Actually, no, I was talking about a fixed lens for the sake of Kenny's question.

 

The fact that I use a bellows system has nothing to do with the question of the OP.

 

 

I stand corrected.

 

 

[RWB]

Question....

 

When people "stand corrected" does that mean their bottoms are sore from Grandma's "correction stick" and so they cannot "sit corrected?"

 

OK -- not very numismatic, except some collectors get sore after buying from certain coin dealers.

[coinman_23885]

OK -- not very numismatic, except some collectors get sore after buying from certain coin dealers.

 

Some are left even more sore when selling to certain dealers. In general, it strikes me that this industry is full of sharks. Hopefully the minnows and smaller fish will start educating themselves and leave the sharks to starve and cannibalize each other.

 

My comments aren't directed at anyone in particular.

[RWB]

Ahh... the minnow here understands the need for kelp.

[rmpsrpms]

Keep in mind that modern AF Macro lenses shorten FL as mag increases. Typically they are 60 to 70% of nominal FL at max mag. So while a 100-105mm lens has reasonable WD for Dollars, it has very short WD for Cents and Dimes. I have a Nikon 105 VR Micro and find it unusable for Cents. But like Brandon, I use a bellows setup, and the fixed FL and small diameter of bellows lenses has me spoiled away from modern Macros.

 

You need to ask yourself...what size coins will I shoot most often? If mostly small coins, then a 150-180mm lens might make more sense than 100-105mm. If you shoot mostly Dollars, get the 100-105mm.

[Steve1337-migration]

I use a inexpensive 25mm long extension tube made by Kenko (still made in Japan). It allows auto focus and I mount my 35mm Sigma 1.4 DG (nikon) lens and get great results. Hope this helps!

 

Sample image below is a possible mint error on a 2015 1/10oz AGE proof.

 

 

 

[RWB]

Many inexpensive lenses will give good results. Problems are that a cheap lens might be OK at only one F-stop, and they typically have lower contrast due to internal reflections, chromatic aberration and astigmatism.

 

[Hard Times]

Mark Goodman seems to indicate that the bigger the better. By pulling the lens farther away, you can get more light on it. However, as Brandon mentioned - you will then need a bigger copy stand (expensive), you will need bigger lights (expensive), you will need to buy the bigger lens (expensive).... you get the picture. I don't think the expense is justified by the marginally improved quality, especially for the level that most of us play at.

 

I use a 100mm, and I am extremely happy with it.

 

Certainly true. BUT......... Mark Goodman takes better images than just about anyone I have seen. I went big because he went big, and I still can't replicate him perfectly all of the time, or, even most of the time. So take home is that there is more to it than the lens size but being big helps.....

 

 

HT, Who loves to image coins (somehow got to get out of this....)

 

edit: changed 'can' to 'can't'

[coinman_23885]

Thanks again everyone!

[brg5658]

Keep in mind that modern AF Macro lenses shorten FL as mag increases. Typically they are 60 to 70% of nominal FL at max mag. So while a 100-105mm lens has reasonable WD for Dollars, it has very short WD for Cents and Dimes. I have a Nikon 105 VR Micro and find it unusable for Cents. But like Brandon, I use a bellows setup, and the fixed FL and small diameter of bellows lenses has me spoiled away from modern Macros.

 

You need to ask yourself...what size coins will I shoot most often? If mostly small coins, then a 150-180mm lens might make more sense than 100-105mm. If you shoot mostly Dollars, get the 100-105mm.

 

Ray's (rmpsrpms) comments are exactly spot on. It really depends on what your personal needs are as to what lens focal length you need.

 

Given the flexibility of the bellows systems that rmpsrpms has been building for a few years now, it's hard for me to ever want to go back to a dedicated macro lens for $1500+. Unless you are flush with cash you want to throw around, or if you want to scale your imaging up to a business, I have been 100% happy with using a bellows set-up...and my setup is the same as Bob Campbell's (robec) -- you can be the judge of the quality, as you have seen plenty of images by both me and robec.

 

Professional quality images can be had for $150 camera (Canon Rebel XSi) + $80 bellows + $40 enlarging lens + $30 in lights + $100 for copy stand = $400. Sure, you can make some upgrades to certain components -- like my lens is the APO Rodagon-D 75mm f/4.0 duplicating lens (~ $300) which has fantastic flat field properties and sharpness that are hard to beat. But even then, we're still talking a complete setup for ~$650. It all depends on what you want in a system, and whether it needs to scale to high throughput.

 

It makes sense to me why Mark Goodman and Todd Pollock and Phil Arnold need $3000 cameras with $2000 lenses (or even more probably). For my personal coin imaging needs (and occasional images for friends), I simply don't have a need for that kind of equipment -- and I'm happy to save the money.

 

[wdrob]

 

Professional quality images can be had for $150 camera (Canon Rebel XSi) + $80 bellows + $40 enlarging lens + $30 in lights + $100 for copy stand = $400. Sure, you can make some upgrades to certain components -- like my lens is the APO Rodagon-D 75mm f/4.0 duplicating lens (~ $300) which has fantastic flat field properties and sharpness that are hard to beat. But even then, we're still talking a complete setup for ~$650.

 

 

You can knock out both the bellows and the copy stand by purchasing an enlarger such as the one listed below (for the next 5 hrs). Chances are you can pick that up for one bid of $20.00 and $25.00 shipping.

 

That head lifts right off the top, fabricate a plate (with the spare parts taken off the enlarger), attach a mounting bezel and then a camera and enlarging lens.

 

 

Omega C-700 Enlarger

 

 

 

 

 

[brg5658]

Professional quality images can be had for $150 camera (Canon Rebel XSi) + $80 bellows + $40 enlarging lens + $30 in lights + $100 for copy stand = $400. Sure, you can make some upgrades to certain components -- like my lens is the APO Rodagon-D 75mm f/4.0 duplicating lens (~ $300) which has fantastic flat field properties and sharpness that are hard to beat. But even then, we're still talking a complete setup for ~$650.

 

 

You can knock out both the bellows and the copy stand by purchasing an enlarger such as the one listed below (for the next 5 hrs). Chances are you can pick that up for one bid of $20.00 and $25.00 shipping.

 

That head lifts right off the top, fabricate a plate (with the spare parts taken off the enlarger), attach a mounting bezel and then a camera and enlarging lens.

 

 

Omega C-700 Enlarger

 

 

Two of my 3 copy stands are converted enlargers.

[wdrob]

 

Yep! They are offered that low very often. That one ended at $22.50 + $25.00 shipping. Not a bad entry into the bellows setup.

 

If it would have had a 100mm lens instead of the 50mm it would have been the cat's meow!

 

 

 

 

[brg5658]

Yep! They are offered that low very often. That one ended at $22.50 + $25.00 shipping. Not a bad entry into the bellows setup.

 

If it would have had a 100mm lens instead of the 50mm it would have been the cat's meow!

 

 

There is no good way to "mount" a camera above the enlarger contraption that I have found. The stand can be retro-fit to work as a very stable copy-stand, but the rest can basically be thrown away. You still need a mount for your camera and a decent bellows. Sometimes they come with a usable enlarger lens, but you can pick up fantastic enlarger lens with great optics and flat field attributes for around $40-50.

 

One of my first lenses was an $8 Vivitar 75mm enlarging lens, and when downsizing images to 700x700 pixels final size for online posting, that lens was amazing! $8, I kid you not!

[wdrob]

 

Sure there is.

 

I did it and used the existing parts that I removed from that exact same model that I provided the link to.

 

Here is example images.

 

 

 

Maybe you, or others can tell what I did there.

 

 

[brg5658]

Bill, you get the "Numismatic MacGyver Award"

 

 

 

[wdrob]

 

Hahaha!

 

Well thank you very much.

 

I might be the only person who has super glue holding part of my photography setup together.

 

 

 

[coinman_23885]

Very neat, but aren't you afraid any heat will melt the glue and the camera will fall?

[wdrob]

 

There is no heat. But even if the glue were to break its bond, the center of gravity for that camera allows it to sit there. Matter of fact, I used it without mounting (just laid it up on top over the bellows opening) while I was waiting for a mounting ring to arrive.

 

I had to mount a section of an extension tube on top of the mounting ring to allow for clearance of that flash 'hump'. I am not exactly sure how that affected the focal length but I believe it increased the magnification and that is why I can't fully photograph certain very large medals. I think the only way to compensate for that is to go with a 120mm or higher lens.

 

Not worth it since I am not imaging many very large medals.