Coin Photography

The MPE65 is an excellent lens, one of the best out there that can mount directly to the camera. Many award-winning photos have been shot with it. But it's not too useful for coin photography, since it STARTS at 1:1 and goes up from there. This is the opposite problem from the Zeiss and other dedicated macros that stop at 1:2. The MPE65 is also quite heavy, and large in diameter, so has the same problem as the Zeiss and other dedicated macros in getting light to the subject. In fact, the MPE65 is FAR worse due to its use at high magnification. The higher the magnification, the closer you are to the subject, so the harder it is to get light in there.

Here is a nice explanation of the problems associated with high-magnification shooting, and a couple of older Canon lenses designed for this purpose. The MPE-65 is even listed on this page:

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fdlenses/fdmacro/2035macro.htm

A bellows system has the advantage that you can choose objective lenses for particular purposes, or just use one lens that works over a wide range. If you go the dedicated macro route, to cover full Dollar shots at 0.4x to variety shots at 5x, you would need to buy both the Canon 100mm and the MPE65, and spend around $1500. If you bought a bellows, a ~80mm lens, and a 4x objective, it would cost you between $250 and $500 (used prices). You could spend more, but at the $500 level you would get higher quality shots and spend $1000 less than you did on the dedicated lenses. Main drawback is you lose the ability to take the system out into the field, but we are talking coin photography here...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

That makes sense - the MPE-65 does come off as a bit closer to a microscope than a macro lens.

Thanks for the details.

Dave

 

Well, a microscope has additional optics not present in the MPE-65. There's really nothing special about the MPE-65, it's just a 65mm lens with a long throw. I suspect it shortens focal length, because if it didn't it would have to extend almost 300mm to get to 5x. This further reduces working distance, unfortunately. Microscopes generally have objectives that are optimized for a given magnification, while the MPE-65 is rated over a wide range of mags. So using the MPE-65 is still in the realm of PhotoMacrography, not PhotoMicrography.

 

Do any of you notice (for all you eBay sellers on board) that the quality and lighting on your photos are what bring you more sales? I just updated most of my store's listings with better photos (although not great, still working on lighting, focus, etc) but a lot better than what I had.. since then, in the last five days, I've sold over 15 items easy. anyone see this being an means to an end?

 

Well...of course. The people buying from crappy pictures are the gamblers and not many coin collectors are gamblers. If you really want to sell coins, you juice them like some questionable sellers on ebay.

 

Bad pictures = slow sales, low selling price
Decent pictures = slow sales, some competitive bidding
Good pictures = quick sales, top dollar bids

 

Haha, yeah that is a common practice by those few, I try not to go overboard with juicing them, all I do is use the Auto Contrast and in some cases bump Saturation up by a few points, but nothing to make the coin unrealistic. So far every customer I've sold to has never complained about my photos, thankfully!

 

I use a Nikon D-3100 with a Sigma 150MM Macro lens and I love my set up. I also use a copy stand with day light bulbs.



It really does a good job.....Dex

 

Is that under diffused lighting? Photo looks great!

 

There is no way that is diffused lighting. In my experience, diffused lighting destroys the luster.

 

Dexter made me do it.......

Joe,

You are killing me with your Buffs. I have to break out the big guns. I don't think you have seen this one.

My setup is a Canon 5D MK II with a Canon 100 mm MACRO bolted to a copy stand. Lighting was two Halogen lamps. I shot it in RAW mode and did a manual White Balance. As always any constuctive photographic critisism is always appreciated. there are some reaily awesome photogs here. My feelings cannot be hurt. Some say I have a very thick skin, but I just think I am too stupid to know when I have been insulted
BTW, this Warrior was an old friend of Lehigh96. Thanks Paul

 

Wow, that photograph is better than both mine and Brandon's. Brandon Kelley that is!




Having seen that coin in hand, I think your photo is by far the closest to the in hand appearance of the coin. Ours emphasize the green too much, specifically on the reverse.

 

Thanks Paul,

It was a bugger to shoot and I don't think I am done yet:smile

 

No Sir, I never defuse my lighting. I've tried it in the past and it just never seems right. Probably just me. That is one GORGEOUS 36 my friend, very nice. Lehigh96 is a good man with great coins. And man he sure can image a coin just fine, one of the best around. Thank you for the complement on my 1915 Buff, I like that one too. It's housed in a pcgs holder with the assigned grade of MS-66 but I think it's a little better than the assigned grade, that's why I bought it. It's sure not hard to look at either. When I need a good subject to image the 1915 is always a good one....Dex

 

Here's a 34 Buffalo imaged with the T2i

 

no lens? Amazing!

 

Yep, that T2i is amazing! But I did use a lens, a 75mm Apo Rodagon D M1:1 duplicating lens.