Wich macro lens is best

I have a choice between

Wich macro lens is the best

Thanks


1/Tamron AF18-200 mm - f / 3.5-6.3 XR Di - II LD Aspherical (IF) Macro - super zoom lens with macro function - Suitable for Nikon 169,00 euro

2/ Tamron AF 70-300mm F / 4-5.6 Di LD Macro 1 : 2 - telephoto zoom lens with macro function - Suitable for Nikon 136,00 euro

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Would you be terribly offended if I said neither of those? Those are not macro lenses - they are zoom lenses with a macro feature. If you want a macro lens for high quality coin photography, those will not be the best choice. If you want an all-around lens that could probably get decent enough coin pictures with some fighting, go with the first one. The second one is a telephoto lens, and will be terrible for coin pictures.

A true macro lens is going to be expensive - but worth it if you are serious about it. Since you seem to have a Nikon camera, take a look at this article. It will explain macro lenses, and help guide you to the best choice: http://www.techradar.com/news/photo...s/best-macro-lens-for-nikons-8-tested-1079616

 

thanks
Nikon AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR 40mm - f/2.8G - Macro lens | Nikon
i am gonna buy this one

 

A much better choice, but....

I probably should have mentioned this earlier. For coins, you really want a focal length a bit longer than that. Mark Goodman recommends around 100mm, or longer if possible.

The problem you will have with the 40mm lens is that you won't be able to get enough light on the coin. With the lens very close to the coin, you limit the light - and if you pull it back farther the coin looks smaller.

Sorry for not telling you that earlier

 

Awesome answers from physics-fan.

 

i didn't buy it yet. I cannot spent more then 225 euro

 

ro, practice with your new camera first! You could get a nice coin instead of a lens you aren't ready for.

 

The Nikon l840 Coolpix is back to the vendor. I can make beter pictures with mine telephone
i am now go for the

Nikon D3200 Body now i am only needs a lens

 

I hate to be disagreeable but, no, that's a lie, I thrive on it some days.....

Physics-fan is 100% right about those zooms being bad choices. They are made for people who buy a camera with interchangeable lenses and then try to get one lens that does everything poorly. I will never understand this desire. Generally the longer a zoom range is, the more it must compromise at one end or another. Do-all zooms focus closely but do not have the other corrections required for best work at close distances. Macro lenses are made to give their best results at closer focusing distances and provide sharp images out to the corners with a flat field of focus. They are great for shooting a dollar bill. Coins, however, are round and do not use the corners of the lens so you can forgive a lens that has lesser performance in corners or focuses at a slightly different distance in the center than in the corners. I have a 100mm Canon (camera manufacturer brand) macro lens and it is great. I also have a Canon 70-200 zoom that cost about the same and it is very hard to tell the difference except that the zoom lets me be almost twice as far away from the coin when I shoot. Is the slight sharpness gain of the macro worth the convenience of the zoom (used on extension tubes)? It makes no difference to me for coins as I shoot them and I own both so I can choose as the mood strikes. The zoom does better birds and insects.

Here is the 'tough love' part: 90% of the owners of good camera equipment nver learn to use them well enough to see the difference between a good short range zoom and a prime macro. If I had it to do over, I might buy a 180mm macro (even more expensive) just to show off I had one but I'm less sure my photos would improve enough to matter. Below is a shot with the Canon 70-200 f/4 zoom on extension tubes reduced to fit here:

and a small part of it cropped from the unreduced image:


If you are a better photographer than I am AND own a better lens your results may be better. If not both, buying a better lens may not help until you do some practicing.

This image was made using a 2006 original model Canon Digital Rebel camera. Newer ones will be a bit better. The image below was made with a 1970's Yashica 100mm macro lens. It was adapted to the Digital Rebel using a Russian M42 to Canon adapter on a home made CY to M42 adapter (two old extension tubes and Gorilla Glue - I kid you not). Obviously this rig only works for macro but it works. Before blaming your equipment, consider the problem may not be the glass. Those with experience in photo will be able to see that this Septimius is not as sharp as the Probus. Those who plan to make smaller images than these, may decide they don't need the $1000 lens.

Camera sellers make millions selling upgrades to people not ready for them. I suggest using the D3200 with the lens it came with until you understand it well enough that you are ready to make informed upgrade decisions.

You will have to crop quite a bit to get images that fill the frame. The D3200 has plenty of image quality to spare so you can crop unless you want really huge images. If you can not crop images to your satisfaction, you may want a set of automatic extension tubes:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Genuine-Ken...ital-Camera-/231534019994?hash=item35e880c59a
This is the brand I have but there are cheaper that may work as well. Do NOT buy the under $10 ones that lack the electric connections. I have Canon and know nothing about Nikons and the off-brand stuff made for them. The two manufacturer brands are both excellent with fans that unreasonably hype one over the other.

 

This is the one I've been using lately.......

 

Dude nice lenses I don't know which one is better, but this is not National Geographic. IMHO-You do not need gnarly equipment to take good coin pictures.

 

Thanks all

 

I will submit to you Exhibit A. The left picture is with the stock lens that came with my camera. The right picture is with my macro lens. Sure, the left picture is decent enough, and is vastly superior to anything a phone/point-and-shoot or similar cheap camera can do. However, the right picture is significantly better. If someone is serious about taking coin pics, then a high quality lens is vital.

 

Nice photos. I think we can agree to disagree.

This was done with my phone.

 

I just don't think its necessary. If your really serious about photography I am sure you can use your lens for other stuff.

 

At the uploaded size, the differences between these two shots are predominantly in lighting and post-processing.

I have several purposed designed macro lenses, and they do have some distinct advantages. The main one is that they allow you to put more pixels (or film) on the subject more easily. Macro lenses are also usually they are better corrected optically in several ways for close-range use, but these effects are minor. If there's interest, I can illustrate this with comparison shots under identical lighting, first using the 105mm VR Nikkor shown about, and then by using a 70-300mm lens with an accessory close-up lens.

Different people have different definitions about what being "serious" about coin photography means, but as the two shots you posted illustrate so clearly, it's not all about the lens.

 

Try as I might, I have been unable to duplicate images I made of coins several years ago. Some of the new ones come out better and some worse. The images record the camera and lens used as well as aperture but it would have required my recording the exact lighting used and I did not then (still don't for that matter). Lighting is very much a performance art and every little wiggle of a coin changes results just like it does with the violinist's bow that separates one performance of a middle school orchestra from another. Professionals are more consistent than I am.

I do agree that macro primes are much better corrected than consumer grade zooms. I am just discovering the things that can be done in the inner levels of RAW software (I use DPP4 but there are many expensive ones that some people swear by. Are color aberrations postprocessed equal to those avoided with a better lens? I guarantee neither method makes as much difference as a solid, vibration free mount. I am certain that I am incapable of producing a pair of images that fairly isolates the contribution of one variable. I also know that I can produce images at least as good as I need for the coins I can afford. I am reshooting some of my favorite coins and see some improved but most just different. Coin photography is a side hobby I have found not much cheaper than collecting since I have been known to buy a coin to see if I am good enough to take a good photo of it. Canon has upgraded my best camera twice since I bought one. At least I have avoided chasing that rabbit down his hole.

 

I want to pursue coin photography as a side hobby and I was hoping it would be easier on the wallet. I'm already looking for a camera I can tether and control from my computer.

 

I know nothing about other brands but Canon cameras that are packaged with "EOS Utility" software should add this feature. I never use it because My setup is not close to my computer and I am happy with doing it the old way. Some cameras may have WiFi capability to do this without a wire but I have not investigated that. I consider wiggling coins and lights more important that sitting at a computer when shooting so I only tied and abandoned this technique. Others swear by it.

 

Thanks for your input!