Re: Coin photographers?

K6AZ <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:j83bf2hsta960bs0nid6n7flqh5aim3rkr@xxxxxxx:

On 29 Aug 2006 20:52:15 -0700, "Phil DeMayo" <flip1948@xxxxxxx>
wrote:

anti-spam wrote:

It's not a matter of semantics.

It's just that the lighting did change between the shots, and the
crappier lighting used with the fixed-lens camera resulted in a
crappier picture.

Your examples absolutely, positively do NOT prove the superiority
of one camera over the other.

(Although I personally prefer my SLR over my point-and-shoot for
close-ups and macros.)

In the post in which Eric provided the links to the two images he
did not say the lighting was the same....he said the setup was the
same.

The point of his post was that with the fixed lens digital camera,
the majority of which use the wide-angle end of the zoom ratio for
their macro mode, you have to get so close to the subject that the
camera and/or lens will block the light. He proved that with his
images.

Now, here's exactly what he said before listing the
links....perhaps you need to read it again:

"Now as far as fixed lens cameras, I have one of the best, the
Nikon 8800. It does
great outdoors, and the 10x optical zoom with VR really is sweet.
But it just can't
compare to a SLR and a good macro lens. I've been through plenty of
fixed lens
cameras and they all have the same problem, to get close enough to
the coin to
get a decent sized macro shot you wind up with the lens blocking
your light source
only allowing light on to the coin at a low angle which is bad for
doing coins, you
want a high angle of light which is impossible when your lens is
only a couple of
inches away from the coin.

Here are two shots of the same coin, one taken with the 8800 and
one with the
D70. The setup for both was identical, only the cameras were
switched:"

His example clearly illustrated the superiority of the DSLR in that
it's greater subject to lens distance allowed for proper lighting
of the coin. The fixed lens camera did not allow for this and I
doubt that significant repositioning of the lights would have
resulted in the type of image he acheived with the DSLR. Moving the
lights in closer would have resulted much harsher
lighting....requiring much experimentation with diffusing the
lights.

Additionally, if you take a good look at the images you should be
able to clearly see that the dedicated macro lens was also
optically superior.

Thanks Phil. I'm not sure what his point is. On one hand he says he
prefers a DSLR, but his argument seems to be that my comparison was
flawed claiming that the lighting was different between the two
cameras. Everything was the same with the exception of the position
of the cameras which was necessary due to the differences in the
lenses.

I've been in arguments before where people have tried to tell me
they could do as well with a fixed lens consumer camera. As you
know, I made the change to digital cameras over five years ago.
I've gone through half a dozen cameras, and there is just no
comparison. It's like trying to compare a Honda Civic to a
Mercedes.

If anyone here wants to argue that a fixed lens can do as well as a
DSLR with a macro lens, I would challenge you to image a dime.
Dimes have been the most difficult for me to photograph, and I
still have some bugs to work out (mostly the cool spot at 12
o'clock) but if anyone wants to argue that a fixed lens camera can
do as well, try this with a fixed lens camera:

http://www.k6az.com/forums/1940_mercury_obv_lg.jpg
--
K6AZ Forum

http://www.k6az.com/forum/


Woah! Hey! Are you knocking my Honda Civic?!? ;-) Just kidding!

Just blow that guy off, Eric. It's not worth arguing over. At some
point, you two just have to agree to disagree and let it drop. I think
we all understand what you did, and what the effect was. That's the
point, and your experiment was understood by most - me included.

As for your challenge - I'm gonna try to take you up on that challenge!
Ha! Well, why the hell not? I've only got the digicam and no dSLR, so I
will do my best to duplicate your pic. Now, if you'll just send that
Merc to me, I can get started! If I win, I get to keep the coin, ok? Ha!
But, seriously, what grade did PCGS give that Merc? Just guessing: a 66?

No, I don't seriously expect to match the beauty of that pic. But, I'd
like to see if I can even get *reasonably* close with the camera that I
do have. Or, I'd like to see how close I can get, I guess. Will my pic
be 'horrible', 'acceptable', 'good', 'very good', 'pretty much on par
with that one'? How far off is my photography from that of a master
photographer like yourself?

No, I'm not taking the challenge in order to prove you wrong. I think
that you've proven your point, and I don't doubt you are correct in
every way about this thread. I'm just curious as to what I can do. I
know my pics (of circulated coins, anyway) are pretty decent, for ebaY's
standards. But, I still wonder what I can do with a lustrous, toned
beauty like that!

So, if you don't mind, I'd like try to take some pics of one of my shiny
Mercs (I have a few in the 65-66 range that might slightly compare to
that one), and we can compare here for educational purposes, not for any
other evil reason. So, I'm taking the challenge of trying to produce a
pic of a dime similar in quality to that one, but with my Panasonic
Lumix DMC-FZ5 instead of a dSLR. But, I'm not making the argument that
my digicam can do as well as your dSLR with macro lens. Understood? This
is just for educational purposes - mostly for me.

Of course, the setup (copy stand, lighting, etc.) is kinda important,
and my setup is nowhere near as nice as yours is, either. So, this may
be a failed experiment from the get-go. Oh well. At least it'll be a
discussion topic.

BTW - thank you again, Eric, for re-hashing this old thread! It's become
a pretty popular thread, and I'm learning even more! Too cool! You rock!

--
Eric Babula
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: PING Eric Tillery: Coin Photographers Challenge (Long)
    ... could produce as good of pictures as a dSLR. ... Some argued that it's the lighting that's more important than the ... Some said the person behind the camera is most important. ... "If anyone here wants to argue that a fixed lens can do as well as a ...
    (rec.collecting.coins)
  • Re: Lighting and coin photos
    ... > What is the best lighting here. ... Just as you hear in real estate "location, location, location" in coin ... When I was taking pictures with an old digital Mavica I ... With the Mavica I had to get the camera very close to the ...
    (rec.collecting.coins)
  • PING Eric Tillery: Coin Photographers Challenge (Long)
    ... Some argued that it's the lighting that's more important than the ... Some said the person behind the camera is most important. ... "If anyone here wants to argue that a fixed lens can do as well as a ... Now, even though I only own a digicam, I do ...
    (rec.collecting.coins)
  • Re: Coin photographers?
    ... the crappier lighting used with the fixed-lens camera resulted ... superiority of one camera over the other. ... The point of his post was that with the fixed lens digital ... only allowing light on to the coin at a low angle which is bad ...
    (rec.collecting.coins)
  • Re: Coin photographers?
    ... was that with the D70 the camera was not blocking the higher angles of ... It's just that the lighting did change between the shots, ... crappier lighting used with the fixed-lens camera resulted in a crappier ... the coin. ...
    (rec.collecting.coins)
Loading