| Author |
 Replies: 16 / Views: 5,023 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1418 Posts |
Wow Dave, great close-ups!
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
With all I've just said, it bears mentioning that the Tamron is a formidable lens, capable of stunning results. The Sigma is no slouch, but if you're gonna go over the top, go all the way. I believe the Canon still outshines it. The Tamron's minimum focal length is 18.5 inches; I do not know how this plays in the real world, except that there will be cases where the coin needs to be on the floor.  The Canon's similar spec is 12", and I cheerfully push that limit in my daily shooting. You own a Canon, EEW. Buy the Canon. The L model is no better optically; its' advantage is IS, which is irrelevant in this arena. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1248 Posts |
Use a 90MM Tamron on a Canon Rebel and am extremely happy with it. I focus manually but use the canon Software to computer. It is great.
But Dave, I am not sure where you get the 18,5" min focal from?
I get as close as approx. 12"
lens is absolutely sufficient for any coin images.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10045 Posts |
Wow, great detail!   The DSLR companies spend the most $ on R&D for optics--and have a slight advantage. The main advantage with second-tier lens companies is a decent gear for a $ savings. |
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
But Dave, I am not sure where you get the 18,5" min focal from? Straight from Tamron's site. Your 90mm has a minimum focus distance of 11.4" Generally, there's a relationship like that - the longer the lens, the longer the minimum focus distance. |
|
Previously Banned Member
 United States
71 Posts |
Well! OK Dave! hahaha That shot of the Lincoln is just perfect! As a Lincoln lover, I'd get that coin sealed up though - looks like it is going brown, albeit a very attractive brassy type of golden brown. Presuming that shot is of a raw coin? OK enough drooling over your penny. Would you mind? Could you post all the camera specs (shutter, aperture, ISO) plus a picture of your lighting set up at the angles/positions to get that shot? You captured luster with out sacrificing any detail. Perfectly consistent outline/contrast of the bust. Your lighting angle/intensity was perfected for that shot. Do you find yourself moving lights around often when certain pennies just won't light up the same as that 1910? You are right, it doesn't get any better than that! Ok I am convinced that the Canon 100mm will improve my photos to a level I will be happy with, especially since both of our cameras have the same sensor (22.2 x 14.8)and relatively the same image size (mine=3888 x 2592 vs 4272 x 2848=yours). Ok for side by side study, the 1911 is raw, the 1910 is yours, the 1909 is slabbed - the first pic captures the luster, the second one looks lit from a similar angle as your image.. I resized these images to be the same size.     One difference I noticed was Pixel Density 22.2 x 14.8 I don't want to go off topic in this thread, however I am adding this note and link as a reminder for further photography discussion and study. Pixel Density http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key...el%20density |
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
That one's no longer in my collection; it came back MS65RB from PCGS and I liquidated it because I was expecting a 66. Here's an older pic of my lighting setup, with my (previous) 350D:  It's a 4ft section of track lighting with gooseneck fixtures; I have 3 lights (50w MR16 halogens) but generally only use two. It's wired with a dimmer inline, but I rarely use that. The gooseneck table lamp is only used to side-light die cracks and the like. The setup you see is the distance I had to keep an 8MP 350D from a Morgan to get the whole coin into the frame. Just imagine how far a 180mm lens would have forced me to place the camera. The Lincoln shot was ISO 100, 1/125@f/12 with lights at 10:00 and 2:00 to the obverse as you see it. I was never happy with IGWT, even with 3 lights; they just made it all the harder to avoid washouts so I settled on 2 lights and a slightly dark motto. And, yes, I move the lights all over the place, coin by coin. 10 and 2 is always my starting point, but I vary the angle depending on luster - the greater the luster, the closer I'm likely to make the lighting as close to vertical above the coin as I can. There are also cases where I use all 3 lights, or just one. The 100mm Macro is super-sweet between f/8 and f/13; I tend to leave it in that range and let the aperture dictate the rest of the settings. I have more than enough lighting to keep the rest of the parameters within reasonable limits. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1248 Posts |
these friggggging goosenecks are hard, nearly impossible to get....
Super Dave, what is your WB setting with these..? Most certainly NOT auto...
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
Super Dave, what is your WB setting with these..? Most certainly NOT auto... I always do a Custom white balance setting. These days I have a copystand with an 18% gray base; since my lighting changes so frequently, I do a new Custom setting with every change. Then, I fix it in the Gimp. |
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
All seriousness aside, my 450D prefers a Custom setting against pure white more than grey; even with 100w of Halogen light and a 40mm FOV, the light across the white balance test shot varies on 18% grey because my halogens are pretty tightly focused, being Spots rather than Floods. A few layers of printer paper presents a much more homogeneous backdrop.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
211 Posts |
Stunning shots SuperDave!
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
Stunning shots SuperDave! Thank you, but I can't say that I've had my work published. You, however, are The Man. |
|
New Member
United States
3 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
85 Posts |
I would go for the Canon. I have everything Canon and I love them.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
380 Posts |
Being a Nikon fanboy and everything... I would go with the Canon.
Just because I feel like you are getting a better quality lens. I have shot with both Sigma and Tamron, but I was never as satisfied. To me the 100mm is more than enough, and I get what I need out of it. You on the other hand may decide that you want/ need a little more out of your lens?
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 16 / Views: 5,023 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 12/09/2010 9:52 pm
