|
This page may contain links that result in small commissions to keep this free site up and running.
Welcome Guest! Registering and/or logging in will remove the anchor (bottom) ads. It's Free!
To participate in the forum you must log in or register. | Author |
 Replies: 21 / Views: 5,740 |
|
New Member
United States
29 Posts |
Hi everyone, First post here. Actually first post ever. I have been following posts here and in the error/variety coin section for some time now. Fascinating topics. Quite new to coin photography and the coin error/variety subjects and was wondering if I could get some help understanding and selecting from the numerous trinocular stereoscopes I see are available. I see a number of posts refer to the AmScope site which in the trinocular category alone there are dozens of options, in many cases it appears there are a handful of different instruments being offered as standalone or with any combination of accessories (lights, cameras, stands with lights in the base, etc). Of the handful of standalone scopes, there are various zoom ranges available (3.5x-45x, 3.5x-90x, 7x-45x, etc). I see the scopes come with 10x eye pieces but you can purchase other eye pieces to change the view. I have read in some posts that anything more than 3.5x-45x isn't worth it or a waste (although it's only a couple bucks more). So here's my interest and goals. I want to have a rig that is capable of seeing minute details on a mint mark with sharp clarity as well as take sharp whole coin shots. I purchased a Celestron 5MP USB Microscope for $80 and wasn't pleased with quality of the images and couldn't get close enough without the non removable clear plastic cowling touching the coin. Digital zoom of course just reduces quality since I am no longer optically zooming in. The software is limited and the lighting is too smart trying to adjust to what it thinks is best and you can't override that feature. So I am planning to send that one back. The reason I am heading down the trinocular stereoscope road is because I want some super clear optical sharpness at close range, I like the idea of being able to view the subject purely through optics and then be able to take an image with a live view on my PC (27" iMac). I also already have a Nikon D90, 12 MP camera I could use to attach to the third port to take the images. I understand I will need to get a Nikon adapter. All of that being said (sorry it's such a long explanation), and given my desire to have a whole coin and minute detail range of viewing options with crisp sharp clarity.... Which scope specifications would be the best match? Or at least give me the most flexibility for my goals? Or maybe I am asking for my cake and icing and I can't get both? I've never been able to look through a stereoscope so I don't have a frame of reference on how adaptable they can be in terms of field of view, zoom levels, etc when changing out eyepieces, etc. I have seen quite a few very impressive images in your posts. I can't imagine how large Coop's hard drive and backup hard drives are. ;) Price range? Well I see the standalone scopes are in the $250 to $450-$500 range which I can manage. I know I need a few more items as well, Nikon adapter, additional eyepieces maybe, software to post process, some good lighting, software to support remote shutter release and live view for MAC. Anyway, your expertise would be much appreciated and thanks much in advance. Please don't hesitate to let me know I am headed down the completely wrong path here if that's the case. I have enjoyed learning from all of you and am looking forward to continuing to do so. |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
872 Posts |
well all I can say is a AmScope version is out there for you. They have student sized stereo microscopes or the heavier industrial microscopes. The student microscopes typically weigh 5 to 8 pounds. The more beefier and stocky industrial microscopes can weigh between 10-18 lbs. As for photographs, you should check out some of my posts. I don't have time right now to explain all the details, but the pics should show you what the setup can do. I got two microscopes, one smaller student one I paid 145.00 for and the other was a industrial version I paid $245.00 for. Both are AmScope, both do what they are intended to do. The heavier one is a TRINOCULAR and the smaller one is BINOCULAR. I then bought a Canon T3i Body refurbished for 350.00 from Canon and the AmScope camera adapter for 89.00. I DID buy a 5MP Microscope Camera from AmScope, and this works GREAT if you have a microscope that can take an additional lens and get the power factor up there. For the AmScope Microscope Cameras. I had a source tell me that there is not much difference in the QUALITY of the pictures when you go from a 3MP to a 5MP to a 10MP or higher microscope camera. The Quality is a different animal than pixel size. I bought the 5MP and I will stay there. My lighting consists of 2 Walmart desktop gooseneck lamps. AT 12.49 a pop that was a cheap investment. For lighting, it will change dramatically between coins. having a good lighting system is important, but MASTERING how to diffuse that lighting to eliminate the glare on a coin and have a decent presentation is paramount. I need a custom desktop light box so I can use it on either scope, it can be small enough to surround the micrscope lens, and that can cover 3 out of 4 sides of a square with the bottom side open, where I can position a coin, while the 3 sides diffuse light. Ok, so through all that, I own a business and the intent is to buy and sell. So my purpose may be different than yours. here is what my setup looks like; https://goccf.com/t/173936If I had to do it all over again, I may have bought a slightly lower powered industrial microscope. I think this one is a 10x 20x 30x 40.... I should have went from say 2x to 40 or so. the smaller student style microscope does 3.5 to 20, and thats OK, it does the job. Since I have 2 scopes, I have one I can inspect a coin on, and another that I can shoot pics on. |
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
You're not going to get sufficient field of view from a quality scope for full-face images. That will require a bespoke lens with your D90, which can get expensive. Google up "reversed lens" for a rather cool way to create a Macro lens from what you have in stock, or consider lens extension tubes.
The magnification required to view coin details with the naked eye will differ drastically from that necessary to shoot them. Consider the size of a pic from your Nikon viewed full size on your monitor - there's considerable magnification inherent in that. I use no more than 4x for digital imaging, and even that gives so little depth of field that z-stacking is necessary. So your scope will want a low mag setting for imagery, and 30-40x (max) for your eye.
|
|
New Member
 United States
29 Posts |
Collector-Corner and SuperDave, thank you very much for your feedback.
Collector-Corner: that's a great link to your setup. Very informative. Thank You.
SuperDave: I would have never imagined reversing the camera lenses like that was possible. You are right, what a really cool idea! I understand the extension tube concept now too. Thank you.
So from what I gather from your feedback, a trinocular stereoscope is not really suited for full face imagery but very well suited (given proper lighting techniques) for observing/capturing minute details of a subject. So in Your (Collector-Corner) setup article, you mention you have a 3.5x-40x trinocular stereoscope and at 3.5x (largest field of view) you can get at most about a half of a penny of visibility..... At 20x you can get the full date in view, I would imagine at your scopes max mag of 40x your entire field of view is filled with a mint mark or even closer? Does that sound right?
Coop asked you later in a post about your full face images.... Based on the field of views described above at 3.5x which could only get half a penny in view, how did you get full face images? Did you take your full face images using a technique like what SuperDave is referring to?
Here's a basic question I just realized..... When you look through the binocular portion of the trinocular stereoscope and a camera is plugged into the third port, is it true at a given magnification, that what you see and the camera sees are different views since the camera is not looking through a 10x eyepiece? Essentially, don't you need to remove a naked eye viewing eyepiece from a port in order to plug in the camera with the adapter attached to its body? If this is the case, what is the difference in view?
I think I was under the impression when you plug your camera into the third port you are getting the image in the camera that your are viewing through the binocular eyepieces. I have a feeling this may not be the case. I think I am struggling to understand how the stereoscope magnification varies given the scopes mag range and the eyepiece power (or lack thereof when the camera adapter is plugged into the third port). If I could get my hands on a scope to tinker with, it might become clear quickly how the scope mag range and eyepiece powers correlate. Guess that's why I am getting some help from you guys before I invest. ;)
I understand now what you (SuperDave) are talking about with respect to not needing to get a camera view of just the area of interest. A larger field of view image, with good lighting, sharp focus, and adequate resolution, can be zoomed in on and cropped to view the area of interest. You are right, a 12MP image viewed at 100% on my 27" monitor is quite a huge image.
Again, as SuperDave pointed out, it appears I am going to need to get my full face images without the use of the stereoscope. If I want to use my D90, I will need to get a tripod setup and an appropriate macro config (bespoke?, reversing lens, extension tubes, etc.). I did Google 'bespoke lens' and couldn't come up with any results. What is this SuperDave?
Gentlemen, thanks again for your continued feedback in advance. Your knowledge is very helpful and appreciated.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4038 Posts |
Bespoke means "made to order", "custom-made", or sometimes "purpose-built" in the context SD used it, I believe. It is an Old English term. I will often use the term "dedicated macro lens" to describe a lens that is intended for macro photography but fits a standard camera mount. This type of lens is a "bespoke macro lens"...Ray
Contact me for photographic equipment or visit my home page at: http://macrocoins.comEdited by rmpsrpms
04/25/2014 12:26 am
|
|
New Member
United States
29 Posts |
Hi Ray, thanks for the term definition. Yeah, that sounds expensive. Actually a dedicated macro lens may not be that pricey. When you said custom made, THAT is what sounded expensive! Thanks.
Edited by Gestin
04/25/2014 12:31 am
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
Hi Ray, thanks for the term definition. Yeah, that sounds expensive. Actually a dedicated macro lens may not be that pricey. When you said custom made, THAT is what sounded expensive! Thanks.
Actually, a dedicated macro lens for your Nikon - in an appropriate focal length around 100mm - is a rather pricey proposition of around $500-600 or more. It'd be far less expensive to do a bellows/duplicating lens setup as we're so prone to promoting around here (  ), but I chose not to recommend such a rig for you given your needs. It doesn't lend itself to the studying process, being more oriented towards imagery than live viewing. The trinocular you're considering is an excellent platform, along with your quality camera, for detail imaging so all you'll need is an inexpensive solution for full-face imagery. The advantages of a bellows/lens setup would be wasted for you. So, if you've already got a decent 50-75mm fixed focal length lens laying around, either reversing or extension tubes will give you a cheap and high-quality full-face imaging capability with very little learning curve. That's all you need. Quote:
Here's a basic question I just realized..... When you look through the binocular portion of the trinocular stereoscope and a camera is plugged into the third port, is it true at a given magnification, that what you see and the camera sees are different views since the camera is not looking through a 10x eyepiece? Essentially, don't you need to remove a naked eye viewing eyepiece from a port in order to plug in the camera with the adapter attached to its body? If this is the case, what is the difference in view?
Yes, the camera sees less magnification because it doesn't have the 10x eyepiece. This is compensated by the sensor/image in the monitor magnification thing. In the end analysis, what you shoot won't be a whole lot different than what you see - at least, it'll be quite close enough for you to meet the goal of picturing what you're looking at. |
|
New Member
United States
29 Posts |
Thanks again for your guidance SuperDave. Yes, that macro lens is pricy! My Nikon lens lineup consists of:
- Nikon DX 35mm prime, f/1.8, 52mm front lens thread
- Nikon 85mm prime, f/1.8, 62mm front lens thread, with aperture ring
- Nikon DX Telephoto Kit lens, 18-105mm, f/3.5-5.6, 67mm front lens thread
So for the "Reversing Lens" method, both of my prime lenses fall outside of the 50-75mm you mentioned. My D90 has a 1.5 crop factor for the sensor.... not sure if that comes into play here. Maybe the 85mm is still a good candidate? The 85mm is a really nice lens and has the benefit having a manually adjustable aperture ring where the other two strictly DX lenses do not. So in addition to the already required Nikon (or equiv) BR-2A Reversing Ring (~$40), I would also need to get a Nikon (or equiv) BR-5 62mm-52mm adapter ring (~$29) to make it work. A Set of 3 extension tubes (man there are a million brands out there) would be in the sme price range as the two reversing components mentioned above (some more and some less $$). Maybe the extension tubes route is the better way to go given I can mixup the different combinations of extension tubes and use them for all of my lenses? I am curious which of the two methods above (reversing lens vs. extension tubes) provides a sharper image? or will they provide the same result and it would really come down to convenience of setting it up? Price wise they are both very inexpensive solutions like you said. Ok, sounds like the stereoscope is a no brainer for the detail viewing and imagery. So when you mentioned a couple posts ago: Quote:
So your scope will want a low mag setting for imagery, and 30-40x (max) for your eye. You are referring to the 3.5x-45x as the ideal choice, right? And the 3.5x-90x will not be of any benefit, correct? The 45x to 90x zoom range of the later in these scopes is really too close to have any practical use when looking for small coin error/variety details? Sorry, beat this dead horse, I just want to make sure getting the 3.5x-90x for $30 more is a waste of money or is it worth the small increased investment given my intended use. I haven't looked into one of these scopes to have a frame of reference unfortunately. Thanks again guys for helping me spend my money.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4038 Posts |
Your 85mm f1.8, with extension tubes, will be the solution of choice for full-coin imaging. You will need some Nikon extension tubes, available fairly cheaply on ebay. Get the ones that don't have any electronic connections as you will use the lens with manual aperture and manual focus. I can't suggest how many or what length tubes to get, so you'll need to experiment. The lens itself will be set to f5.6 for Dimes/Cents/Nickels/Quarters and f8 for Halves/Dollars. Should give you excellent images...Ray Contact me for photographic equipment or visit my home page at: http://macrocoins.com |
|
New Member
United States
29 Posts |
Thanks Ray. I am searching ebay right now and have about a million hits to plough through! Do you think I should go with Nikon tubes (if Nikon makes them)? or run with some 3rd party tubes. If I don't go with the electrical contact tubes.... there's not much else that can go wrong I guess.... just quality material and secure fit is all that's left to be concerned about I suppose. I think I will check some reviews to see what brand is reputable. I am ok spending a little more for a better quality set if necessary. I see most sets come with three tubes (12mm, 20mm, and 36mm). Thanks again! |
|
New Member
United States
29 Posts |
I think I just figured out the difference between the 3.5x-45x stereoscope and the 3.5x-90x stereoscope based on the Packing List of a pair of these stereoscopes........ given a particular series AmScope stereoscope .... for instance, the SM-1TX (3.5x-45x) and the SM-1TZ (3.5x-90x), the SM-1TX is the same stereoscope as the SM-1TZ, with the exception that the SM-1TZ is just supplied with one additional Barlow (the 2x), which turns a 3.5x-45x into a 3.5x-90x? So I could pickup the 3.5x-45x stereoscope (which is probably better suited to my needs anyway) and if down the road I have some need for 90x (even for some non-coin inspection related purpose), I would't need to go buy another stereoscope, I could just pickup a 2x Barlow and I would be good to go? AmScope SM-1TX (3.5x-45x) http://www.amscope.com/sm-1tx.html AmScope SM-1TZ (3.5x-90x) http://www.amscope.com/sm-1tz.htmlDoes that sound right? Is it that simple? |
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
Does that sound right? Is it that simple?
Yup, it's that simple. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4038 Posts |
One thing that may be misleading is the site implies a working distance of 8" across the whole 3.5x...90x zoom range. I believe this is not true, and that the 8" working distance is for the scope without either barlow installed. In this configuration the zoom range would be 7x...45x, still very respectable. With the 0.5x barlow the zoom range would be 3.5x...22.5x, with working distance 16". For 2x barlow the range would be 14x...90x, with working distance of 4". This is how barlows added to objectives work. If someone else has experience with this scope that says differently, please chime in. Barlows on oculars don't change the working distance..Ray
Contact me for photographic equipment or visit my home page at: http://macrocoins.com |
|
New Member
United States
29 Posts |
Hi Ray, I took a look at the following 7x-45x AmScope stereoscope: AmScope SM-1T (7x-45x) http://www.amscope.com/sm-1t.htmlAnd found that a Barlow isn't included in the packing list... which supports your thoughts on the zoom range..... but, the scope description indicates it has a 4" working distance... hmm.. tricky.... Actually, if the 7x-45x with no barlow equates to a 4" working distance, then maybe you get 3.5x-22.5x with the 0.5x barlow (like you said) and a best case 8" working distance. and then you get 14x-90x with the 2x barlow (like you said) and a best case 2" working distance. You are right, it is a little misleading the way they list the working distance.... I think they list the best case working distance given the barlows (or lack thereof) included. Just thinking here..... thanks for your input! |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4038 Posts |
That makes a lot of sense versus my B&L Stereo/Zooms. They have native WD of around 4", and their barlows do exactly what you describe. The SZ4's have range of 7x...3x...Ray
Contact me for photographic equipment or visit my home page at: http://macrocoins.com |
|
New Member
United States
29 Posts |
Thanks everyone for your help! I have the following on the way: AmScope SM-1TX (3.5x-45x) http://www.amscope.com/sm-1tx.html Except I found it on ebay new for $325 And the associated Nikon Adapter for $88 from the same source on ebay. I am also watching a set of extension tubes hoping to bid on those later this weekend. Thanks again for the help. |
| |
Replies: 21 / Views: 5,740 |
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Contact Us | Advertise Here | Privacy Policy / Terms of Use
|
| Coin Community Forum |
© 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Forums |
| It took 0.97 seconds to rattle this change. |
 |
|
| |
| |
Posted 04/24/2014 08:09 am
