| Author |
 Replies: 211 / Views: 37,853 |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
2684 Posts |
The "scanner versus digital camera" thread illustrates that a camera is superior to a scanner for coin images. I had made this conclusion some time ago, but am now taking action. I will be selling my Nikon F SLR FTN film camera system on ebay very shortly (I'm still processing the images taken, of course, on my cheap digital camera which doesn't work all that well and needs to be replaced). Ironically, as one might expect from a $1500 camera, my Nikon takes an absolutely beautiful picture of coins along with everthing else placed in front of it. It just doesn't take digital pics (Nikon just announced they are ceasing production of almost all its film cameras). The money gained from the sale of my Nikon will go into a new digital. My questions: what digital cameras are people using (e.g., Minolta, Olympia, Nikon, etc.) and what type camera have people found to work best for coins? I do NOT need nor want one which does mpegs and audio, but I do need one for coin images and general use. What cameras have people found do NOT work for coins? My example for one which doesn't work on coins: Kodak DX3500 2.2 mpx. Price IS an object: $500 or less (preferably less). |
|
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
309 Posts |
Hello Morgan,
I have used a Sony Mavica FD-97 camera ( 2.0 megapixel) and was very succesfull ( it did have a wonderful macro).I am using a Minolta A1 now and the pics are great.
In my opinion you just have to see how the macro function works on any camera that you want to buy.The Minolta has a macro at wide angle ( less usefull for coins) or at telephoto ( which I am using).
I can get a little bit further from the coin and if I put a cut up ping-pong ball over my pop-up flash I can use it quite good without refracting light on shiny surfaces.I am also using a source of white light as opposed to just normal light bulbs ( to get rid of the yellowish effect).I use also Photoshop filters to reduce the yellow,but I like white light better.
I hope this helps.
|
|
Forum Dad
 United States
24150 Posts |
Fred, I use an Olympus C-750 (4 MP) which is absolutely fantastic for coins. It has a super macro mode which allows me to get 4 cm from the subject. It also has a 10x optical zoom which is fantastic. You should be able to get one under $500. A note about zooms... Don't be fooled into buying a camera with an extravagant digital zoom. Digital zoom for coins is well, ummm, worthless. Make sure its optical. The difference for those who don't know... Optical zoom is done with the glass lenses (like binoculars) and is extremely accurate and true. Digital zoom basically guesses at what your image would look like if it was closer. It literally remaps the pixels to what it thinks should be right. Optical actually brings it closer, digital just guesses. Now it is OK if the camera has a digital zoom, as long as it has optical also. You can leave the digital off. There may be cases where you would want to use it, like on vacation and such. Quote:
Nikon just announced they are ceasing production of almost all its film cameras That's a shame. As digital is far better than scanning, film is much better than digital. The quality of photos, that is. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7123 Posts |
Hey Fred
Save the money Just send the coins to me , I will photograph them and send you copies !!
Keep in mind I would only do this for a friend !!! Anything to help you know .
By the way I use a Dimage,, Konica Minolta it was a Christmas gift, and I'm still trying to learn everything this camera can do !!
Rick
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1529 Posts |
Bought this one just over a year ago and am having a blast using it for general photography as well as the cataloging of my collection. Being a real "expert" with one of those Kodak just point and shoot cameras for many years, changing over to this monster and then learning to use it has been challenging. I am grateful to member "Guest" here for the many tips given. I know the cost of acquring one is over what has been stipulated, but as a general rule of thumb, going upwards in a model may only cost slightly more. Shop around, there is pletora of brands and models now available and I am sure you will find one that suits your purpose and budget... 
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
My Two Cents: I am absolutely foaming at the mouth, waiting to save up enough money for a Canon S2 IS. 5MP, 12x optical zoom, image stabilization, and it'll focus on something that's touching the lens. In other words, macro focal length = Zero. Everyone I know with a Canon camera has sworn by its' macro capability, down through the years, and this is the shortest focal length I've ever seen a Canon specify. I intend to find out how good it is as soon as I can afford one. I go to NASCAR races, and the idea of a great race camera that will also photograph my coins really turns my crank. I currently use a Minolta Z2, which is good, but it's not a Canon. Oh, yeah - one can be had at Best Buy this week for $379. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
867 Posts |
I got a Samsung camera for Christmas, but you know I've never tried to take pictures of coins! What's the matter with me?  The camera does have a "macro" setting that the instructions specifically says is for taking pictures of flowers and coins, it does a darn good job on flowers! (I was out last weekend freezing my you-know-what off taking pictures of my crocuses that were in bloom) Sounds like a weekend project to me, that and digging out that yen I mentioned in the "Found in Circulation" thead... Rachel [:p] |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
9377 Posts |
Hi Morgan Fred. I use a Kodak Cx6230 2.0 megapixel. I take my picture at a distance of about 12 inch (30cm)set on macro. I then increase the size using digital zoom, about x6. The pictures are reasonable, but I'm sure could be a lot better with more megapixels and something to rest the camera on. The flash is diffused through an old opaque juice bottle. Here is a sample of what I get.   Regards Steve |
|
Forum Dad
United States
24150 Posts |
Quote:
using digital zoom, Ditch the digital zoom and move closer, you will like the results. |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
3730 Posts |
Hi:
This won't apply because of the cost. However I have owned a Nikon D-70 for almost two years, and it has exceeded all my expectations.
I bought my first Nikon in 1976, and have NEVER had to send one in for repair.
Cost would be a stumbling block for the D-70. I paid $995 for my first one, and $990 for my back-up. Of course that included lenses.
Edited by Gary Burke
03/08/2006 8:54 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
626 Posts |
Quote:
Originally posted by Morgan Fred
What cameras have people found do NOT work for coins? My example for one which doesn't work on coins: Kodak DX3500 2.2 mpx.
I don't know what the difference between a 3500 and a 3600, but here is a shot taken with my Kodak DX3600 2.2 megapixel. Keep in mind that it is also taken through a slab.  I think it takes rather goods pics, but I am in the market for an upgrade. |
|
Forum Dad
United States
24150 Posts |
quote:
In other words, macro focal length = Zero.
I can't wait to see how you get light in there.  
|
|
Rest in Peace
 United States
2684 Posts |
Thanks all. A lot of food for thought. On which I decide will be how much I get for my Nikon system, presuming it sells at all.
Fred
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
quote:
Originally posted by bobby131313
quote:
In other words, macro focal length = Zero.
I can't wait to see how you get light in there.
Well, we're about to find out. My wife, whom I love with a love which surpasseth understanding, allowed me to break loose the fundage to pick up an S2 IS. With a discount coupon that Best Buy sends me regularly (I'm a closet geek, and I've already worn out one Best Buy card if that's any indication), I got my Canon for $350. My first impression is that the Canon is completely in another league from the Minolta. The tactile sensations of operating it are vastly more solid and professional-feeling than the Minolta - it's kind of like the difference between an Acura and a Chevy Cavalier. Here's an out-of-the-box, first-try pic with Super Macro from the Canon - the lens was less than an inch from the subject. It's an actual size image, untouched in Photoshop:  For the record, that's a 1921-D VAM 1I, an R-7 coin which might just equal the Condition Census for that VAM which I believe to be MS65. You'll be seeing it later in the series I'm posting here. Is SuperDave a happy camper? Yeppers. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1203 Posts |
quote:
Originally posted by SuperDave
Here's an out-of-the-box, first-try pic with Super Macro from the Canon - the lens was less than an inch from the subject. It's an actual size image, untouched in Photoshop:
**Edited photo from quote to save bandwidth - see photo above** 
Is SuperDave a happy camper? Yeppers.
That really did it now Dave! I'm ordering my Canon S2IS tomorrow at the latest and worry about transfering the pics from the camera to this site later. First things first! Thanks for sharing, as it has helped make up my mind to learn how to post pics on the internet. For that I needed a camera and this should just about fill the bill. |
|
Valued Member
United States
194 Posts |
Dave
Very impressive!!! I muight have to trade in my Sony for one of those Cannons. Can I ask what kind of lighting you used? I am assuming the camera is user friendly? Did the software that came with it work easily?
Thanks for posting.
Margaret
|
| |
Replies: 211 / Views: 37,853 |
Posted 03/08/2006 2:59 pm
