I played with one a long time back and was not to impressed. I should try again now as my knowledge is better. I don't see the need for it but for people it works for go with what works.
<< <i>Who's used one and what can you tell me about it? >>
I have played around with one. It is a bear to get set up correctly, but once done, it allows a great deal of flexibility for lighting. Personally, the shots take with the lens appears "flat" when you move the light directly above the coin (as axial lighting does), and I could not justify the expense as I prefer the look of a longer standard macro lens with a slightly off axis position of light to bring out the luster.
Depth of field was not a concern, and is actually deeper than the typically longer macro lens -- as depth of field is inversely related to focal length (85mm for T/S -vs- 150+mm for typical macros), with subject distance and aperture held constant.
If you were interested in getting some first-hand experience, try and find a photography store that allows you to rent lenses. I am fortunate enough to live near just such a store.
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
I used a Nikon 105mm short mount bellows lens on a tilt-shift bellows once for some coins. The advantage is you have more degrees of freedom with where to place your lights as the camera can be out of the way and still appear to get a straight-on shot. From a practical point of view, however, it's much trickier to use, as focusing involves adjusting the focus in the traditional manner and adjusting the tilt until you hit the combination that gives you the perfect shot. If you change the angle of the coin, you start over. It was an interesting academic exercise, but no way would I want to shoot a whole collection this way. If you don't have the skills to take a competent shot without tilting the lens, adding tilt will not make your life easier or results better. If you're curious about using one, by all means rent one for a weekend and use it for lots of different things, as they are interesting to use and it will be an educational experience.
Yes, but so are experienced message boarders. I'll take my coin-related questions here, my "How many helium balloons would it take to lift me?" questions to Google.
"I'll split the atom! I am the fifth dimension! I am the eighth wonder of the world!" -Gef the talking mongoose.
Would seem like a pain to use but worse you could end up with some lighting effects that can't be duplicated with the human eye...that is, the photo doesn't look like the coin.
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
Forget about the 24mm or 45mm for coins. They're mostly useful for architecture photography.
The 85mm Micro-Nikkor only goes to 1:2 magnification, so if you are trying for smaller coins it won't fill the sensor even for APS-C. You need to use lens extensions for higher mag and this messes with the tilt/shift axis. Also, most 85 Micros tilt in one axis and shift in another! You can have them modified to do both in same direction but I think from the factory they are orthogonal.
Advantages are as noted earlier by others, except I want to spell them out clearly:
Combo of tilt and shift allows you to keep proper flatness of field and correct geometry (ie keeps the tilted coin nearly round) while you tilt the coin to get axial lighting similar to how you actually view a coin in-hand.
But how valuable is this? I have a Nikon PB4 bellows that allows tilt and shift in same direction and yet so far have not produced better images with a tilted lens versus a non-tilted one.
OK, now my soapbox: In my experience the "in-hand" look is not very picture-worthy. When you hold a coin in-hand you usually rotate it around until the light shines directly off it (if raw) or nearly directly off it (if slabbed), sort of like axial lighting. But any single view using this technique gives overall poor illumination, with shadows and hot spots all over. When you have the coin in-hand you compensate by gently rotating it around to let the light shine off different areas so you can see the luster "move" and get light on all areas of the coin to assess the surface condition, marks, color, etc. No single in-hand image is good enough to grade by let alone provide a nice general view of the coin. If you don't believe me, or disagree, I suggest you pick up a coin and hold it in your normal manner, and then critically look at the coin as if it was a photograph and imagine it on your screen. I think you will be very disappointed. This is why a pet peeve of mine is seeing a nice image of a coin and having someone ask "is that what it looks like in-hand?" I hope not.
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
<< <i>Depth of field was not a concern, and is actually deeper than the typically longer macro lens -- as depth of field is inversely related to focal length (85mm for T/S -vs- 150+mm for typical macros), with subject distance and aperture held constant. >>
That's an odd way to look at it. If you hold subject distance constant and change focal length, the magnification will change. So it's not really a fair comparison. For a given camera sensor size and aperture, depth of field is not affected by the focal length, only by the magnification. What you should keep constant is the composition of the image, ie the magnification. Doing this gives a fair comparison, and results in the DOF being the same for all lenses regardless of focal length.
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
I use a 85 PC micro for 75% of the coin pics that I take. I only use tilt. Tilt allows you to tilt the focus plane away from parallel.
1) It is not an easy lens to use. I almost gave up on it shortly after getting it. Now that I know how to use it, it doesn't slow me down much.
2) Re it only going to 1:2: That is a slight limit, but it goes to about 0.75:1 with a Canon 500D. That enough for most anything.
3) Re Frank's suggestion that you get unnatural lighting effects: I would suggest that the lighting is more like what you see when you look at coins under a light. You don't look at coins from straight-on in real life, why should you when you shoot images? I only tilt the coin slightly anyway, just enough to improve the lighting. Some coins benefit from that lighting and some don't.
4) The slight tilt of the coin moves the light away from the camera and lens. doesn't get as hot when shooting.
5) the lens is very expensive.
6) You can get the same effect with a Nikon PB-4 bellows and a longer focal length enlarging lens. not nearly as expensive. A little harder to use.
DOF for macro is predominantly related to magnification, detector size, and aperture. The standard DOF calculation for macro doesn't include focal length. This calculation is an approximation and a simplification. In reality the focal length does affect the DOF for macro, but not enough to care about.
Tilt and shift does not affect the DOF in any way, shape, or form. It only adjusts the geometry of the image. It does allow you to place the focus plane along most any flat surface. The DOF will vary along that flat surface. The part of the focus plane that is closest to the camera will have the least while the part that is farther away will have more. The DOf will look like a cone with the point toward the photographer and the focus plane in the middle of it.
The tilting effect on the focus plane lessens as the magnification rises and it will take more lens tilt to get the same tilt of the focus plane. Works best at non-macro distances. Much above 1:1 the tilt of the lens becomes almost the same as the tilt of the coin and its benefit goes away.
As another option, I opted for a much better copy stand and a longer macro lens. Get a Sigma 180mm Macro lens on eBay or elsewhere for sub $500 and a tall copy stand for sub $200 somewhere else and you can place your lights wherever you like and very high above the coin if that's your cup of tea
I've avoided using tilt for a long time, but finally am giving in as I image toned Lincoln Cents. I just can't get a good color representation any other way.
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
It's on my list of lenses I'd like to spend some extended time with if I can ever stumble across one in mint condition at a reasonable price. There's a few tilt-shift adapters which can be placed between the body and lens, but built into the lens seems to be the sensible way to go.
To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
mingot
Posts: 1,805 ✭✭✭
Comments
Google is your friend.
<< <i>Nikon tilt shift lens
Google is your friend. >>
I am aware of what they are, which one fits on my body, and even where to purchase one.
What I am asking about is specific applicability to photographing coins.
<< <i>Who's used one and what can you tell me about it? >>
I have played around with one. It is a bear to get set up correctly, but once done, it allows a great deal of flexibility for lighting. Personally, the shots take with the lens appears "flat" when you move the light directly above the coin (as axial lighting does), and I could not justify the expense as I prefer the look of a longer standard macro lens with a slightly off axis position of light to bring out the luster.
Depth of field was not a concern, and is actually deeper than the typically longer macro lens -- as depth of field is inversely related to focal length (85mm for T/S -vs- 150+mm for typical macros), with subject distance and aperture held constant.
If you were interested in getting some first-hand experience, try and find a photography store that allows you to rent lenses. I am fortunate enough to live near just such a store.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars
-Paul
<< <i>Nikon tilt shift lens
Google is your friend. >>
Yes, but so are experienced message boarders. I'll take my coin-related questions here, my "How many helium balloons would it take to lift me?" questions to Google.
Best advice has been to rent one for a weekend. If I decide to pursue, I will go that route and see what sort of results that I get.
can't be duplicated with the human eye...that is, the photo doesn't look like the coin.
The 85mm Micro-Nikkor only goes to 1:2 magnification, so if you are trying for smaller coins it won't fill the sensor even for APS-C. You need to use lens extensions for higher mag and this messes with the tilt/shift axis. Also, most 85 Micros tilt in one axis and shift in another! You can have them modified to do both in same direction but I think from the factory they are orthogonal.
Advantages are as noted earlier by others, except I want to spell them out clearly:
Combo of tilt and shift allows you to keep proper flatness of field and correct geometry (ie keeps the tilted coin nearly round) while you tilt the coin to get axial lighting similar to how you actually view a coin in-hand.
But how valuable is this? I have a Nikon PB4 bellows that allows tilt and shift in same direction and yet so far have not produced better images with a tilted lens versus a non-tilted one.
OK, now my soapbox: In my experience the "in-hand" look is not very picture-worthy. When you hold a coin in-hand you usually rotate it around until the light shines directly off it (if raw) or nearly directly off it (if slabbed), sort of like axial lighting. But any single view using this technique gives overall poor illumination, with shadows and hot spots all over. When you have the coin in-hand you compensate by gently rotating it around to let the light shine off different areas so you can see the luster "move" and get light on all areas of the coin to assess the surface condition, marks, color, etc. No single in-hand image is good enough to grade by let alone provide a nice general view of the coin. If you don't believe me, or disagree, I suggest you pick up a coin and hold it in your normal manner, and then critically look at the coin as if it was a photograph and imagine it on your screen. I think you will be very disappointed. This is why a pet peeve of mine is seeing a nice image of a coin and having someone ask "is that what it looks like in-hand?" I hope not.
http://macrocoins.com
<< <i>Depth of field was not a concern, and is actually deeper than the typically longer macro lens -- as depth of field is inversely related to focal length (85mm for T/S -vs- 150+mm for typical macros), with subject distance and aperture held constant. >>
That's an odd way to look at it. If you hold subject distance constant and change focal length, the magnification will change. So it's not really a fair comparison. For a given camera sensor size and aperture, depth of field is not affected by the focal length, only by the magnification. What you should keep constant is the composition of the image, ie the magnification. Doing this gives a fair comparison, and results in the DOF being the same for all lenses regardless of focal length.
http://macrocoins.com
1) It is not an easy lens to use. I almost gave up on it shortly after getting it. Now that I know how to use it, it doesn't slow me down much.
2) Re it only going to 1:2: That is a slight limit, but it goes to about 0.75:1 with a Canon 500D. That enough for most anything.
3) Re Frank's suggestion that you get unnatural lighting effects: I would suggest that the lighting is more like what you see when you look at coins under a light. You don't look at coins from straight-on in real life, why should you when you shoot images? I only tilt the coin slightly anyway, just enough to improve the lighting. Some coins benefit from that lighting and some don't.
4) The slight tilt of the coin moves the light away from the camera and lens. doesn't get as hot when shooting.
5) the lens is very expensive.
6) You can get the same effect with a Nikon PB-4 bellows and a longer focal length enlarging lens. not nearly as expensive. A little harder to use.
Tilt and shift does not affect the DOF in any way, shape, or form. It only adjusts the geometry of the image. It does allow you to place the focus plane along most any flat surface. The DOF will vary along that flat surface. The part of the focus plane that is closest to the camera will have the least while the part that is farther away will have more. The DOf will look like a cone with the point toward the photographer and the focus plane in the middle of it.
The tilting effect on the focus plane lessens as the magnification rises and it will take more lens tilt to get the same tilt of the focus plane. Works best at non-macro distances. Much above 1:1 the tilt of the lens becomes almost the same as the tilt of the coin and its benefit goes away.
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
<< <i>Using a tilt/shift lens for photography sounds like a ridiculous idea but I guess strange things have been done. >>
Do you mean for numismatic photography or all photography? Most of the best photos ever taken were done with tilt/shift lenses (view cameras).
http://macrocoins.com
http://macrocoins.com
Error Code: 113