Rob

Have you got a consistent lighting set-up? Also, I don't know what the function's called, but their was an F setting on my camera that needed fine-tuning to stop the camera from focusing on the background instead of the coin (something to do with depth of field, I think? Maybe this is what's giving you some blurred shots? Nick would probably know more! The F-stop is a measure of aperture size. Large apertures give small F-numbers and vice-versa. The larger F-numbers give greater depth of field, which dictates how much of the detail nearer than and further away than the focus point appears in focus. In the case of Rob's obverse picture, adjusting the depth of field won't help because none of it is in perfect focus. It means that the "auto" focus hasn't. Autofocus works by adjusting the focus until maximum contrast is obtained within the focus region, which means that if the focus region contains a monotone colour and no features then AF can struggle. In cases such as these, I usually move the coin off-centre so that either the legend or the rim are in the focus region, so that the AF system can see some contrast. Having said that, I don't believe that the Nikon AF system is particularly good. Unsurprisingly, I concur. But I can also see an advantage in having a background with detail such as Stuart uses. If your Nikon has a LiveView mode, try using that as you can move the focus rectangle to any part of the view. This might be difficult to ascertain. I lost the manual ages ago. I think it did a runner courtesy of Lord Lucan riding Shergar along with my copy of Murdoch part 1. You might be surprised what you can find on the Internet... Remarkably there appears to be over 100 web pages devoted to manuals or problem solutions for an obsolete camera which I will need to peruse! A lot of people must have a lot of spare time to waste as you wouldn't think that people could get so passionate about what is essentially a tool.

I also can't stand the abbreviated nonsense, again all in lower case! c u tmoz 4 t dont b l8 It's alright, I've just had an enquiry on the website that I will have to decipher. If not immediately obvious, I will ask them to clarify in English.

People who text in a continuous stream of lower case letters, whose only concession to the concept of punctuation is to add a colon in order to make a smiley. The codes for which they know off by heart, needless to say.

Blimey Declan! That capsule must be the size of a side-plate. Inner Diameter = 65.00 mm, Outer Diameter = 71.374 mm and the inside depth = 5.486 mm. The ring would have an inner diameter of 41 mm and an outer diameter of 65 mm. Course I now have to work out where to put the capsule, it obviously won't fit in those boxes with the flips, but at least the coin is safe! Buy another three cartwheel tuppences, put them in these capsules, drill a hole through all four, mount them on cocktail sticks and you can provide transport for the rest of the collection which will be contained within the chassis. As least you can have confidence the wheels will withstand the journey and the foam adds suspension.

Not at that price. It is worn quite a bit on both sides. I would have thought something in the £25-35 ballpark. On the plus side, it is remarkably free of edge knocks which makes it more desirable, so perhaps you could up it marginally.

Have you got a consistent lighting set-up? Also, I don't know what the function's called, but their was an F setting on my camera that needed fine-tuning to stop the camera from focusing on the background instead of the coin (something to do with depth of field, I think? Maybe this is what's giving you some blurred shots? Nick would probably know more! The F-stop is a measure of aperture size. Large apertures give small F-numbers and vice-versa. The larger F-numbers give greater depth of field, which dictates how much of the detail nearer than and further away than the focus point appears in focus. In the case of Rob's obverse picture, adjusting the depth of field won't help because none of it is in perfect focus. It means that the "auto" focus hasn't. Autofocus works by adjusting the focus until maximum contrast is obtained within the focus region, which means that if the focus region contains a monotone colour and no features then AF can struggle. In cases such as these, I usually move the coin off-centre so that either the legend or the rim are in the focus region, so that the AF system can see some contrast. Having said that, I don't believe that the Nikon AF system is particularly good. Unsurprisingly, I concur. But I can also see an advantage in having a background with detail such as Stuart uses. If your Nikon has a LiveView mode, try using that as you can move the focus rectangle to any part of the view. This might be difficult to ascertain. I lost the manual ages ago. I think it did a runner courtesy of Lord Lucan riding Shergar along with my copy of Murdoch part 1.

Have you got a consistent lighting set-up? Also, I don't know what the function's called, but their was an F setting on my camera that needed fine-tuning to stop the camera from focusing on the background instead of the coin (something to do with depth of field, I think? Maybe this is what's giving you some blurred shots? Nick would probably know more! The F-stop is a measure of aperture size. Large apertures give small F-numbers and vice-versa. The larger F-numbers give greater depth of field, which dictates how much of the detail nearer than and further away than the focus point appears in focus. In the case of Rob's obverse picture, adjusting the depth of field won't help because none of it is in perfect focus. It means that the "auto" focus hasn't. Autofocus works by adjusting the focus until maximum contrast is obtained within the focus region, which means that if the focus region contains a monotone colour and no features then AF can struggle. In cases such as these, I usually move the coin off-centre so that either the legend or the rim are in the focus region, so that the AF system can see some contrast. Having said that, I don't believe that the Nikon AF system is particularly good. Unsurprisingly, I concur. But I can also see an advantage in having a background with detail such as Stuart uses.

Very good. Tripod, no hands and a Nikon using autofocus(?) link Not so good. Colour's good, and the reverse is pretty damn sharp, just a little out of focus on the obverse, that's all! You can have one with the obverse in focus and the reverse not, or both not, or both in focus. You can also have images that are totally wrong in colour. Take your pick.

I have often thought about getting my PL67 crown re-slabbed and sent of to the likes of Heritage. The problem is the slabbing, to get it put back into it's PCGS slab is very involved and expensive for a one off unless you are a member. You are also assuming it is going to make a similar grade or attribution as it did previously. I sold a US customer a proof halfpenny (P1235) that had previously graded 64. It came back as a currency strike MS62. Easy money if you can make it with no comeback.

Very good. Tripod, no hands and a Nikon using autofocus(?) link Not so good.

I will admit to having a chuckle when I saw that description. The more so that the close up photo of the coin does not really match the hyperbole. As a sixpence collector, this and other coins in the auction do interest me. But the prices are completely over the top. Which is a shame as I would have been willing to drop a decent number of dollars at prices which more accurately matched what I believe to be the value of the coins. I have bid and won a few times at Heritage in their weekly internet auctions and, usually, the prices are more or less what one would expect. But this particular auction seems to be completely over the top. I don't know if this is due to unrealistic reserves being set by sellers or by an auction house trying to manipulate market prices. It will be interesting to see how much success they have. You've hit the nail on the head Jaggy, OTT prices coupled with market manipulation. I said it before in a thread a few months back, but Heritage normally start the bidding at Spink book for grade and work upwards from there. Just because a Common 1853 sixpence is a Good UNC does'nt mean i want to pay 3 times over Spinks price guide. Of course, a quality soecimen i would have thought in the £259-£350 range, but over £1300 is a bloody joke if it Hits top estimate, in fact the £650 start price is a joke, thats Double what spink Rate a UNC at , and checking back on Londoncoins previous auctuons, best i can see sold for £160 in 2011 and another in UNC or near so in 2012 for £135 That's because 1853 isn't a rare date.

Not wanting to buy it Rob, its the BS description that comes With it to Hype the bidders into a frenzy for a Common date coin and then whio in an OTT start and estimate price That really gets on my nipple ends Yes, but that's part and parcel of the estimate. Nobody is going to list a lot described as a decent example and then expect it to sell for multiples of its normal market value. It isn't any different to all those on ebay who extol the virtues of their listings, just that with eBay you are a bit more circumspect knowing who is likely to be the seller. In many US eyes, a 68 is an abnormality that should be pursued - hence the high estimate. It only needs one person to put a bid in at the reserve and it's sold. Many people buy the number just to improve their set ranking.

It is just another example of Heritage (and others) pandering to the number assigned by the TPG. Once a coin gets a number above 65 or 66, US buyers will pay way over the odds based on another's numerical opinion. Leave it. Nobody says you have to buy it.

Know anyone, Rob? I'll have one if you do? Me. Not for sale, but I paid £50-60 for it a few years ago.

You get proof-like halfpennies. Well worth a premium.

A grain of truth in the description. The main feature which is the corrosion is clear and it has been honed to a fine point in the various places as the crystals have grown.

A type set would comprise one of each denomination for an issue. So predecimal Eliz. II would have a farthing, halfpenny, penny, threepence, sixpence, shillings (English & Scottish), florin, half crown and possibly all three crowns. You could extend that to include a maundy set and a sovereign if desired and also a 1953 set because they were the only coins of the reign with BRITT OMN in the legend. George VI would be the same base and silver denominations, but the silver threepence would be extra. Again you have the early coins with IND IMP, but following Indian independence, this was dropped from 1949. George V has 925 silver, 500 silver, ME coins and the final issues. You can make your criteria as wide or as narrow as you feel comfortable with, but it gives mental encouragement if you know you can complete a set.

The last question is the easiest to answer - Yes. When you start out you can't hope to know what you will prefer in the future, but once you have a focal point it is easier to decide what you can afford in terms of grade. By all means choose a single denomination if it suits you. Once you go into the realms of varieties there isn't a hope in hell of completing a series, so make the best of what you can achieve. If you like coins in a certain grade, then stick with them throughout the series as it gives a more balanced visionary impact. A single blazing BU coin will stand out like a sore thumb in a tray of fines. The converse is true as well, but in this instance it is likely to be low grade because that's all there is available. There is no right or wrong thing to collect because you are doing it for personal pleasure. If you have already decided that you are not going to collect silver back to 1880 on the grounds of price, I would suggest you collect anything that appeals. A collection doesn't have to be focussed on a certain denomination, so maybe a type set of each reign is what you will gravitate to. It means that you can probably do the entire hundred years at reasonable cost because you don't have the expensive key dates to worry about. Whitman folders are not a good idea. All card produced in recent times is acidic from the bleaching process, so you should avoid contact with paper other than that produced by traditional methods. The 2x2 paper envelopes are acid free for example. Filling gaps as quickly as possible is not a good way to go about it in my view. Better to wait for the right coin for you to come along. Patience is very important when building a collection.

The first one is a 1977 Silver Jubilee crown, worth 25p if you could find a buyer. The second is 900 silver (.3618 oz), so worth bullion unless in mint state when it might be worth a little more.

Those are the cheap bits. What about the missing one?

What's fine?

There might have also been an argument for calling them dollars on account of the 8 reales and dollar being close in size and weight and the underlying coin was captured bullion of both types amongst others. There might also have been a case for not using English units in isolation on account of the silver purity which was lower than sterling. As the price of silver fluctuated, the 5 shillings/dollar was only a nominal value anyway.

Yes, but it is from Hartlepool. You should see some of the other things from there.

What do you take me for? Of course not! I thought you might have been one of those people who subscribe to 'Barbed Wire Weekly' or similar as mentioned on 'Have I Got News For You'.

Sorted then. The bust is probably whichever king was reigning when the tokens were produced.