Lumix G6 Dual Lens (14-45mm + 45-200mm) Macro Test

[Panda77]

I just received a dual lens coupler in the mail and threw this together (very quickly) for a test of the magnification. This is a little "too much" (most things I want to photograph are larger than 1mm) and it's really hard to get the image in focus while working so close to the object (and relying on manually raising/lowering the tripod).

Lumix G6
Primary lens: Lumix 45-200 @200mm f5.6
Secondary lens: Lumix 14-45 @14mm f3.5

I only started in photography a few weeks ago and these are the only two lenses I have. I think using the 14-45mm as the primary and maybe a 14mm prime as the secondary would give me a better scale to work with.

Photo of the space between two millimeter marks on a tape measure (not cropped).



Photo of the ad hoc workspace. I used an iphone turned sideways with the light turned on.

[xpatUSA]

Great minds think alike, Adam:



not quite so successful though:



Sigma SD9 with 70mm macro and old 28mm mounted backwards.

The whole thing was just too shaky and hard to focus for my taste.

Bought a Raynox DCR-250 shortly thereafter . .

[Panda77]

I like that you use the CD cases to raise/lower the subject. I was just thinking that instead of working with moving the camera that it'd be easier to work on moving the subject. With such a narrow dof, I could first prob use something large (like a cd case) and fine tune it with sheets of paper.

A nice height adjustable table would rock tho; something with a turn lever on the side.

[Panda77]

And today I got a set of extension tubes and Hoya macro lenses both. So, just to have fun, I stacked them all up.

This was my first shot, put through some PS, using:

Lumix G6
Lumix 45-200mm @200mm f5.6
Extension tubes 1, 2, 3 all stacked
Hoya macro filters +1, +2, +4 all stacked

A little easier to use than the reverse lens method, but not quite the magnification. This is a photo of a dried baby's breath (Gypsophila) flower. It measures 5mm wide. There is a bit of noise because it was way underexposed. The tubes I bought did not have the electronic connections and I obviously underestimated the exposure.

EDIT: Also, forgot to mention I just realized I probably should have been using the electronic shutter for the macro shots to reduce camera shake. That wasn't done for either picture.

[xpatUSA]

I have the same lenses 14-45mm, 45-200mm and a Panasonic DMC-GH1. But I also have the Panasonic-Leica 45mm Macro-Elmarit f/2.8 which you would find excellent for this type of photography. It is a true macro 1:1, designed for your type of work. I also have extension rings with electric connections for more magnification, which can get it up to about 1:1.6.

The watch is about 50mm diameter:







All shots are crops.

The number five was shot at 1:1, if I recall correctly.

A short Giottos tripod was used for these shots with a ball-head and a long sliding quick-release plate.

I hope this will be of interest.

[jcuknz]

Panda .. some suggestions
I always use the 10 second delay release and do not touch camera and rig after pressing trigger.
A two dioptre Close-up lens could provide a useful but not too close solution for you when using the 45-200
Useless for use on the 14-42.
I use the 14-140 .... my 2D works well but not as tight a framing which is why I got the 4D .... The aim with the CU lens is NOT to get that close but simply to overcome the inability of a longer lens to focus reasonably close [ 12 inches ] With the 430mm effective lens of my bridge camera the 2D works well and was my prefered way of getting big close-ups but not with just a 280mm equivalent on my GH2.
This was my disgusting result of the 4D on the 14-140 ....

Better using two sets of auto-extension tubes


My son has a G3 and he got a 45-200 and a 2D as a birthday pressie but unfortunately I have not seen any results from him but it should be good ...

Stagecoach demonstrated to us a year or more ago here on CiC that it can be better for greater depth of field to stay back a bit and crop as I did some years back with my first Nikon bridge camera ....[35-280 but using its macro focus at mid pointof the zoom ]
"Dinner for Two" [ my cat had sicked up ... I eventually learnt not to feed her biscuits ]

[Stagecoach]

Stagecoach demonstrated to us a year or more ago here on CiC that it can be better for greater depth of field to stay back a bit and crop as I did some years back with my first Nikon bridge camera

John,

The term 'better' or anything suggesting that was never used in the thread and example you are referring to by me. I simply showed a real world example under controlled conditions and criteria comparing the result of cropped against un-cropped.

It was to demonstrate an 'option'

Grahame

[jcuknz]

Sorry Grahame I will stop giving you the credit ... it is an option as you say, and it does increase the depth of field as I found when I did an experiment ... not 'Dinner for two' which I did by chance unaware of the facts long before I found CiC.