Poor Man's Macro...

[Left Coaster]

Some time ago, I bought a very, very bargain basement loupe. I bought it down at the swap meet maybe 15 years ago. Don't know why I bought it, but I don't think I paid more than about a buck for it:




A friend of mine took some photos of a knife using a loupe, and they weren't bad, considering. I thought I'd try it, just for fun. I held the loupe up in front of the lens on my point & shoot, in this case a Canon G12. I was hand-holding the loupe as well as the camera, so I knew these weren't going to be real sharp. Add to that what is probably a pretty lousy optic in the loupe, and there's a lot of room for improvement. I'm going to try it again with the camera on a small tripod, triggered with a remote, with the loupe somehow affixed to the lens.

Anyway, this is what I ended up with:


Part of the dial on my Edouard Lauzieres:




A portion of the back of a half dollar:




Anyone ever try this?

[Watchdog]

It seems like you should end up with some good results if you add in a tripod and remote (you could also just use the cameras built in timer).

I haven't done this, but at work, since we don't have a camera mount for our microscope, I've just pressed the camera lens up to the eyepiece and have had pretty good results.

[Left Coaster]

It seems like you should end up with some good results if you add in a tripod and remote (you could also just use the cameras built in timer).

That's what I'm thinking. Even still, though, the optic in the cheap loupe will always be a limiting factor.

I found a Bausch & Lomb one for about thirteen bucks, and the optic is glass as opposed to plastic: Loupe

[WatchFan1]

I guess it will do in a pinch, it seems only a small percentage of the image is in focus and
chromatic aberration seem to be pretty severe.

[stratct]

I did. Mine isn't as good. But I am certainly a poor man for sure!

[Left Coaster]

I guess it will do in a pinch, it seems only a small percentage of the image is in focus and
chromatic aberration seem to be pretty severe.

Well, yeah, but it's not like I was using fine optics here. In fact, I'm pretty sure the optic is plastic...

[LimeNine9r]

Here's a loupe macro shot of my old beat up Casio that ive owned since 1979 or 1980 with my iPhone I used my trusty 4x/8x loupe, the watch pic was with 4x - won't focus with 8x lens . Wrist shot is as close as I can get with iPhone - no loupe . Had to load photobucket app onto iPhone, the Mobil email uploading wasn't working quick enough. .... It's all easier over on Facebook.

[SFwatchGuy]

They don't look too bad.
I have a Canon G9 and I believe the minimum focus in the macro mode is 1/2 inch. The detail in the G9 picture allows for quite a bit of cropping and I have never had any complaints when trying to get up close and personal. With watches anyway.
Here's an example.

Some time ago, I bought a very, very bargain basement loupe. I bought it down at the swap meet maybe 15 years ago. Don't know why I bought it, but I don't think I paid more than about a buck for it:




A friend of mine took some photos of a knife using a loupe, and they weren't bad, considering. I thought I'd try it, just for fun. I held the loupe up in front of the lens on my point & shoot, in this case a Canon G12. I was hand-holding the loupe as well as the camera, so I knew these weren't going to be real sharp. Add to that what is probably a pretty lousy optic in the loupe, and there's a lot of room for improvement. I'm going to try it again with the camera on a small tripod, triggered with a remote, with the loupe somehow affixed to the lens.

Anyway, this is what I ended up with:


Part of the dial on my Edouard Lauzieres:




A portion of the back of a half dollar:




Anyone ever try this?

[Left Coaster]

Here's a loupe macro shot of my old beat up Casio that ive owned since 1979 or 1980 with my iPhone

Huh, never even thought of trying it with my iPhone. Could just be goofy enough to make sense!