Hyperfocus. Do you?

[Dylan8i]

What do you mean "back off a little...?" Are you saying you focus on a distant object and then re-compose?

i mean instead of leaving focus on infinity and having the 1/3 in front of the focus point in focus, i zoom at less than infinity and get alot more of the frame in focus. i just do it by gut, so i could probably have alot more in focus if i did the math, but thats alot of work ( as you can see by this thread).

[armando_m]

hmm , interesting!

perhaps this explains why my camera sometimes when auto-focusing at infinity the focus scale shows it focusing at 15 ft

[Shebang]

Thanks to all of you for your technical expertise and "holding my hand" through this arduous process. I've been reading this whole day. Not sure that's a good thing to admit...

Field testing tomorrow the academic gain (I hope) of today.

[Shebang]

Okay, I can't let it go, yet. So, I sat here and thought about the academic gains of the day. This is a test.

(1) Focal length equals the "size" of the lens. For example, the focal length of my 50m prime is 50m, and the focal lengths of my 17-40 zoom is 17 or 40 or a number in between. (This is computed based on a math formula using the measurement of distance from basically the center of the lens to the sensor or film - which I could care less to know. I hate math).

(2) DOF is the specific range or zone or plane that is perceived as acceptably sharp, and utilizes a concept known as Circle of Confusion. ( -- aptly named.)

(3) Hyperfocal Point is the maximum Depth of Field attainable in a given scenario, and is determined by a math formula using the focal length, the aperture, and an acceptable Circle of Confusion. (Again, I hate math.)

(4) The DOF of a particular Hyperfocal focus point begins halfway in front of that focus point. IOW, the Hyperfocal sharpest focus distance using a 50m prime on a 1.6 crop sensor camera at an aperture of F/8 is 54.1 feet. At this distance, the CoC is .019mm. Therefore, the closest thing in acceptable focus (or the front of the DOF plane) would start at 27.5 feet. Sharpness of focus would increase as one reaches the 54.1 feet marker and then begin to lose sharpness, finally reaching an unacceptable clarity at a point just before "infinity."

Do I correctly understand these terms/concepts? Did I pass the test??

Thanks again for staying with me on this. I appreciate each and every one of you for wading through this...

[OldClicker]

Okay, I can't let it go, yet. So, I sat here and thought about the academic gains of the day. This is a test.

(1) Focal length equals the "size" of the lens. For example, the focal length of my 50m prime is 50m, and the focal lengths of my 17-40 zoom is 17 or 40 or a number in between. (This is computed based on a math formula using the measurement of distance from basically the center of the lens to the sensor or film - which I could care less to know. I hate math).

(2) DOF is the specific range or zone or plane that is perceived as acceptably sharp, and utilizes a concept known as Circle of Confusion. ( -- aptly named.)

(3) Hyperfocal Point is the maximum Depth of Field attainable in a given scenario, and is determined by a math formula using the focal length, the aperture, and an acceptable Circle of Confusion. (Again, I hate math.)

(4) The DOF of a particular Hyperfocal focus point begins halfway in front of that focus point. IOW, the Hyperfocal sharpest focus distance using a 50m prime on a 1.6 crop sensor camera at an aperture of F/8 is 54.1 feet. At this distance, the CoC is .019mm. Therefore, the closest thing in acceptable focus (or the front of the DOF plane) would start at 27.5 feet. Sharpness of focus would increase as one reaches the 54.1 feet marker and then begin to lose sharpness, finally reaching an unacceptable clarity at a point just before "infinity."

Do I correctly understand these terms/concepts? Did I pass the test??

Thanks again for staying with me on this. I appreciate each and every one of you for wading through this...

Almost.

(4) - For what we are doing here, the CoC is a function of the sensor size (does not change with distance). The acceptable focus would include infinity, not "just before" infinity.

TF

[Photo-John]

you can get little charts to carry or I have seen a calculator that is an application in a cell phone.

I have an iPhone app that has this info. It's called PhotoCalc. It also has sunset and sunrise times along with other photo-related data and tools.

[Sushigaijin]

I use it for landscapes with foreground detail. For other applications where I might want high DoF, like macro photography, it really has no place because of the short working distance.

It's most useful at wide angle and street shooting/candids. The best thing about hyperfocus is the worst thing too - almost EVERYTHING is in focus. Great if you want it, but bad if you don't. You absolutely cannot use DoF to isolate a subject with it.

I only have one lens where hyperfocal shooting is relevant(to me): my 12-60. I have an approximate idea of where the hyperfocal point is at 12-14mm at useful f/stops. I can predict where it will be at f/8 - f/12 even if I don't have an exact number from a chart; the useful range is just something I've taken the time to memorize. I also keep track of how far hyperfocal distance is at f/2.8 (widest aperture) just in case I'm shooting wide angle in low light.

If you need everything in focus, there is no easier way than hyperfocal distance.

[Shebang]

Almost.

(4) - For what we are doing here, the CoC is a function of the sensor size (does not change with distance). The acceptable focus would include infinity, not "just before" infinity.

TF

Thank you, TF. I think I understand what you are saying. When I said "just before infinity," I was using phraseology I read. I think basically the article was saying to push the envelope and get as much in focus as is possible -- IOW "reaching back" as far as you can while "reaching forward" as far as you can with an acceptable focus.

I picked a lens today, checked your DOF chart, went out and walked if off and shot. It seemed to work. It got too dark before I could do all I wanted, and we are supposed to get rain the next 2 days.

Thank you so much for your help. This was a struggle.

[Shebang]

Thank you, Photo-John, Erik and all.

[Shebang]

Newer lenses don't even have markings on them to hyperfocus with. A good technique if you are shooting landscapes is to focus one third the way into the shot. If I happen to be using an older lens with the markings on it, yes I do. I have a Voigtlander 15mm lens I use and when mounted it doesn't touch the focus mechanism on the M camera so you have to guess focus. I hyperfocal focus it and shoot away.
http://www.naturephotographers.net/a.../rb0307-1.html

Thanks, Greg. Great photo! I read that the scales on the newer lens and especially zooms are pretty worthless, that they are so compacted, they are ineffective/inaccurate. Would you agree with that? Are you using your 15m on a full frame?

[Greg McCary]

Thanks, Greg. Great photo! I read that the scales on the newer lens and especially zooms are pretty worthless, that they are so compacted, they are ineffective/inaccurate. Would you agree with that? Are you using your 15m on a full frame?

No I use my 15mm on a film camera, so maybe yes I do.LOL

[Loupey]

I agree with Greg and I use the same technique as he outlined in post #25. It was easier learning this stuff when film was the only way and every lens - even zooms - back then had the DOF lines etched on them.

Canon still provides these on their prime wide angle lenses. I can't imagine carrying around charts or trying to memorize them. Use these DOF guides on the lens if you have them. Use the LCD playback if you don't. Or do both.

[Shebang]

I agree with Greg...in post #25...had the DOF lines etched on them.

Canon still provides these on their prime wide angle lenses. I can't imagine carrying around charts or trying to memorize them. Use these DOF guides on the lens if you have them. Use the LCD playback if you don't. Or do both.

I'm not the most colorful crayon in the box...

It's been hard enough just to get the concept, let alone actually utilizing it in my clicking.

Here is a picture of my 17-40. Mine scale doesn't look like Greg's scale. How do I hyperfocus using this scale? (numbers are: .28m to infinity or 1 foot to 3 feet)

Also - exactly what do you mean by "use the LCD playback"? Am I missing something or am I just too blind to see what's in focus and what's not on that little thing??

[freygr]

I just use DOFMaster, a palm OS program if I need to know the DOF

[Shebang]

I just use DOFMaster, a palm OS program if I need to know the DOF

OldClicker pointed me to the online DOF calculator. I did use and got better results, but, like Loupey and Greg, etc. did/do, if I could find a way around it, I would. I see their results and the great results of so many others here that don't seem to physically use the DOF calculator, and I'm wondering how do they do it???

[freygr]

With a DSLR you can see the DOF using the DOF preview button, and you do see the wide open DOF to begin with.

[Shebang]

With a DSLR you can see the DOF using the DOF preview button, and you do see the wide open DOF to begin with.

I guess I am just blind -- which, without glasses, I certainly am. I just can't see it. I need an 11x13 LCD screen, I guess.

[readingr]

You really are making this hard work.

I use the simple method of take the pic look at the screen and zoom in to the areas that I want to pay attention to and if their wrong adjust to compensate. It's the best way to learn and you will soon find out what works and you will quickly work out what a situation needs from the experienc3e you gain.

I agree in the day of film I used this method a lot but using digital I just take the pic and re-take until I'm happy.

Roger R.

[Frog]

I don't know if I'm enlightened or this headache I'm getting is from trying to figure out if it is important or not. I imagine it is sometimes but I usually get satisfactory or even good results just making sure that what I want in sharpest focus is my focal point and adjust f/stop to broaden or narrow the focus.
I can see where/when it might be critical but I also think that those times are few unless maybe you are using film. I do wish that modern lenses and cameras had those scales on them as well as split screen focus which I've never figured out why they were removed.

[Loupey]

Paula - there just isn't room to put the scales on current zoom lenses. You have to imagine that the scale changes as the focal length changes so you end up having a "curved scale".

But as I mentioned, some primes still have them (see below, from Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L). In this example, at f/16 my DOF would extend from just over 1 meter to infinity. So much easier than using any chart.

Lastly, on the Canon system isn't there a feature where you focus on the closest subject then focus on the farthest subject and then the camera figures out the proper settings? I never used it but I seem to recall this feature being available somewhere on some cameras. AutoDOF or something like that. Kinda would solve your issue

[Loupey]

Also - exactly what do you mean by "use the LCD playback"? Am I missing something or am I just too blind to see what's in focus and what's not on that little thing??

By that I meant shoot a scene, review the image on your LCD at high magnification (no need to squint since you can zoom way into an image) and see if everything looks "right" to you. If not, just adjust your focus and/or aperture and repeat until you get it right. One reason why they took the DOF marks off the lenses is because we all have instant feedback on our shots. With film we had to use scales, charts, etc. so that we were highly sure we got it right - until we received our film back from processing 1 week later

[Shebang]

Roger, Frog & Loupey and all:

I do finally "get" the concept of hyperfocus and DOF. I don't "get" how those of you who don't use either a DOF calculator and a yardstick, or use a lens with a "real" DOF scale on it, are putting this concept into practical use in the field.

All I really know for sure is I'm not getting the tack-sharp focus that I see on a regular basis on this forum. I don't care how I get it -- I'm lazy. Easy would be good. Though I've improved, somehow, I'm still missing the focus "boat." I am going to experiment more with the LCD ideas suggested -- and that A-DEP thing, Loupey. I did read that that was worthless, but maybe the writer doesn't really know.

I'm continuing to read, re-read and experiment. I've got a camera and a lens that is capable -- I just need the skill. My present main photography goal is to achieve sharp focus.

I'm :blush2: that I'm having such a tough time with this, and I really, really appreciate your efforts to help -- I do tend to go all OCD at times:blush2: Sorry for the headache, Frog...

[Frog]

What shots are you not getting the "tack sharp" focus on?
Are you using a tripod?
Are you using the timer when using the tripod?
Are you sharpening the shots in post processing?

[Greg McCary]

Shebang the best thing to remember is not just throw the camera up and let it focus to infinity. This can lead to soft images. When I am shooting a zoom without the scale I focus on an object about one third the way into the shot, I press the shutter half way letting the camera focus and then compose the shot and then shoot. And just as Loupe wrote, I check the LCD screen by magnifying it to check for sharpness. Newer digital lenses are all such higher quality than some in the past it really is a mood point. The only time I ever really hyper focus is if I am shooting a manual focus camera.

[readingr]

Roger, Frog & Loupey and all:
All I really know for sure is I'm not getting the tack-sharp focus that I see on a regular basis on this forum. I don't care how I get it -- I'm lazy. Easy would be good. Though I've improved, somehow, I'm still missing the focus "boat." I am going to experiment more with the LCD ideas suggested -- and that A-DEP thing, Loupey. I did read that that was worthless, but maybe the writer doesn't really know.

Shebang,

Why don't you post an example or two with EXIF data so we can assess what your doing wrong. That will give you more help than the theoetical stuff that's been discussed.

Some things I have learnt from experience

Sharpness can be a lens problem, my 24-70L recently had a problem and I found out that the screws on the baseplate of the lens needed a bit of tightening.

The diopter is not adjusted correctly on the viewfinder

Speed - needing a tripod

Tripod - not sturdy enough for the weight of camera and lens

DOF not high enough to capture what you want

Not using the timer to take the photo and stand away from the tripod to minimise shake

Traffic or wind rocking the tripod on long exposures, I have used this to create an effect that some people liked, and hang my rucksack underneath to add weight at times to stop the rocking.

Lack of experience of when the light just won't let you take the photo you want with pin sharpness with the available kit.

and the list goes on - I am still learning.

Roger R.