landscape focus question

[windoze]

landscapes....
when i shoot birds, i focus on the bird obviously. But when it comes to landscapes i'm a "bird brain". Suppose your standing on the bank of a river looking out onto the wide river ( and there are boats and other things of interest in the river ) and across the other side where in the background there are mountains in the far off distance. So lets say I want to take a picture that shows as much of the scene sharp and in focus as possible. Where do I focus?? And do I strive for f/8 and higher? This is just an example ( and maybe a bad example ) of situations when im not sure where i should be "focusing". I remember Andy once telling me something about either 1/3 or 2/3... out in the distance..
if im not clear about what im asking I apologise in advance..... but i think you get the idea.

troy

[spudjer]

Windoze, check this out:

http://www.dofmaster.com/hyperfocal.html

It explains how to handle large scenes and lots of depth of field

Hope it makes sense... :wink

[Seefutlung]

"Hyperfocus" is the term used for obtaining the maximum DOF harpness from infinity back to some point colser to the camera. The Hyperfocus settings varies per lens lengh and aperature ... I am not an expert on hyperfocus ... so do a google for more info ... probably some great info here as well.

[Antonio Correia]

Windoze, check this out:

http://www.dofmaster.com/hyperfocal.html

It explains how to handle large scenes and lots of depth of field

Hope it makes sense... :wink

Some time ago, I have been investigating about the hyperfocal diatance.
http://www.vividlight.com/articles/3513.htm also might be useful.
Remember that, to be accurate, the distance varies with the camera you use.

Regards. :thumb

[Nikolai]

"Hyperfocus" is the term used for obtaining the maximum DOF harpness from infinity back to some point colser to the camera. The Hyperfocus settings varies per lens lengh and aperature ... I am not an expert on hyperfocus ... so do a google for more info ... probably some great info here as well.

I already mentioned this in a couple of threads ago...
I made a little chart for my camera (YMMW), and made it wallet-size, so I can always refer to it..
It's for 30D, I think 20D should be the same.

http://nik.smugmug.com/photos/79572762-L.jpg

Just remember - when you set the HF distance D, you'll get everything from D/2 to infinity in focus.
E.g. at 50mm and f/8 HF = 16m, so if you focus at 16m (~50ft) you'll get everything from 8m (~25ft) and upto oo...

HTH

[Antonio Correia]

Nikolai, correct me if I am wronge:

The CoC (Circle of Confusion) for the 20 D is 0,019.
I do not know if it's the same with the 30 D.
If it is not, then the table is not perfect but enought for general purposes.
Anyway I do not find a great use in this table as the lenses do not have, as they did, the little dots of distance in the barrel ...
The table is important to give a notion of where you are in relation to infinity.
I have also a table similar to this - show you later today - for my lenses.
:thumb

[Antonio Correia]

I found this
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=11015&highlight=Depth+field
It was when I made the "investigation" about CoC, DOF ...

[Nikolai]

Nikolai, correct me if I am wronge:

The CoC (Circle of Confusion) for the 20 D is 0,019.
I do not know if it's the same with the 30 D.

According to all the source I've read, their CoC values re the same.


Anyway I do not find a great use in this table as the lenses do not have, as they did, the little dots of distance in the barrel ...
The table is important to give a notion of where you are in relation to infinity.

You're correct, not all lenses have the distance scale, and even those that do are not very accurate ones.
However, if the table says that under giver circumstances the HF distance is, say, 10m, you can then locate an object 10 m away and use the AF to focus on it, thus acquiring desired HF conditions.

I wish our cameras were smart enough to have something like "HF Lock" :rolleyes

Cheers! :1drink

[wxwax]

f16, tripod, focus on a distant object, fuggedaboutit. :1drink

[Antonio Correia]

The table again here:
http://antoniocorreia.smugmug.com/photos/84136488-M.jpg

[Nikolai]

f16, tripod, focus on a distant object, fuggedaboutit. :1drink

It really depends on what you call a distant object... A distant mountain peak 20 miles away? A tree across the river?

At 400mm and f/16 the HF distance is 530m = 1,600ft.
With the mountain peak you'll overdo it and lose the details in the hills which you could have had.
With the tree across the river you'll blur the horizon...:dunno

BTW, is anybody aware of a cheap laser (or whatever based) distance meter? :rolleyes
I mean, I know of construction tools, but they are for relatively short distances, and they get pricey with the range getting above 100ft...

[Antonio Correia]

It really depends on what you call a distant object... A distant mountain peak 20 miles away? A tree across the river?

At 400mm and f/16 the HF distance is 530m = 1,600ft.
With the mountain peak you'll overdo it and lose the details in the hills which you could have had.
With the tree across the river you'll blur the horizon...:dunno

BTW, is anybody aware of a cheap laser (or whatever based) distance meter? :rolleyes
I mean, I know of construction tools, but they are for relatively short distances, and they get pricey with the range getting above 100ft...
Nikolai,
I have a distance meter for my profession (Architect).
Laser. You see the target. The problem is when there is too much sun...
We can't see the point.

DANGER - NEVER look directly to the laser. NEVER direct it to your or somebody eyes !

Hilty have them.
I own a Zeiss witch have been giving me good services...
It was my ideia to show it to you but, as it is 5/6 years old and could not find it fast in the net.
I'll remember that, tomorrow.

[windoze]

i thank everyone that replied, now i am going off to digest all this techie stuff with a large bottle of excedrin. After i understand hyperfocal distance i plan to write a thesis explaining quantum mechanics ( which might be easier ).....

thanx again...

troy

[wxwax]

It really depends on what you call a distant object... A distant mountain peak 20 miles away? A tree across the river?

At 400mm and f/16 the HF distance is 530m = 1,600ft.
With the mountain peak you'll overdo it and lose the details in the hills which you could have had.
With the tree across the river you'll blur the horizon...:dunno


You're right.

I just never thought about shooting a landscape with a 400mm. No reason why not, I guess.

[Antonio Correia]

Nikolai,

http://www.us.hilti.com/holus/modules/prcat/prca_navigation.jsp?OID=-11725

this is the link for the instrument I was refering yesterday.

Regards.
:thumb

[John Mueller]

i thank everyone that replied, now i am going off to digest all this techie stuff with a large bottle of excedrin. After i understand hyperfocal distance i plan to write a thesis explaining quantum mechanics ( which might be easier ).....

thanx again...

troy

:lol4 I feel your pain Troy.

[Manfr3d]

Print your hyperfocal distance sheet on A5 paper
and have it sealed in plastic at your local copy shop
costs 2$ and adds an invaluable piece of equipment
to your bag. Not only if you like shooting landscapes.

[Antonio Correia]

Print your hyperfocal distance sheet on A5 paper
and have it sealed in plastic at your local copy shop
costs 2$ and adds an invaluable piece of equipment
to your bag. Not only if you like shooting landscapes.

Smaller is better. A6 or A7.
:thumb

[Nikolai]

Smaller is better. A6 or A7.
:thumb
:rofl

[Nikolai]

Nikolai,
http://www.us.hilti.com/holus/modules/prcat/prca_navigation.jsp?OID=-11725
this is the link for the instrument I was refering yesterday.
Regards.
:thumb
Obrigado!
By any chance you know the price ballpark?
I hate it when they "quote you upon request".
Also - what's the working range?
The website is wonderfully silent about all these little details... :dunno
Thanks!

[Antonio Correia]

Obrigado!
By any chance you know the price ballpark?
I hate it when they "quote you upon request".
Also - what's the working range?
The website is wonderfully silent about all these little details... :dunno
Thanks!

I'll tell you the price in Portugal on monday.
I drive throught the road I'll stop and ask.
Nice week-end. :):

[thebigsky]

f16, tripod, focus on a distant object, fuggedaboutit. :1drink

Is that an Ansel Adams quote? :wink

[Antonio Correia]

I'll tell you the price in Portugal on monday.
I drive throught the road I'll stop and ask.
Nice week-end. :):

Hilti: about 90 / 100 € ...:thumb

[Antonio Correia]

I post today a new hyper focal distance table/chart I build for my own lenses and cameras (Canon 20 D; 350 D).
The formula is included in the document so you can do one for yourself using an Excel sheet.
The numbers in italic correspond to the use of the converter 1.4.
The converter is not used with 16mm or 20 mm focals.

Remember that the CoC (Circle of Confusion) differs from camera to camera. Refer to manual.
Remember that the HD (Hyper focal Distance) is the distance at which you focus the lens and get everything focused from half that distance to infinity.
5 STEPS PROCEDURE
1. Frame and adjust aperture and speed.
2. Use a divise to measure a distance.
3. Focus on that target with the central focus point of your camera
4. Switch off auto focus.
5. Go back to the frame and shoot.

To measure the distances I can use this instrument I have bought in September 1997 for 1.000 € ! which I have been using for work since then.
http://antoniocorreia.smugmug.com/photos/86066459-M.jpg .http://antoniocorreia.smugmug.com/photos/86065435-M.jpg

[pathfinder]

BTW, is anybody aware of a cheap laser (or whatever based) distance meter? :rolleyes
I mean, I know of construction tools, but they are for relatively short distances, and they get pricey with the range getting above 100ft...

Nik - Take alook through a hunting catalog from Cabelas or Gander Mountain or Bass Pro looking for rangefinder - There are scads of them made by Nikon, Leica, Bushnell and several others. They range in price from about $150 on up. The range varies some according to price, but 400 to 600 yards is not unusual.

Here is a Nikon one - http://cabelas.com/cabelas/en/templates/links/link.jsp?id=0034280711907a&type=product&cmCat=searchFeat&returnPage=search-results1.jsp&QueryText=rangefinder&N=4887&Ntk=Products&Ntx=mode+matchall&Nty=1&Ntt=rangefinder&noImage=0

[Antonio Correia]

Nik - Take alook through a hunting catalog from Cabelas or Gander Mountain or Bass Pro looking for rangefinder - There are scads of them made by Nikon, Leica, Bushnell and several others. They range in price from about $150 on up. The range varies some according to price, but 400 to 600 yards is not unusual.

Here is a Nikon one - http://cabelas.com/cabelas/en/templates/links/link.jsp?id=0034280711907a&type=product&cmCat=searchFeat&returnPage=search-results1.jsp&QueryText=rangefinder&N=4887&Ntk=Products&Ntx=mode+matchall&Nty=1&Ntt=rangefinder&noImage=0

It looks good for the purpose...
Good suggestion. :thumb

[01af]

Suppose your standing on the bank of a river looking out onto the wide river (and there are boats and other things of interest in the river) and across the other side where in the background there are mountains in the far-off distance. So let's say I want to take a picture that shows as much of the scene sharp and in focus as possible. Where do I focus? Most will tell you to set the lens to the hyperfocal distance---however that's not a good idea generally. If there is an obvious center of interest, focus on that. Otherwise, set the focus to infinity. This way you'll lose a bit of (relative) sharpness in the foreground ... but since the objects in the foreground are closer, they also will be rendered bigger so a bit more blur will hardly hurt them. The objects in the background however will be rendered much smaller, so they need to be in good focus in order to appear sharp to the eye. Think of it as 'relative sharpness' ... the smaller the detail the better the sharpness must be. That's why in the type of landscape shots you've desribed above, using the hyperfocal setting is a bad idea.

If possible, use an aperture of f/8 or f/11 for good depth-of-field. Avoid smaller apertures as they will yield poor sharpness due to diffraction effects. Use f/16 or f/22 with 35-mm-format or APS-C-format cameras only if you desperately need more DOF and can sacrifice some resolution. With larger-format cameras, you may stop down one or two f-stops further before diffration sets in. With smaller-format cameras, like digital compacts, use a wider aperture as diffraction sets in earlier on small image formats.

Read more on this topic in Harold M. Merklinger's excellent article The Ins and Outs of Focus---download the article in PDF format here (http://www.trenholm.org/hmmerk/TIAOOFe.pdf) (92 pages, 2.2 MB). It has a lot of math but it's not too hard to understand ... certainly no rocket science. And you may read diagonally across the math parts if you want; just make sure you get the conclusions.


I remember Andy once telling me something about either 1/3 or 2/3 ... out in the distance. The one-third/two-thirds rule of the distribution of DOF is pure bullshit. Simply forget it! Actually, the ratio of the parts of DOF before and behind the plane of focus is gradually shifting from 1:1 at large magnification (macro) to 1:oo (infinity) at the hyperfocal distance and beyond. Of course, there does always exist one particular distance where the distribution will be 1:2 (or 1/3 to 2/3) ... but that always holds only at one certain distance; it's not true generally.

-- Olaf

[gus]

f16, tripod, focus on a distant object, fuggedaboutit. :1drink

:nod amen.

[Antonio Correia]

http://www.dofmaster.com/
Do you know this site ?
Last week I have been working on a chart like this.
As a matter of fact I have "built" similar instrument with the same purpose.
Only next week I'll be able to shoot it and publish it.
I did it adapted to my lenses.
http://www.dofmaster.com/files/intro_scale.jpg