Depth of Field - is there no mode selection for it?

**AstroDave** · 09-17-2019, 10:14 PM

Originally posted by pschlute

For me it was always a Rhino.

Me, too!

Not a Number · 09-17-2019, 10:52 PM

Back in the MF days of the 80s Minolta's sales literature would tout the fact that their SLRs had aperture priority (Av) metering as opposed to shutter priority (Tv) such as Canon's SLR. The notable exception was the MD5/7/11 which had both Av and Tv modes (as well a M). Aperture priority gives the camera operator (photographer) more control over the DOF. Shutter priority is better suited for sports/action shots (which is probably why Canon came to and continues to dominate the Sports Photography field).

So from that perspective Av and TAv might be considered "DOF modes".

richfam · 09-17-2019, 11:44 PM

Zeiss Batis lenses have a digital display on the lens itself that, while it normally displays the focus distance, can be switched to display the current depth of field range instead. This sounds like what the OP is looking for. But the Batis lenses are expensive and only made in Sony E-mount.

**Digitalis** · 09-18-2019, 05:53 AM - **1 Like**

Some older model 500 series hasselblad lenses had two orange indicators on the DOF scale that would move as you opened or closed the aperture to show you the range you could expect DOF to cover, of course this was based upon a fixed ratio of reproduction* like all DOF calculators.

* I think it was based on a 5X5 inch square print. Most 35mm DOF calculators are based upon a 6"X4" print, sof DOF calculators allow you to vary the COC, however all this has an effect upon is the apparent depth of field, not the actual depth of field [Which even at high F numbers, is actually smaller than you think]

Last edited by Digitalis; 09-18-2019 at 06:07 AM.

normhead · 09-18-2019, 07:01 AM - **3 Likes**

Bracket your ƒ stops. pick the DoF you like. IMHO I can't predict which ƒ-stop does what you want by reading scales. I'm not sure that a DoF mode could be crated that would accurately predict what-stop I'm going to be happiest with. I've many times thought "I'm wasting my time but I'm just going to stick with the process/" And then ended up liking the "stick with the process" image more than the image the distance scale suggests I'd like. What you want for DoF is determined entirely by context. The computing power needed to understand context would be phenomenal, especially since it would have to learn what your own personal choice would be based on your evaluation of hundreds of images, and it might not be the same for the next guy.

**UncleVanya** · 09-18-2019, 08:13 AM

Maybe I'm reading too much into the phase "exposure mode"... That is what tripped me up the most.

photoptimist · 09-18-2019, 08:28 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by normhead

Bracket your ƒ stops. pick the DoF you like. IMHO I can't predict which ƒ-stop does what you want by reading scales. I'm not sure that a DoF mode could be crated that would accurately predict what-stop I'm going to be happiest with. I've many times thought "I'm wasting my time but I'm just going to stick with the process/" And then ended up liking the "stick with the process" image more than the image the distance scale suggests I'd like. What you want for DoF is determined entirely by context. The computing power needed to understand context would be phenomenal, especially since it would have to learn what your own personal choice would be based on your evaluation of hundreds of images, and it might not be the same for the next guy.

Unfortunately, bracketing the aperture is not sufficient because DoF is a two variable problem involving both the near and far range of the focus. You'd have to bracket BOTH the aperture and the focus-distance setting so you can chose the best shot that has the right combination of in-focus and out-of-focus effects in both the background and foreground. Even the "focus-one-third-in" rule is only a crude approximation that is only correct for certain focal lengths and certain distances.

You are right that the "best" DoF (and focus distance) setting is sensitive to context (and sensitive to display/printing parameters, too). The photographer needs to decide how sharp (or blurry) they want the background objects and how sharp (or blurry) they want the foreground objects to manage the contradictory goals for both subject isolation and subject contextualization. It's not an easy decision and it's one that can be further complicated by compositional choices such as intentionally reframing to include (or avoid) distant skyline features or include (or avoid) very close foreground features.

pschlute · 09-18-2019, 08:47 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by normhead

Bracket your ƒ stops. pick the DoF you like. IMHO I can't predict which ƒ-stop does what you want by reading scales. I'm not sure that a DoF mode could be crated that would accurately predict what-stop I'm going to be happiest with. I've many times thought "I'm wasting my time but I'm just going to stick with the process/" And then ended up liking the "stick with the process" image more than the image the distance scale suggests I'd like. What you want for DoF is determined entirely by context. The computing power needed to understand context would be phenomenal, especially since it would have to learn what your own personal choice would be based on your evaluation of hundreds of images, and it might not be the same for the next guy.

My approach is always to take a number of shots at different apertures. If I am isolating the subject it will be wide open and every half stop from there to say f4.5. I intuitively know roughly what will work and what wont.

Mode this and mode that may make for an impressive spec sheet, but too much automation removes the basic skills that lie behind. There is no substitute for getting your hands dirty and manually configuring your kit.

normhead · 09-19-2019, 05:32 AM

Originally posted by photoptimist

Unfortunately, bracketing the aperture is not sufficient because DoF is a two variable problem involving both the near and far range of the focus.

Insufficient for you maybe... it seems to work quite well for me. On macros there could be a situation where moving the DoF around forward and backwards might produce better results, but for the most part, you can just focus on your subject and fire. That's my experience anyway.

I used to sit my new teachers down, when I was an HS department head. "Here is what the ministry says you much legally do." Then I'd tell them how to do the job, what they had to do , what they didn't have to do. You have to be careful you aren't presenting the things you should theoretically do, but really don't have to out in the real world.

angerdan · 09-19-2019, 07:53 AM

Originally posted by pschlute

The KP can do DOF bracketing..... http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/support/pdf/kp.pdf
But the reason there is no DOF "mode" is because the DOF control is always underneath your thumb (the rear wheel)

Very interesting!
Manual page 52:
ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/support/man-pdf/kP.pdf#page=52

jack002 · 09-19-2019, 08:15 AM

Don't all the cameras with scene modes do this? My K110D has modes that favor a large or a small aperture. They just don't call it shallow/deep DOF.

angerdan · 09-19-2019, 08:23 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by jack002

Don't all the cameras with scene modes do this

You're right.
ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/support/man-pdf/k-1.pdf#page=48

Cthulhugan · 09-19-2019, 07:26 PM

One possible implementation would be to have the camera adjust the aperture as the lens is focussed and zoomed to keep the same DoF. Maybe not a mode, but a “DoF lock” feature. I suppose that could be useful when shooting activity with a large range in subject distance. I can’t say I’d have use for that, but some might.

wings · 10-04-2019, 03:09 PM - **1 Like**

I am assuming that you know that you can program the K-1 & II DOF preview?

angerdan · 10-05-2019, 02:36 AM

Originally posted by wings

I am assuming that you know that you can program the K-1 & II DOF preview?

The DoF preview by stopping down to the exposition aperture is not what this thread is about.

09-19-2019, 05:32 AM	#24
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by photoptimist Unfortunately, bracketing the aperture is not sufficient because DoF is a two variable problem involving both the near and far range of the focus. Insufficient for you maybe... it seems to work quite well for me. On macros there could be a situation where moving the DoF around forward and backwards might produce better results, but for the most part, you can just focus on your subject and fire. That's my experience anyway. I used to sit my new teachers down, when I was an HS department head. "Here is what the ministry says you much legally do." Then I'd tell them how to do the job, what they had to do , what they didn't have to do. You have to be careful you aren't presenting the things you should theoretically do, but really don't have to out in the real world. Last edited by normhead; 09-19-2019 at 08:14 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Depth of Field and Pixel Peeping	DSLRnovice	Pentax Full Frame	10	11-07-2017 08:16 PM
Pentax KS2 + 18-135 (no auto mode/ no scene mode?)	hr21	Pentax DSLR Discussion	9	02-13-2016 04:21 PM
Depth-of-field bracketing -- is there a way to do this?	baj	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	16	07-04-2015 02:17 PM
May 1st, 2012 A Day Without the 99% No Work – No School – No Housework – No Shopping	jogiba	General Talk	4	05-02-2012 02:48 AM
50mm FA f1.4 and a quick depth of field study	keithlm	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	05-18-2011 06:43 AM

09-17-2019, 10:14 PM	#16
AstroDave Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2007 Location: Flagstaff, Arizona Posts: 1,637	Originally posted by pschlute For me it was always a Rhino. Me, too!

09-17-2019, 10:52 PM	#17
Not a Number Moderator Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Venice, CA Posts: 10,526	Back in the MF days of the 80s Minolta's sales literature would tout the fact that their SLRs had aperture priority (Av) metering as opposed to shutter priority (Tv) such as Canon's SLR. The notable exception was the MD5/7/11 which had both Av and Tv modes (as well a M). Aperture priority gives the camera operator (photographer) more control over the DOF. Shutter priority is better suited for sports/action shots (which is probably why Canon came to and continues to dominate the Sports Photography field). So from that perspective Av and TAv might be considered "DOF modes".

09-17-2019, 11:44 PM	#18
richfam Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2017 Location: Lindsborg, Kansas Photos: Gallery Posts: 89	Zeiss Batis lenses have a digital display on the lens itself that, while it normally displays the focus distance, can be switched to display the current depth of field range instead. This sounds like what the OP is looking for. But the Batis lenses are expensive and only made in Sony E-mount.

09-18-2019, 05:53 AM - 1 Like	#19
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Some older model 500 series hasselblad lenses had two orange indicators on the DOF scale that would move as you opened or closed the aperture to show you the range you could expect DOF to cover, of course this was based upon a fixed ratio of reproduction* like all DOF calculators. * I think it was based on a 5X5 inch square print. Most 35mm DOF calculators are based upon a 6"X4" print, sof DOF calculators allow you to vary the COC, however all this has an effect upon is the apparent depth of field, not the actual depth of field [Which even at high F numbers, is actually smaller than you think] Last edited by Digitalis; 09-18-2019 at 06:07 AM.

09-18-2019, 07:01 AM - 3 Likes	#20
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Bracket your ƒ stops. pick the DoF you like. IMHO I can't predict which ƒ-stop does what you want by reading scales. I'm not sure that a DoF mode could be crated that would accurately predict what-stop I'm going to be happiest with. I've many times thought "I'm wasting my time but I'm just going to stick with the process/" And then ended up liking the "stick with the process" image more than the image the distance scale suggests I'd like. What you want for DoF is determined entirely by context. The computing power needed to understand context would be phenomenal, especially since it would have to learn what your own personal choice would be based on your evaluation of hundreds of images, and it might not be the same for the next guy.

09-18-2019, 08:13 AM	#21
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,404	Maybe I'm reading too much into the phase "exposure mode"... That is what tripped me up the most.

09-18-2019, 08:28 AM - 1 Like	#22
photoptimist Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2016 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,126	Originally posted by normhead Bracket your ƒ stops. pick the DoF you like. IMHO I can't predict which ƒ-stop does what you want by reading scales. I'm not sure that a DoF mode could be crated that would accurately predict what-stop I'm going to be happiest with. I've many times thought "I'm wasting my time but I'm just going to stick with the process/" And then ended up liking the "stick with the process" image more than the image the distance scale suggests I'd like. What you want for DoF is determined entirely by context. The computing power needed to understand context would be phenomenal, especially since it would have to learn what your own personal choice would be based on your evaluation of hundreds of images, and it might not be the same for the next guy. Unfortunately, bracketing the aperture is not sufficient because DoF is a two variable problem involving both the near and far range of the focus. You'd have to bracket BOTH the aperture and the focus-distance setting so you can chose the best shot that has the right combination of in-focus and out-of-focus effects in both the background and foreground. Even the "focus-one-third-in" rule is only a crude approximation that is only correct for certain focal lengths and certain distances. You are right that the "best" DoF (and focus distance) setting is sensitive to context (and sensitive to display/printing parameters, too). The photographer needs to decide how sharp (or blurry) they want the background objects and how sharp (or blurry) they want the foreground objects to manage the contradictory goals for both subject isolation and subject contextualization. It's not an easy decision and it's one that can be further complicated by compositional choices such as intentionally reframing to include (or avoid) distant skyline features or include (or avoid) very close foreground features.

09-18-2019, 08:47 AM - 1 Like	#23
pschlute Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Surrey, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,202	Originally posted by normhead Bracket your ƒ stops. pick the DoF you like. IMHO I can't predict which ƒ-stop does what you want by reading scales. I'm not sure that a DoF mode could be crated that would accurately predict what-stop I'm going to be happiest with. I've many times thought "I'm wasting my time but I'm just going to stick with the process/" And then ended up liking the "stick with the process" image more than the image the distance scale suggests I'd like. What you want for DoF is determined entirely by context. The computing power needed to understand context would be phenomenal, especially since it would have to learn what your own personal choice would be based on your evaluation of hundreds of images, and it might not be the same for the next guy. My approach is always to take a number of shots at different apertures. If I am isolating the subject it will be wide open and every half stop from there to say f4.5. I intuitively know roughly what will work and what wont. Mode this and mode that may make for an impressive spec sheet, but too much automation removes the basic skills that lie behind. There is no substitute for getting your hands dirty and manually configuring your kit.

09-19-2019, 07:53 AM	#25
angerdan Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,639	Originally posted by pschlute The KP can do DOF bracketing..... http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/support/pdf/kp.pdf But the reason there is no DOF "mode" is because the DOF control is always underneath your thumb (the rear wheel) Very interesting! Manual page 52: ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/support/man-pdf/kP.pdf#page=52

09-19-2019, 08:15 AM	#26
jack002 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Missouri Photos: Albums Posts: 727	Don't all the cameras with scene modes do this? My K110D has modes that favor a large or a small aperture. They just don't call it shallow/deep DOF.

09-19-2019, 08:23 AM - 1 Like	#27
angerdan Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,639	Originally posted by jack002 Don't all the cameras with scene modes do this You're right. ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/support/man-pdf/k-1.pdf#page=48

09-19-2019, 07:26 PM	#28
Cthulhugan Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2015 Location: Calgary Alberta Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 227	One possible implementation would be to have the camera adjust the aperture as the lens is focussed and zoomed to keep the same DoF. Maybe not a mode, but a “DoF lock” feature. I suppose that could be useful when shooting activity with a large range in subject distance. I can’t say I’d have use for that, but some might.

10-05-2019, 02:36 AM	#30
angerdan Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,639	Originally posted by wings I am assuming that you know that you can program the K-1 & II DOF preview? The DoF preview by stopping down to the exposition aperture is not what this thread is about.