[stevewig]

I'm interested in your views as to the use of hyperfocal distance.

For instance, when using wide angle lenses:

Do you use this capability?
If not why not?

Do you regard it as a trade off between a "tack sharp" subject and a large but reasonably sharp field of view?
If not why not?

If you use only sometimes, what determines the occasions when you do use it?

[wlachan]

Do you regard it as a trade off between a "tack sharp" subject and a large but reasonably sharp field of view?

That's what I found out and have since never used it again. I just focus on what's most important and stop down when needed.

[stevebrot]

Do you regard it as a trade off between a "tack sharp" subject and a large but reasonably sharp field of view?

Yes. The notion of DOF (what the hyperfocal is based on) is based on perception of an acceptably sharp image. Even at very narrow apertures, there is only one point where the image is actually in focus. You can proof this by "pixel peeping".

As for when it is handy...That is easy. Street photography or any other time when you want reasonable focus and don't want the AF on the camera to choose the subject. Some lenses/cameras (e.g. S-Takumar 35/3.5 and Olympus XA) even have the hyperfocal marked in red on the distance scale and aperture ring. Usage is easy...

1. Turn off the AF
2. Put your camera in Av mode
3. Choose the appropriate aperture
4. Choose the appropriate distance on the focus ring (much easier on manual focus lenses)
5. Shoot without thinking about focus

For an examples of photos taken using this technique, just search the forum for posts by jgredline. Often enough, he shoots from the hip and does not even bring the camera to his face.


Steve

[Marc Sabatella]

Per a reader suggestion, I've gone ahead and moved this to General Photography, as it's more a technique question than anything about the camera itself.

[philbaum]

I'm interested in your views as to the use of hyperfocal distance.

For instance, when using wide angle lenses:

Do you use this capability?
If not why not?

Do you regard it as a trade off between a "tack sharp" subject and a large but reasonably sharp field of view?
If not why not?

If you use only sometimes, what determines the occasions when you do use it?

Yes, i use it a lot.

Technically, its a tradeoff but with digital sharpening methods, one can make a large field appear to be sharp. Any tourist can point at a single subject and make that appear sharp. it takes a more work to have a large depth of field appear sharp. I like to provide a scene that the more time spent, the more items one can discover in it. With some exceptions, i find single focused images to lack interest for myself. well done macros and good compositions are exceptions, e.g. Art Wolf has an image of a sharp deer way back in a forest of trees, the nears ones not in focus at all, masterful piece.

With telescopic lenses used relatively close, its often difficult getting a large DOF.

[stevewig]

Yes, i use it a lot.

Technically, its a tradeoff but with digital sharpening methods, one can make a large field appear to be sharp. Any tourist can point at a single subject and make that appear sharp. it takes a more work to have a large depth of field appear sharp. I like to provide a scene that the more time spent, the more items one can discover in it. With some exceptions, i find single focused images to lack interest for myself. well done macros and good compositions are exceptions, e.g. Art Wolf has an image of a sharp deer way back in a forest of trees, the nears ones not in focus at all, masterful piece.

With telescopic lenses used relatively close, its often difficult getting a large DOF.

Very interesting answer.....

[Ecaterin]

The only time I consciously use hyperfocal distance is when I'm shooting video. Since video is manual focus on the K-x, I use my DA15, set it up for the best compromise, and hit 'record.' A very handy usage

[Mechan1k]

I have used it when on the move actually.
I need to take some camera gear with me again while doing deliveries.
It's a case of quickly getting "that" shot ... while waiting for that traffic light to change.
You just never know what might crop up when driving around ... and using hyperfocal distance really helps in this case.

[dadipentak]

I've tried to understand hyperfocal focusing but I always end up in the circle of confusion ;~) One of these days (perhaps at the "East Coast Outing" I'll get someone to show me how to do it.

In the meantime, I try to apply my understanding of the concept by stopping down to some extent and putting the focus on an object more or less a third of the distance (more or less) into the acceptable dof I'm looking for. It works (more or less ;~) but I'm sure a more refined approach would produce more refined and consistent results.

[Mechan1k]

hyperfocal distance is made easy if your lens has the distance markings on the barrel (the older the better).

[mysticcowboy]

Hyperfocal distance gives the greatest range of apparent sharpness possible in an image. Yes, there is only one point of absolute sharpness, but that's not always the most important consideration.

When shooting landscapes with a wide angle lens, say 35mm or less, hyperfocal distance focusing is extremely useful. It also works with interior building shots. There I'd use it at 24mm or less. With those types of shots there is seldom one special object or person that needs to be in absolutely perfect focus. Rather, you're trying to get the largest possible part of the image in apparent focus.

The idea of apparent focus is the key to using hyperfocal distance. While most of the image may not actually be in real focus, the viewed image still looks sharp. Yes, pixel peeping will reveal the real focal point of an image but in a print most of an image will appear in focus. It's a subtle point. Bottom line, if it appears to be sharp, then it will generally look good.

The actual computations for hyperfocal distance depend both on the distance you focus at and the aperture. There are charts for figuring this out. I have an iPhone app.

For landscapes you can often come close enough by using a small aperture, say f 11-16, (smaller apertures than that tend to be soft do to lens diffraction) and focusing a third of the way into the part of the image you want to be sharp. For landscapes, use spot focus and pick a spot a quarter to a third of the way to the horizon. If your lens has depth-of-field markings, then manual focus works well. The one third rule of thumb comes from the fact that your in-focus area extends farther past the point of focus than it does in front.

I can't imagine too many situations where I'd try hyperfocal distance focusing with any sort of telephoto.

[arbib]

With my DSLR, it is a little more difficult. the newer lenses don't have DOF scales in them, for the most part. But, if I shoot at the widest FL, (16mm-18mm on my 16-45 zoom), and I shoot at f/11 or f/16, I can set the focus on INF and on Manual Focus.. it will work fine 5 feet to INF.

Really with any kit lens, if you set at 18mm and f/11 and set the camera/lens on manual focus and on INF... you are set with a around 28mm fov and a DOF of around 5 feet to INF.

I use it mostly with my 28/2 and 35/1.4 for my Leica. And with the Olympus XA I own too, I do the use RF now and again.

It allows you to quickly take a photograph without any fuss. and the sharpness is fine.

With street photography, this is an advantage for fast shooting, where you will not have time to fiddle with settings.

I'm all for Hyper-Focal DOF shooting...


Taken with a 24mm lens set at f/11 and for max DOF-3' to INF- on a Voigtlander Bessa R2 at hip level as I passed him, a few years ago.

[stevewig]

With my DSLR, it is a little more difficult. the newer lenses don't have DOF scales in them, for the most part. But, if I shoot at the widest FL, (16mm-18mm on my 16-45 zoom), and I shoot at f/11 or f/16, I can set the focus on INF and on Manual Focus.. it will work fine 5 feet to INF.

Really with any kit lens, if you set at 18mm and f/11 and set the camera/lens on manual focus and on INF... you are set with a around 28mm fov and a DOF of around 5 feet to INF.

I use it mostly with my 28/2 and 35/1.4 for my Leica. And with the Olympus XA I own too, I do the use RF now and again.

It allows you to quickly take a photograph without any fuss. and the sharpness is fine.

With street photography, this is an advantage for fast shooting, where you will not have time to fiddle with settings.



I'm all for Hyper-Focal DOF shooting...


Taken with a 24mm lens set at f/11 and for max DOF-3' to INF- on a Voigtlander Bessa R2 at hip level as I passed him, a few years ago.

Arbib, your picture is protected - no show!

[arbib]

Arbib, your picture is protected - no show!

I see it ???
I'll check out the host site...
I picked the largest size... I changed it out to a smaller one

[dadipentak]

I see it ???

FYIm I see it.