About hyperfocal distance..

Wheatfield · 09-23-2008, 06:26 PM

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

Originally posted by throndor

Read a couple of texts but still not sure of some issues..

1- So there is no way to get things in focus from 1 inches to infinity? (i've seen some photos where they shot the beach boulders and the sea, both of which were pretty in focus?)

A very short focal length lens may come close. Cokin, and I am sure others, used to make half glass close-up diopters specifically for this. The diopter covered a portion of the lens and allowed for very a very long depth of field. I don't know if they still make them or not.

2- When my hyperfocal distance is longer than 2 meters, how do i focus on something that is at that distance.. The lens just focuses on things nearer than 2 metres and the rest is just "infinity".. so how is focusing on something at 4 meters and 30 meters different?

Manual focus.

dgimcmillan · 09-24-2008, 08:44 AM

I often buy the Photo magazines from England, because they seem to be a lot better than what we have in Canada/U.S.

There was an article a while ago where the writer showed how to do a composite image that would have both the foreground and background in focus.

I don't remember the exact details, but I think it involved using a tripod to maintain your perspective; keeping the same focal length; and focussing on foreground; shoot; focus on background; shoot. Then, using PS, you would use layers and place one image on top of the other, then selectively erase the OOF areas from one layer to expose the in-focus areas on the other layer.

I tried it at the time, and thought it was really cool! But, I haven't done it since, because I use Lightzone and can't be bothered with all the work PS makes me do. Unfortunately, LZ won't do layers!

Ian Mc.

Spongefingers · 09-24-2008, 09:56 AM

Originally posted by dgimcmillan

I often buy the Photo magazines from England, because they seem to be a lot better than what we have in Canada/U.S.

There was an article a while ago where the writer showed how to do a composite image that would have both the foreground and background in focus.

I don't remember the exact details, but I think it involved using a tripod to maintain your perspective; keeping the same focal length; and focussing on foreground; shoot; focus on background; shoot. Then, using PS, you would use layers and place one image on top of the other, then selectively erase the OOF areas from one layer to expose the in-focus areas on the other layer.

I tried it at the time, and thought it was really cool! But, I haven't done it since, because I use Lightzone and can't be bothered with all the work PS makes me do. Unfortunately, LZ won't do layers!

Ian Mc.

Do you mean focus stacking?
Focus stacking - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You're right about British magazines, they are the envy of the world!

dgimcmillan · 09-25-2008, 11:05 AM

Sponge....

your link definitely looks like what the article described. I didn't try it with a macro, though. I did it with an outdoor scene and focussing on the foreground, then the background. I only used 2 exposures, so it wasn't all that much of a stack!

I can't post any examples, since I don't have any right now. I think I'll try this again next week when I'm on vacation.

Ian Mc.

RioRico · 10-05-2008, 10:42 PM

So you want 1-inch-to-infinity sharpness with your dSLR? You've already seen the suggestions re: tilt and shift (yes, you can buy such adapters for 35mm-format lenses); small aperture (but not too small or you have diffraction problems); very short focal length; and backing away and cropping. Sure, these work.

Another (CHEAP!) solution: a split-diopter filter, very much like a split-ND filter. Properly applied, half the image is macro-focused, and the rest isn't. It's sort of like putting bifocals on your camera. Here's one for US$5 on eBay:
Hoya 55mm Split Field Technical Filter Diopter - eBay (item 250301909954 end time Oct-06-08 17:24:38 PDT)

Hmmm, I just ordered new eyeglasses from CostCo today, new lenses to go into old frames. The old lenses are... progressive bifocals! Maybe I'll mount an old lens on a bellows and try for deep-focus effects. Hmmm...

09-24-2008, 08:44 AM	#17
dgimcmillan New Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Abbotsford, British Columbia, Canada Posts: 13	Another way....I think I often buy the Photo magazines from England, because they seem to be a lot better than what we have in Canada/U.S. There was an article a while ago where the writer showed how to do a composite image that would have both the foreground and background in focus. I don't remember the exact details, but I think it involved using a tripod to maintain your perspective; keeping the same focal length; and focussing on foreground; shoot; focus on background; shoot. Then, using PS, you would use layers and place one image on top of the other, then selectively erase the OOF areas from one layer to expose the in-focus areas on the other layer. I tried it at the time, and thought it was really cool! But, I haven't done it since, because I use Lightzone and can't be bothered with all the work PS makes me do. Unfortunately, LZ won't do layers! Ian Mc.

09-25-2008, 11:05 AM	#19
dgimcmillan New Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Abbotsford, British Columbia, Canada Posts: 13	Re: Focus stacking Sponge.... your link definitely looks like what the article described. I didn't try it with a macro, though. I did it with an outdoor scene and focussing on the foreground, then the background. I only used 2 exposures, so it wasn't all that much of a stack! I can't post any examples, since I don't have any right now. I think I'll try this again next week when I'm on vacation. Ian Mc.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
hyperfocal distance	stevewig	Photographic Technique	26	07-16-2010 10:57 PM
Hyperfocal distance	yipchunyu	Photographic Technique	1	06-23-2009 07:46 AM
hyperfocal distance and digital lenses	axl	Pentax DSLR Discussion	12	01-15-2008 11:07 PM
Do you use Hyperfocal distance ?	simonkit	Photographic Technique	26	10-10-2007 03:11 PM
Hyperfocal distance	regken	Pentax DSLR Discussion	16	03-26-2007 05:29 PM

09-23-2008, 06:26 PM	#16
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here. Originally posted by throndor Read a couple of texts but still not sure of some issues.. 1- So there is no way to get things in focus from 1 inches to infinity? (i've seen some photos where they shot the beach boulders and the sea, both of which were pretty in focus?) A very short focal length lens may come close. Cokin, and I am sure others, used to make half glass close-up diopters specifically for this. The diopter covered a portion of the lens and allowed for very a very long depth of field. I don't know if they still make them or not. 2- When my hyperfocal distance is longer than 2 meters, how do i focus on something that is at that distance.. The lens just focuses on things nearer than 2 metres and the rest is just "infinity".. so how is focusing on something at 4 meters and 30 meters different? Manual focus.

09-24-2008, 09:56 AM	#18
Spongefingers Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 237	Originally posted by dgimcmillan I often buy the Photo magazines from England, because they seem to be a lot better than what we have in Canada/U.S. There was an article a while ago where the writer showed how to do a composite image that would have both the foreground and background in focus. I don't remember the exact details, but I think it involved using a tripod to maintain your perspective; keeping the same focal length; and focussing on foreground; shoot; focus on background; shoot. Then, using PS, you would use layers and place one image on top of the other, then selectively erase the OOF areas from one layer to expose the in-focus areas on the other layer. I tried it at the time, and thought it was really cool! But, I haven't done it since, because I use Lightzone and can't be bothered with all the work PS makes me do. Unfortunately, LZ won't do layers! Ian Mc. Do you mean focus stacking? Focus stacking - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia You're right about British magazines, they are the envy of the world!

10-05-2008, 10:42 PM	#20
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	So you want 1-inch-to-infinity sharpness with your dSLR? You've already seen the suggestions re: tilt and shift (yes, you can buy such adapters for 35mm-format lenses); small aperture (but not too small or you have diffraction problems); very short focal length; and backing away and cropping. Sure, these work. Another (CHEAP!) solution: a split-diopter filter, very much like a split-ND filter. Properly applied, half the image is macro-focused, and the rest isn't. It's sort of like putting bifocals on your camera. Here's one for US$5 on eBay: Hoya 55mm Split Field Technical Filter Diopter - eBay (item 250301909954 end time Oct-06-08 17:24:38 PDT) Hmmm, I just ordered new eyeglasses from CostCo today, new lenses to go into old frames. The old lenses are... progressive bifocals! Maybe I'll mount an old lens on a bellows and try for deep-focus effects. Hmmm...