I use Pentax 67 with 105mm lens. I really feel that I can not focus on person's body in order to get the good composition. If I focus on head, the top area is really empty and doesn't look good. I did this method that I focus on person's head and then move down to the body for composition but because of thin DOF, the focused area seems to be not focused if I do that. Is there any other alternative for focusing vertically?

[672]

If you can share photographic examples that would help us help you. Otherwise shoot at f13 to get the whole body in focus ?

[johnsey]

With a tighter shot and shallow depth of field, the focus and recompose method may be just enough movement you will need to slightly tweak your focus after composing the shot. Watch the eyes to make sure they are sharp and you should be fine.

[TomB_tx]

Why do you have to focus using the center spot? The stanard screen lets you judge sharpness anywhere on the image.

Why do you have to focus using the center spot? The stanard screen lets you judge sharpness anywhere on the image.

It doesn't have a split focusing and the standard focus screen is really horrible screen ever. I have to use the magnifier for accurate focusing.

[672]

If you focus on a head and then recompose downward you will have to shoot at like 5.6 or 8. The 105mm will never be in focus edge to edge before 5.6.

[tuco]

I focused on an eye and recomposed in this shot at f2.8 using the 105/2.4. Does DOF get much thinner than this? If you are standing back 8+ feet from the subject and are stopped down any at all, I don't think you should have much problem with a recomposed focus.

The micro prisms on the 6x7 work better in many cases than a split prism. With a split, you'll have trouble of course when there are no lines perpendicular to the split whereas the micro prisms work no matter what. They are much easier to see and get better critical focus with magnification such as on the folding hood ( which I use here).

[johnsey]

I focused on an eye and recomposed in this shot at f2.8 using the 105/2.4. Does DOF get much thinner than this? If you are standing back 8+ feet from the subject and are stopped down any at all, I don't think you should have much problem with a recomposed focus.

The micro prisms on the 6x7 work better in many cases than a split prism. With a split, you'll have trouble of course when there are no lines perpendicular to the split whereas the micro prisms work no matter what. They are much easier to see and get better critical focus with magnification such as on the folding hood ( which I use here).

I think he's looking at more of a full or 3/4 body shot from the original post.

[tuco]

I think he's looking at more of a full or 3/4 body shot from the original post.

My point if I can focus and recompose that close (#1 extension tube), it should be of little concern with the distance needed for a 3/4 or full body shot.

Focus and recompose handhold examples on a 3/4 and full body at f2.8 and using the 105/2.4.

[672]

I was thinking of digital not film.

And, on your second shot, either focus is on the bedroll or nowhere at all. Certainly does not appear to be on the subjects face.

---------- Post added 03-18-15 at 06:46 PM ----------

could be the low quality web data though.

[tuco]

could be the low quality web data though.

I'll look at the file later. But that shot could be at f2.4. That and handhold means nothing would be very sharp. But more than likely I moved or the subject moved between the time I focused and took the shot. It's not easy to focus handhold at f2.4/2.8 with this lens and camera because you and the subject can move. On a tripod and still subject, however, it's much easier and I get a better success rate.

Here are a few more f2.8 + 105/2.4 shots I found. This one was on a tripod and much easier to do




This one was handhold and the focus is missed once again where you can see it's at the back of the dog's leg.