Hyperfocal Distance

<p >What's your technique for setting the hyperfocal distance for landscape photography? I have the EFS 17-55/2.8 and it doesn't have a depth of field scale, so that means charts or tables. Do you bother with that or do you use another technique or rule of thumb? Many thanks. </p>

They removed the Hyperfocal Distance scale from most primes and almost all AF zoom lenses. Some Canon cameras have an A-DEP function, but I used it with spotty results. The best thing to do I guess would be to turn the AF off and try to figure out the best Hyperfocal Distance by trial and error. After a while it sort of comes naturally. There are charts and formulas on the web that teach you how to figure the best HD for a scene, but many of those are overly complicated.

 

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

<p>It seems like it's a bit of a challenge. I have Barnack loaded on my computer, but I won't have that information in the field. I've also heard of focusing one-third into the scene, but one of the websites said not to do that either. I wonder if there's an iPhone or iTouch app?</p>

"I wonder if there's an iPhone or iTouch app?"

 

There is !

<p>most canons have a depth of field mode -- focus on one subject, then the next, then press shutter button again, lens focuses so that each object is sharp, then trip shutter.</p>

<p>If your lens has a distance scale on it, you can focus on the near and far points that you want in focus, and then set the lens manually so that these 2 distances are equally spaced at either side of the focus index. This doesn't tell you what aperture you need to use, though ... use the smallest you can get away with, or bracket them. </p>

<p>Despite what many people might think, hyperfocal distance is first of all dependent on print magnification as well as sensor resolution (on digital sensors), and so the correct numbers might be different for different users dependent on what kind of print size is their finished product.</p>

<p>There is no such thing as everything in focus - focus is just in a plane, no matter what focal length a lens is, but there is such a thing as everything being acceptably sharp, or sharp enough that you cannot distinguish whether it is in focus or not, and so the best thing to do is to try out different focus points yourself and compare - not just pixel peeping, but actually print at least small test swatches in your usual maximum print size.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>"What's your technique for setting the hyperfocal distance for landscape photography?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I rarely resort to using the hyperfocal distance in landscapes, but rather follow the advice given in <a href="http://www.trenholm.org/hmmerk/DOFR.html">Depth of Field Revisited</a> : focus at infinity and pick an appropriate aperture value.<br>

I would sacrifice sharpness at infinity only if there is a dominating, <strong>very close</strong> foreground with interesting detail.</p>

<p>There are several iPhone apps. The one I have tried is called "field tools depth of field guide." It's very simple, and when I compared the results to DOFmaster, they matched. The price is $0.00. One thing I don't understand about it is that it asks you to set the lens you will be using as well as the camera. It does not seem to use the lens information, nor should it, as far as I know. I assumed it would just limit motion of the sliders, but it seems not to.</p>

<p>I agree with the remarks by Hakon, above, even though it is impractical to print a photo before deciding.</p>

<p>Although traditionally the theme is to focus on the hyperfocal point, that often isn't the best plan. One aspect worth remembering is that sharpness is much more important in some areas of the photo than in others. For a portrait, it would usually be the eyes, but for a landscape it might be the distant horizon. Therefore you need to decide where in your photo you want things to be critically sharp. That's usually somewhere between the hyperfocal point and the distant horizon. Trial and error may be the best plan.</p>

<p>Dave,</p>

 

<p>If your camera has Live View, you can easily cut to the chase. Just press the Depth of Field

Preview button while in Live View, zoom in, and (manually) adjust aperture and focus as needed

(while holding the DoFP button) until you’re satisfied.</p>

 

<p>No charts, no apps, no muss, no fuss, and you get the perfect combination of aperture and

focus setting every time.</p>

 

<p>For bonus points, use a tethered laptop instead of the camera’s LCD.</p>

 

<p>Cheers,</p>

 

<p>b&</p>

<p><strong><em>"What's your technique for setting the hyperfocal distance for landscape photography? I have the EFS 17-55/2.8"</em></strong><br>

<br>

I don't. <br>

I also don't use trial and error. <br>

I also agree with the theory described in Hakon's Post. <br>

<br>

But you asked for a practical "in the field" answer, and although I do carry a DoF calculator, I rarely use it for any landscapes, unless I am inhibited by aperture - or playing games with aperture, sans tripod, like in this example: <a href="../photo/9199113">http://www.photo.net/photo/9199113</a> <br>

Or playing games with Tv as in this example: <a href="../photo/9199072">http://www.photo.net/photo/9199072</a> <br>

<br>

So my answer is for landscape work with your camera and lens: <strong ><em >20ft and F/8.</em></strong> <br>

That gives you a "reasonable" DoF from about 10 ft to infinity from FL= 17mm, to FL = 30mm on an APS-C camera. <br>

I just know that. That FL range is entire wide angle to normal range on that zoom lens - typically the range in which you will be mostly always be working.<br>

I know 20ft - if you don't know 20ft take seven big steps to learn it.<br>

If you need a safety net, use F/11.</p>

<p>WW</p>

 

<p>I either just use a really small aperture, check the DOF preview for a very general idea, or if I want to be very precise about focus I use Live View and carefully inspect the image at 10X with the DOF preview button depressed.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

<p>Martin S. got it right - when done correctly - and that isn't all that hard - the results beat the "hyperfocal distance" acceptable sharpness baloney every time. </p>

<p><em>"So my answer is for landscape work with your camera and lens: 20ft and F/8." </em><br>

Thanks, William. That is easy to remember.<br>

I notice that 20 feet (6m) is in fact the hyperfocal distance at a FL of 30mm on 1.6x crop (according to the DOF calculator at http://www.lensplay.com/lenses/lens_depth_of_field3.php.<br>

What would you recommend for an equivalent FOV on full-frame (actually 135 film)? DOF seems to fall off rapidly beyond a FL of 35mm on full-frame according to the calculator.</p>

<p>I found a handy device to have with me in the field. It's a wheel/dial type calculator</p>

<p><a href="http://www.expoimaging.com/MediaFiles/instructions/EN_33.pdf">http://www.expoimaging.com/MediaFiles/instructions/EN_33.pdf</a></p>

<p>There are actually two different modes - one for telephoto, one for wide / standard. </p>

<p>I can't understand how knowing the hyperfocal distance in the field is going to help you if you don't have the means to set it accurately. Certainly with my Canon zooms I couldn't expect to set any specific distance accurately using the distance scale on the lens. </p>

<p>I further can't understand a point of view that a technique that leaves infinity on the boundary of acceptable and unacceptable sharpness is the best way to focus for landscapes all the time or even most of the time. Equally bear in mind that your point of sharpest focus might well be lost somewhere in the ether , wasted on something that doesn't need to be critically sharp.</p>

<p>I could be almost as critical about a routine which selects infinity focus all the time. Anything the matter with an approach that asks the photographer to determine what the real/most important subject of the photograph is and focus on that, with aperture selected to provide either a broad or narrow dof depending which suits the shot best? This means that sometimes you might use infinity focus, sometimes an approximation to hyperfocal, and sometimes not far in front of your toes. Depending on what you're trying to achieve with the shot. </p>

OK here is the easiest solution. Get a manual lens that has a HFD sale on it and attach it to your DSLR.

<p>Many good points on the subject and I do prefer to use a small laminated HF chart with me for quick reference in the field. I found the following web site where you pick the correct "circle of confusion" and your common focal lengths of your lenses; it then produces a chart which you can print out.<br>

<a href="http://johnhendry.com/gadget/hf.php">http://johnhendry.com/gadget/hf.php</a></p>

<p>I use the hyperfocal guides on my EF 24mm all the time. I usually back off a stop or two on the guides though. On my 14mm the guides simply lie, so I have to wing it. If find the depth of field preview almost useless. The preview allows you see if something is out of focus, but not see if it is sharp. <br>

Is there a consensus on the best iPhone app? That could be useful sometimes.<br>

Dan</p>

<p>FWIW, I have "DoF Calculator" on my iPod Touch, but generally prefer to use a simple DoF card as <a href="http://www.fovegraphy.com/DoF_E.php">presented here</a>.</p>

<p>Here is also a simple trick to get the hyperfocal distance:</p>

<ul>

<li>focus on infinity,</li>

<li>take your picture and inspect at your preferred zooming level to determine where is the sharpness limit (LiveView is also possible),</li>

<li>focus on this point which is your hyperfocal distance (sharp from half this distance to infinity).</li>

</ul>

<p>If you zoom completely then it's like using a CoC of about 2 pixels. Zooming less is like using a larger CoC (I use 50% on the 5D MarkII to get about the standard 0,03 mm CoC).</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"Anything the matter with an approach that asks the photographer to determine what the real/most important subject of the photograph is and focus on that, with aperture selected to provide either a broad or narrow dof depending which suits the shot best?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No, that's what I was trying to say.</p>

<p>If the detail at infinity, or close to it, is the dominant feature and covers a large area in a shot, I will focus on infinity and stop down to ensure that the foreground is acceptably sharp. But if I consider the foreground to be the more interesting feature, I will adjust focus accordingly and accept that infinity will be OK in terms of sharpness, but not great.<br>

This approach has served me well – no DOF tables necessary.</p>

<p>I also agree, that knowing the hyperfocal distance isn't very helpful, since the majority of modern AF lenses has useless distance scales.<br>

The best were probably the old Hasselblad lenses that had mechanical DOF indicators, that would move as you adjusted the aperture; those were the days.</p>

<p>So many people offered so many comments of such differing value that I wonder if anyone actually answered Dave's question.<br /> Dave, I use my ExpoAperture2 to calculate the hyperfocal distances of my shots. Here's a link to the ExpoImaging website about ExpoAperture2:<br /> <a href="http://www.expoimaging.com/product-detail.php?cat_id=4&product_id=4&keywords=ExpoAperture2_Depth-of-Field_Guide"> http://www.expoimaging.com/product-detail.php?cat_id=4&product_id=4&keywords=ExpoAperture2_Depth-of-Field_Guide</a> <br /> Great product. Well worth the price.<br /> Matt</p>

<p><strong><em>"What would you recommend for an equivalent FOV on full-frame (actually 135 film)? DOF seems to fall off rapidly beyond a FL of 35mm on full-frame according to the calculator."</em></strong><br>

<br>

20ft at F/11 is <strong><em>MY</em></strong> answer, for <strong><em>MY</em></strong> gear. A <strong ><em >very rough</em></strong> rule of thumb when converting DoF at any given distance and FL and swapping the same lens from APS-C to 135 Format is <strong ><em >one stop down</em></strong>. </p>

<p>Please note I have a 16 to 35L; 24L; 35L and 15 Fish, so therefore on my 5D I would most likely use one of those three lenses for a Landscape. So for those lenses 20ft @ F/11, is <strong><em>MY</em></strong> answer, because I wouldn’t go beyond 35mm.</p>

<p> If you have a 17 to 40 (for example) then I suggest you work out an answer for yourself, which suits that lens. . . actually, whilst writing I had a quick check 40mm is "safe" at F/11 @ 20ft (CoC = 0.02501mm)</p>

<p>Working at FL = 50mm on 135 Format is a different kettle of kippers . . . do you use that FL for Landscapes much? if so then workout your own "safe" setting. </p>

<p>*** </p>

<p><strong><em></em></strong><br>

<em><strong>BUT: </strong>Also I need to ensure my previous post is completely understood by pointing to my specific wording.</em><br>

<br />I cite this: <strong><em>"I further can't understand a point of view that a technique that leaves infinity on the boundary of acceptable and unacceptable sharpness is the best way to focus for landscapes all the time or even most of the time." (David Henderson)</em></strong></p>

<p>I agree with this statement 100%.</p>

<p>Please understand, Anis, that my "answer", which you quoted is simply answering the question about <em>what technique could be used in the field to get the "hyperfocal distance"</em></p>

<p>Please also note the very first sentence in my post answered the OP's direct question (which I quoted). My answer was: <em><strong>"I don't".</strong></em></p>

<p>The derivation of my “knowing” these distances for the “hyperfocal” and how they are “safe” is from my experience with <em>Hip Shooting</em> (mainly for street work) and <em>Hail Mary Shooting</em> (mainly for Press Doorstops).<br>

<br>

When employing these Shooting Techniques, one needs to get the maximum DoF – but also note, for these types of shots, the main subject is usually around 15 to 30ft – which is in the guts of the DoF, anyway.<br>

<br>

I learnt and became proficient at these two shooting techniques well before AF was used in 135 format cameras – I have just continued the “set and forget” process – and I adapted that process to answer the specific question, which was asked.</p>

<p>To be clear: when shooting Landscapes, I address each indiviuual shot and use whatever technique, from many, to get what is necessary "in focus", for that particular shot and that particular shooting scenario.<br>

<br>

WW</p>

<p>Depending on the lens you are using, DoF is going to cover it all if you are at f/8 or smaller. It's almost a moot point.<br>

Where hyperfocal distance comes in handy is when you find yourself in situations were you may not be able to focus quickly enough, and you know the min and max distances you are likely to encounter.</p>