Landscape Photography - An Issue of Focus

[TME]

Hello,

As I review my photos, it's quite clear that my landscape photos are not really very sharp... and I think this has to do with where I focus the camera... there is this issue about hyperfocal distance and all that technical jargon which confuses me a lot cos I don't watch around with hyperfocal distance tables... so I would like to ask if there is a general rule of thumb that I could follow?

Generally, my assumption is that in a landscape shot, you would want maximum DOF so that everything from foreground to background is sharp... of course only view cameras and layering can do that... but what I want to achieve is the perception of front to back sharpness... so where do I focus??? That's the million dollar question for me...

I'll post one of my pictures and say I how I focused it... perhaps some kind soul can point me in the correct direction...



For this shot, I focused on the shoreline of the distant island... now if you viewed it at around 75% in PS. I find that the foreground is a little blur - movement of the waves not withstanding (the shutter speed was pretty high, enough to freeze the waves)... would you have focused on the shoreline as I did or on the beach in front? Or somewhere in between?




For this shot, my focus was on the horizon line in the distance between the sky and sea... would that be correct?

For a very wide scene with a lot of depth (horizon line), then I would choose to focus on the horizon line... e.g. standing on a beach shooting a sunset... should I focus closer? Or on the horizon line?





This one not taken by me but my dad using a Fuji S9600 on auto mode... where did the camera focus? Where would you focus?


Two more that I took...


This one has lots of details from near to far... where should I focus? I remember focusing on the distant islets of land...



This one is another typical landscape scene... where should the focus be? On the river nearer to me? On the treeline in the far background? The roadsign on the left?


Thanks!!!!

[kkleong]

Hyperfocal distance simply:
When the lens is focused on the hyperfocal distance, the depth of field extends from half the hyperfocal distance to infinity.

It would be easliest if yours is a manual lens with distance, DOF & aperture markings.
There are a few good examples (near the middle section with pics) here:
http://www.dofmaster.com/hyperfocal.html#methods

It would be tough if you're in the field unless you've a iPhone or iPod. Use this:
http://www.dofmaster.com/iphone.html

Personally, I've used a chart or table for the settings when in the field. I've use this table below since my N* days (in ft & m). Focal length ranged from 10mm to 35mm (should be ok for landscape I think).
http://www.nikonians.org/html/resour...gle_tables.pdf

You could also use any on-line calculator and print it out for field work (may design a table yourself).

Example for your first picture, you may focus nearer to keep the waves in focus.
Your setting: FL=85mm, F22, Your hyperfocal dist is about 52ft (16m).
ie. if you focus at hyperfocal dist of 52ft, your DOF will be from 26ft to infinity.

Maybe your aperture of F22 could be small too (running into diffraction?) and FL of 85m too narrow. No?
IMHO, F8 to F16 would be better in landscape for most lenses and a wider focal length would be better suited if you care about DOF.

Hope these help.

[Drudkh]

For landscape shots, I always try my best to shoot in manual focus and at f/16, and then look into the distance scale on the lens and place the infinity symbol on the 16 mark. This ensures that I cover the maximum range of distance in focus.

  1     2     3    ∞        m
 |   |   |  |  |   |   |
 22  16  8  |  8  16  22

The example above shows that range 1.5m to infinity are in focus.
Sharpness wise, depends on glass and the environment factor.
Hope this helps.

[TME]

Originally Posted by Drudkh For landscape shots, I always try my best to shoot in manual focus and at f/16, and then look into the distance scale on the lens and place the infinity symbol on the 16 mark. This ensures that I cover the maximum range of distance in focus. 1 2 3 ∞ m | | | | | | | 22 16 8 | 8 16 22 The example above shows that range 1.5m to infinity are in focus. Sharpness wise, depends on glass and the environment factor. Hope this helps.

Thanks it helps... that's what I also read up on... but not all wide angle lens carry this scale nor are they very accurate... I use the 17-35mm f/2.8-4 and the scales are pretty close set and difficult to use... I have the 50mm f/1.7 (old design) and that has a very good set of scales...

Ok, so does this mean in your example, I should focus at something at 1.5m away from the sensor plane (theoretically) and then everything beyond that up till infinity would be in focus? And would that also mean that everything nearer than 1.5m would be out of focus? Or would the 1/3 foreground 2/3 background in-focus rule still apply?

Also I remember that there was such a discussion between Zerstorer and I about this issue of using the infinity sign on the lens scale to fix hyperfocal distance but that the scales may not be very accurate and can lead to errors... cos I used AF and the lens scales seem to indicate that the infinity sign was lined up along side the aperture I was using... but since the scale has different scaling from one end to the other (for some lenses), then it might not be accurate... any comments on this? Cos most modern consumer lenses don't have the fine DOF scales like the old MF lenses...

[TME]

Originally Posted by kkleong Hyperfocal distance simply: When the lens is focused on the hyperfocal distance, the depth of field extends from half the hyperfocal distance to infinity. It would be easliest if yours is a manual lens with distance, DOF & aperture markings. There are a few good examples (near the middle section with pics) here: http://www.dofmaster.com/hyperfocal.html#methods It would be tough if you're in the field unless you've a iPhone or iPod. Use this: http://www.dofmaster.com/iphone.html Personally, I've used a chart or table for the settings when in the field. I've use this table below since my N* days (in ft & m). Focal length ranged from 10mm to 35mm (should be ok for landscape I think). http://www.nikonians.org/html/resour...gle_tables.pdf You could also use any on-line calculator and print it out for field work (may design a table yourself). Example for your first picture, you may focus nearer to keep the waves in focus. Your setting: FL=85mm, F22, Your hyperfocal dist is about 52ft (16m). ie. if you focus at hyperfocal dist of 52ft, your DOF will be from 26ft to infinity. Maybe your aperture of F22 could be small too (running into diffraction?) and FL of 85m too narrow. No? IMHO, F8 to F16 would be better in landscape for most lenses and a wider focal length would be better suited if you care about DOF. Hope these help.

At that point when I made that beach shot, I knew nothing of hyperfocal lengths... so I thought if I squeeze down the aperture I should get more stuff in focus... of course not... point is that at f/22 diffraction softening sets in... I forgot about it in my quest for maximum sharpness throughout the photo depth... anyway I chose 85mm cos the island is very very far away and 85mm nicely crops out the distractions, especially the rather dirty beach (lots of branches, etc)... makes it looks more postcard like...

Anyway, as I said I don't really like hyperfocal tables... super unwieldly... I'm not the type to shoot from tripod and set up... I'm more the handheld, shoot and move type... so I would prefer Drudkh's suggestion which is also what most websites seems to suggest as most convenient to use... but that is highly dependent on how the scales on that particular lens stacks up... in my case, not good at all it seems...

[kkleong]

Originally Posted by TME Ok, so does this mean in your example, I should focus at something at 1.5m away from the sensor plane (theoretically) and then everything beyond that up till infinity would be in focus? And would that also mean that everything nearer than 1.5m would be out of focus? Or would the 1/3 foreground 2/3 background in-focus rule still apply?

In Drudkh's example, 2.5m is the hyperfocal dist. and DOF is from 1.5m to infinity.
(ie. if you focus at 2.5m, your DOF is from 1.5m to infinity).
If you focus at 1.5m, your DOF is only from 0.5m to 3m with F16 (estimation from scale).
Drudkh, please correct me if I'm wrong.

Originally Posted by TME At that point when I made that beach shot, I knew nothing of hyperfocal lengths... so I thought if I squeeze down the aperture I should get more stuff in focus... of course not... point is that at f/22 diffraction softening sets in... I forgot about it in my quest for maximum sharpness throughout the photo depth... anyway I chose 85mm cos the island is very very far away and 85mm nicely crops out the distractions, especially the rather dirty beach (lots of branches, etc)... makes it looks more postcard like... Anyway, as I said I don't really like hyperfocal tables... super unwieldly... I'm not the type to shoot from tripod and set up... I'm more the handheld, shoot and move type... so I would prefer Drudkh's suggestion which is also what most websites seems to suggest as most convenient to use... but that is highly dependent on how the scales on that particular lens stacks up... in my case, not good at all it seems...

Nothing wrong with using tele for landscape but just have to sacrifice DOF.
Personally, I don't like carrying too much stuff too. But no choice in this case. If lens got no DOF or aperture markings (especially modern AF lens) you've got to have some kind of table for checking.

[Drudkh]

Originally Posted by TME Thanks it helps... that's what I also read up on... but not all wide angle lens carry this scale nor are they very accurate... I use the 17-35mm f/2.8-4 and the scales are pretty close set and difficult to use... I have the 50mm f/1.7 (old design) and that has a very good set of scales... Ok, so does this mean in your example, I should focus at something at 1.5m away from the sensor plane (theoretically) and then everything beyond that up till infinity would be in focus? And would that also mean that everything nearer than 1.5m would be out of focus? Or would the 1/3 foreground 2/3 background in-focus rule still apply? Also I remember that there was such a discussion between Zerstorer and I about this issue of using the infinity sign on the lens scale to fix hyperfocal distance but that the scales may not be very accurate and can lead to errors... cos I used AF and the lens scales seem to indicate that the infinity sign was lined up along side the aperture I was using... but since the scale has different scaling from one end to the other (for some lenses), then it might not be accurate... any comments on this? Cos most modern consumer lenses don't have the fine DOF scales like the old MF lenses...

You are right about the accuracy but it is almost impossible to get the correct DOF by mere judgement. I'm not sure about the 1/3 foreground and 2/3 background rule, sorry.

There is no DOF scale on the 17-35 and neither are they on the Sony 16-35CZ and most of Sony's new range of lenses (I wonder why they left it out). Although this may seem impossible to judge the hyperfocal distance on these lenses, you can experiment with them. As you can see that the photo you want will always involve infinity since it is a landscape shot you want to take. Turn the focusing ring to infinity mark and reverse a little, take a shot and review the photo to see if it suits your liking. If the photo is OK, you can make markings on the lens to indicate the HFD.

[TME]

Originally Posted by kkleong In Drudkh's example, 2.5m is the hyperfocal dist. and DOF is from 1.5m to infinity. (ie. if you focus at 2.5m, your DOF is from 1.5m to infinity). If you focus at 1.5m, your DOF is only from 0.5m to 3m with F16 (estimation from scale). Drudkh, please correct me if I'm wrong.

How did you arrive at the hyperfocal distance of 2.5m from the scales? Is that the distance indicated by the middle marking between the two f/16 marks?

[TME]

Originally Posted by Drudkh You are right about the accuracy but it is almost impossible to get the correct DOF by mere judgement. I'm not sure about the 1/3 foreground and 2/3 background rule, sorry. There is no DOF scale on the 17-35 and neither are they on the Sony 16-35CZ and most of Sony's new range of lenses (I wonder why they left it out). Although this may seem impossible to judge the hyperfocal distance on these lenses, you can experiment with them. As you can see that the photo you want will always involve infinity since it is a landscape shot you want to take. Turn the focusing ring to infinity mark and reverse a little, take a shot and review the photo to see if it suits your liking. If the photo is OK, you can make markings on the lens to indicate the HFD.

But I still won't know where to focus on right? I mean the scales tell you say your hperfocal is 2.5m (as in previous example), then I look for something 2.5m away to focus on (hopefully can find something)...

But now if I go manual focus to infinity and then turn the focusing ring back some, how would I know the hyperfocal distance? Other than using a table... so it would seem I have no choice... I was hoping the new SONY G or CZ lenses have these scales... but it seems they don't have and I won't upgrade then...

[Drudkh]

Since you are taking landscape photos, I believe you will want everything to be in focus? If the answer is yes, you won't need to worry about where to focus in AF mode because you can turn the focusing ring to a position where you had already marked for f/16 in MF mode. If you know how to calculate and use whatever chart, this is probably easier to get the hyperfocal distance? I don't.

What I am trying to achieve here is a set trial and error tests. Like I've mentioned, in the absence of DOF scale, you can create your own.

Here's how this is going be done:



In the illustration above, I have pre-marked the lens with 12 points (pencil) on the focusing ring and a point on the lens body (e.g: on the focusing distance indicator). I'll take a landscape photo at where each of the 12 markings match up and inline with the marking on the lens body, at f/16. I review all the 12 photos taken on my computer and determine which of the 12 is the best (meaning DOF is at its best, e.g: focus is spot on from 1m to infinity). Let's say I am most satisfied with the photo taken at the 5th marking from left, I'll remove the rest of the 11 markings, and I have my pre-determined HPF marked at f/16.

[kkleong]

Originally Posted by TME How did you arrive at the hyperfocal distance of 2.5m from the scales? Is that the distance indicated by the middle marking between the two f/16 marks?

Hyperfocal distance of 2.5m is just Drudkh's example - can be any value (where you're going to focus).

Let's say, you're going to focus an object (and as you turn the focus ring) the index mark will also turn and it'll indicate the distance focused (just read the dist. off the focus ring). Index is the middle/centre of all the apertures (including F16). The range/span of F16 to F16 on the marking scale is your DOF. In this case, you're focusing on the object and finding your DOF.

Alternatively, you can choose the other way round. Choose the focus distance from the focus ring (by rotating it). Set your aperture to F16, the aperture marks from F16 to F16 is your DOF (since you've select F16 as your aperture value). In this case, you're fixing the focus (hyperfocus) distance to give max DOF.

As I've said, above is only applicable to older/manual lens.
Again, if newer lens has no DOF or aperture markings, you may require a table or chart.

[TME]

Mmmm.... cheem... need time to digest and experiment...

[kkleong]

Here is something for you to digest and give a thought:
PS. Distance scale on lenses are non-linear.

Focal length(wide-prime)=35mm, F16, Focus (hyperfocal) dist about 3m, DOF from about 1.5m to infinity.


Focal length(tele-zoom)=80mm, F16, Focus dist about 5m, DOF from about 4m to 8m only.

[Drudkh]

I think our teacher need to come out for kopi liao.

[TME]

Wow that was most helpful... thanks lao shi...

But these days these annoying new lenses don't have these wonderful scales... so I need a table that means... duh...

[two200]

Originally Posted by kkleong Here is something for you to digest and give a thought: PS. Distance scale on lenses are non-linear. Focal length(wide-prime)=35mm, F16, Focus (hyperfocal) dist about 3m, DOF from about 1.5m to infinity. Focal length(tele-zoom)=80mm, F16, Focus dist about 5m, DOF from about 4m to 8m only.

Hah, finally I know what those lines mean on my very old & no longer used Minolta lens. Thanks!

[kkleong]

Originally Posted by two200 Hah, finally I know what those lines mean on my very old & no longer used Minolta lens. Thanks!

No problem.
It's a very useful feature. One glance and we'll know if we'd hit hyperfocal dist and thus giving us max DOF. Unfortunately, most newer AF lens does not have such markings or lines anymore

[TME]

Originally Posted by kkleong No problem. It's a very useful feature. One glance and we'll know if we'd hit hyperfocal dist and thus giving us max DOF. Unfortunately, most newer AF lens does not have such markings or lines anymore

Yeah it's very annoying!

[Watchman64]

Thx TME and KKleong for this thread. I learnt something.

[stubertsg]

A useful thread!!!