Good way to visualise a 1/3 of a way into an image..?

[BertieTBE]

Measure in your head the distance from the nearest detail to the horizon and focus a 3rd of that distance from the nearest point at around f13

That makes perfect sense to me !

Will give that a try and see what I get ...

 

[BertieTBE]

Do you think there might be an argument for saying that more visual methods work for some, while more mathematical approaches work better for others? It's just a question of finding what works for you?

 

[BertieTBE]

This is one of those things where you're trying to do your thinking sat at the computer, stop staring at the figures and go use them.

You're right...but at the moment it's just a bit confusing so look for something to get me started so that I know what to look for when I'm there!

 

[Phil V]

You're right...but at the moment it's just a bit confusing so look for something to get me started so that I know what to look for when I'm there!

But you don't set your camera before you get there. When you get there you set your camera, shoot, check, adjust reshoot, recheck etc. That'll teach you an awesome lot you couldn't possibly attempt in the house, and in just a few minutes.

It's confusing, because it's difficult to visualise without doing it. It's simple when you try it.

 

[HoppyUK]

Gave this a try and got this (note - this is for my Canon 600d (t3i) and Sigma 18-250).


HFD F 5.6 F. 8 F 11 F 16 F 22
18mm 3m 2m 1.5m 1m 0.5 m
24mm 5.5m 4m 2.5m 2m 1.5
28mm 5.5m 4m 2.5m 2m 1.5
35mm 11.4m 8m 6m 4m 3m

Does this look right?
Many thanks.

Yes, apart from the ones that are wrong, they're right (24mm and 28mm can't be the same ). And I would drop a couple of intermediate apertures to make things simpler and just estimate the in-between distances. You don't have to be that accurate, and the numbers only look very precise because that's how the maths works, but DoF doesn't suddenly go from sharp to blurred, it's a gradual process.

If you want maximum depth of field, then hyperfocal distance setting will give you that. And it's not the same as a third up, or down, or in or whatever. HFD focusing only applies when you need both the far distance to be sharp, and also the near foreground. Remember that with HFD setting everything will be sharp from half the HFD set (ie only a few feet in front of you) to infinity. For a lot of landscape photography with a wide-ish lens and a mid-range aperture, it's not necessary as you'll have plenty of DoF anyway.

Then go and do as Phil suggests, and try it. The back garden is perfect, where you can arrange a few objects close by, and use neighbouring roofs and chimneys as an infinity reference. You'll soon get the hang of it.

 

[BertieTBE]

It's confusing, because it's difficult to visualise without doing it. It's simple when you try it.

Yes. I think that's very true. Time for a walk in the country..!

Thank you.

 

[Phil V]

Yes. I think that's very true. Time for a walk in the country..!

Thank you.

You don't need to make a lot of effort, as Richard said, you just need somewhere you can see foreground, middleground and background. In an urban environment that might be a local park or an out of town shopping precinct. In rural areas, it might be possible from your garden.

 

[69Bonni]

Select the nearest foreground subject you want sharp, say it is 6ft away. Now double that distance by eye, ie 12ft, and using a single AF point, focus on something at that distance. That is HFD set.

Then refer to the scale, and at the focal length you're using, select the aperture. Eg, with 24mm lens, that's f/5.6 near enough. Job done.

Brilliant! Never even thought of using HFD this way.... Seems really logical method, thanks for sharing Richard!

 

[HoppyUK]