How to focus on eyes

[Crofts]

Yes, I am not contradicting myself - multiple AF points are primarily a gizmo aimed at gadget lovers in order to sell more dSLR's. And some good photographers may make good use of them anyway.

There are no absolutes in life!

 

[ryanyboy]

I am not saying that you can't be a good photographer if you use multiple focus points. I'm sure many good photographers do use them. I do however believe that very many of the best photographers will try to keep the controls clear and simple, and I think that you will find that an awful lot of them will not want to faff around with focus points.

Well I "faff about" with multiple fiocus points and it's the best way for me. So that disproves that theory.

There is a reason why so many of the best top end pro cameras don't bother with multiple focus points - they're really a toy

And that is just wrong. "Top end pro cameras" DO bother with multiple focus points. It's why professionals get excited about them. Because they are there and we use them.

Perhaps you should stop trying to defend your opinions with made-up "facts" :shake:

 

[awp]

so does no-one else use 51pt 3D? I know it's not on all cameras but you just focus on the eye with the centre point and re-compose and the focus point STAYS ON THE EYE or whatever you focussed on. Very fast and very accurate.

 

[-Rob-]

I use 51pt 3D on the D3 - focus point on eyes then move camera to re-compose and the focus point stays on the eyes - magic!

If you use 51pf 3D focusing then how can you get the camera/lens to focus on the eyes every time. The D3 doesn't have facial recognition software does it?

Would this same technique work on the D300?

 

[Crofts]

Well I "faff about" with multiple fiocus points and it's the best way for me. So that disproves that theory

It disproves nothing. If you re-read the thread, you will notice that I acknowedge throughout there are different ways of doing things. I give my opinion about what is the best way, but I'm very happy if people reject that!

And that is just wrong.... Perhaps you should stop trying to defend your opinions with made-up "facts"

Remind me, how many focal points does a Leica M9 have? Or, say a Mamiya 7 etc. etc.

SOME pro cameras have multiple focus points. Some don't.

Try to check your facts before posting!

 

[joescrivens]

Yes, I am not contradicting myself - multiple AF points are primarily a gizmo aimed at gadget lovers in order to sell more dSLR's. And some good photographers may make good use of them anyway.

There are no absolutes in life!

stroll on

 

[Crofts]

stroll on

Is that supposed to be insulting? You have to try a little harder than that!

 

[-Rob-]

so does no-one else use 51pt 3D? I know it's not on all cameras but you just focus on the eye with the centre point and re-compose and the focus point STAYS ON THE EYE or whatever you focussed on. Very fast and very accurate.

That's spooky, I quote a post from a few days ago just as you are posting about it.

So if you use 51pt 3D and focus on the eye then recompose, does the camera compensate for any forward or backward movement made when you recompose? I take it you'd have to have the camera set on continuous focus for this work.

 

[joescrivens]

It disproves nothing. If you re-read the thread, you will notice that I acknowedge throughout there are different ways of doing things. I give my opinion about what is the best way, but I'm very happy if people reject that!




Remind me, how many focal points does a Leica M9 have? Or, say a Mamiya 7 etc. etc.

SOME pro cameras have multiple focus points. Some don't.

Try to check your facts before posting!

yes but you are saying that the reason some pro cameras don't have them is because they are aimed at gizmo lovers. Thats the statement that you can't backup. You don't know why they are on some pro cameras and not on others, you are just using this to backup your point and basically inventing the reason for it

 

[ryanyboy]

Remind me, how many focal points does a Leica M9 have? Or, say a Mamiya 7 etc. etc.

Neither of which are digital SLRs which is what the OP has referred to from the start.

I think we have a troll here.

 

[joescrivens]

Is that supposed to be insulting? You have to try a little harder than that!

nothing insulting about it, hence the smiley.

 

[EdinburghGary]

I shoot at f1.4 on 85mm using the D3's 51 focus points. I do it loads and loads and loads, I compose and THEN choose a focus point on the eye, chances are one will be close enough not to require a huge amount of movement...

It rarely misses....

One problem with f1.4, if the head is tilted away from you, the other eye can be completely OOF...

G.

 

[Crofts]

Ryanbiy, I said:

There is a reason why so many of the best top end pro cameras don't bother with multiple focus points

I didn't say I was talking about dSLR's. You told me that I am wrong. I have given you examples opf pro cameras that don't have multiple focus points.

Now you have to eat your words!

I guess you're the troll.

 

[artyman]

It doesn't matter two hoots which focus point or method you use or even if you have a fast or slow lens, it's getting the point you want in focus and obtaining a good shot, that is up to the individual photographer knowing his gear and using it to achieve the desired result. If your shots are out of focus the first place to look is your technique.

 

[joescrivens]

Ryanbiy, I said:



I didn't say I was talking about dSLR's. You told me that I am wrong. I have given you examples opf pro cameras that don't have multiple focus points.

Now you have to eat your words!

I guess you're the troll.

are you like 12 years old or something?

 

[Crofts]

that is up to the individual photographer knowing his gear and using it to achieve the desired result. If your shots are out of focus the first place to look is your technique.

A voice of reason at last!

 

[Crofts]

are you like 12 years old or something?

I guess that must seem quite senior to you!

 

[EdinburghGary]

Like many functions on dSLR's, they're aimed at people who like gizmos on equipment rather than photography.

If you're using an f1.4 lens, then you're unlikely to put the point of focus right in the very corner very often. If you do, it's unlikely to be terribly sharp because f1.4 lenses are rarely very sharp in the corners. Dunno about Canons, but Nikons don't have focus points right into the corners anyway, they're all clustered not far from the centre, even the outermost ones. Within that area, the shift in focus is minimal, and easily corrected - it only becomes significant if there is something that is critical focus like an eye right towards the edge of the frame. If there is, then the best way and most accurate way to focus is manually, judging it by eye. Off-centre focal points won't give you the right answer anyway in that case, they simply don't go far enough out.

There is a reason why so many of the best top end pro cameras don't bother with multiple focus points - they're really a toy, of marginal use. If they're a toy that you happen to like and find of some kind of use, then play away with them, there's no problem with that. But all this armchair theorising on this thread about not being able to focus with centre focussing is laughable.

This pretty much flies in the face of exactly how the 85 f1.4 works for me on the D3. I would have no chance of manually focusing properly. I normally use the upper to mid right or left focus point depending on composition I want, and bang - tack sharp every time. Even the SLIGHTEST movement at f1.4 and the shot is wrecked...(talking close quarters head shots).

G.

 

[joescrivens]

Ok, people, time to back away.

No more feeding this troll, it tends to make them stick around. :thumbsdown:

 

[awp]

If you use 51pf 3D focusing then how can you get the camera/lens to focus on the eyes every time. The D3 doesn't have facial recognition software does it?

Would this same technique work on the D300?

You simply align the centre point on the eye and move the camera and the focus point stays with whatever you focussed on! PROVIDED you are set to 'C' continuous focus. I also use the AF on button for focussing. I had a D300 before I got the D3 and yes it works on that too. Also works on entire people - runners - footballers - kids - it just works!

That's spooky, I quote a post from a few days ago just as you are posting about it.

So if you use 51pt 3D and focus on the eye then recompose, does the camera compensate for any forward or backward movement made when you recompose? I take it you'd have to have the camera set on continuous focus for this work.

I always have the camera on continuous and uuse the AF on button - that way if you keep your thumb on the button you're focussing - take your thumb off and it's like single focus - but with instant control - one or the other.

 

[awp]

Referring to all the above banter about centre focus points: maybe if we saw some pics we could see some nice sharp 1.4 pics with different techniques? Or is it all talk?

 

[EdinburghGary]

You simply align the centre point on the eye and move the camera and the focus point stays with whatever you focussed on! PROVIDED you are set to 'C' continuous focus.

I'm not sure if I am following you correctly or not....but if I did that on the D3, at f1.4, I would get nothing but focus in the wrong place.

Just to clarify:

1: I use centre focus on the eye, and once found....

2: I recompose...now because we are in "C mode" or continuous focus...

3: The focus searches as the cheek / other facial area is in a different plane of focus...

I would end up with out of focus eyes, but an in focus chin nose / cheek / whatever.

Probably not an issue on the less insane DOF's, but wide open, worse than useless I imagine?

Gary.

 

[joescrivens]

Referring to all the above banter about centre focus points: maybe if we saw some pics we could see some nice sharp 1.4 pics with different techniques? Or is it all talk?

there would be no way to prove what AF technique was actually used though and where the focus point on the image was

 

[Andy]

I been back button focusing for a few weeks now and its great once you get used to it. Focus on the eyes, af-on, then recompose. A lot of people have said this already so im only gonna make it more fresh in this thread.

But sadly im 4 pages to late, oh well.

 

[EdinburghGary]

Referring to all the above banter about centre focus points: maybe if we saw some pics we could see some nice sharp 1.4 pics with different techniques? Or is it all talk?

1

2

3

I have loads and loads more....the dog was very difficult at f1.4

Gary.

 

[awp]

I'm not sure if I am following you correctly or not....but if I did that on the D3, at f1.4, I would get nothing but focus in the wrong place.

Just to clarify:

1: I use centre focus on the eye, and once found....

2: I recompose...now because we are in "C mode" or continuous focus...

3: The focus searches as the cheek / other facial area is in a different plane of focus...

I would end up with out of focus eyes, but an in focus chin nose / cheek / whatever.

Probably not an issue on the less insane DOF's, but wide open, worse than useless I imagine?

Gary.

Are you doing this using 51pt 3D? If so then the focus point should move as you move the camera locked on to whatever you focussed on. If it loses it just re-focus on the eye and try again - it works for me.

Whatever you were doing in that selection of pics Gary - you certainly got it right for you. Great shots - and sharp.

 

[EdinburghGary]

Are you doing this using 51pt 3D? If so then the focus point should move as you move the camera locked on to whatever you focussed on. If it loses it just re-focus on the eye and try again - it works for me.

I thought you were being a noob and confusing 3D for D3

I don't use the tracking - have done in the past, and it was very good.

G.

 

[awp]

At this time of day my fingers still type in the right order! 3D on the D3 - I know confusing.

 

[-Rob-]

I can only see the first pic (presumably because it's blocked by work PC) but why would you use f1.4 for that pic in a studio? The depth of field doesn't look particularly narrow for f1.4 but if it was as narrow as I'd expect it to be then only 1 of the dogs would have its eyes in focus.

I tend to use about f8 to f11 in a studio to ensure maximum sharpness.

 

[EdinburghGary]

I can only see the first pic (presumably because it's blocked by work PC) but why would you use f1.4 for that pic in a studio? The depth of field doesn't look particularly narrow for f1.4 but if it was as narrow as I'd expect it to be then only 1 of the dogs would have its eyes in focus.

I tend to use about f8 to f11 in a studio to ensure maximum sharpness.

AliB asked me on the phone last week why I shoot at f1.4, and I struggled to answer. I think I said, "there is a hidden quality to it, which I'm not really able to describe...".

Her reply:
No. It's because you are a depth of field WHORE


Anyway, I do it when I use a mottled effect backdrop. A: Because they are gross unless melted away, and B: I just like the light falloff to the backdrop at f1.4, it's soft and dreamy I think.

There is a thread kicking about portraits called P.A.I.N.T.I.N.G.S - the girl has done an absolutely incredible job in the studio on an ultra DOF. Stunning in fact.

For white BG stuff, F13 I use.

G.

 

[POAH]

I use live view in the studio

 

[Triggaaar]

so does no-one else use 51pt 3D? I know it's not on all cameras but you just focus on the eye with the centre point and re-compose and the focus point STAYS ON THE EYE or whatever you focussed on. Very fast and very accurate.

I did try it (briefly) and it was interesting, but I didn't think it was good enough to stay exactly on one eye (more for use of staying on one player etc). I'll check my other settings (make sure a4 is off) and try it again.

I shoot at f1.4 on 85mm using the D3's 51 focus points. I do it loads and loads and loads, I compose and THEN choose a focus point on the eye, chances are one will be close enough not to require a huge amount of movement...

It rarely misses....

At f1.4 I miss loads. But then my kids are never still and it's not easy.

One problem with f1.4, if the head is tilted away from you, the other eye can be completely OOF...

I think it's more 'will be' than 'can be'.

 

[EdinburghGary]

I did try it (briefly) and it was interesting, but I didn't think it was good enough to stay exactly on one eye (more for use of staying on one player etc). I'll check my other settings (make sure a4 is off) and try it again.

At f1.4 I miss loads. But then my kids are never still and it's not easy.

I think it's more 'will be' than 'can be'.

Not always, but mostly true. If you are a good distance away from your subject, it much more forgiving....the dog for example running towards me, I reckon I had a bit of play...but generally when close, it's gonna be a problem.

G.

 

[loplyg]

Actually using the center focus point and recomposing can be hairy if you are going to put the eyes to the far sides of the images, as the rotation of the camera in recomposing will inevitably increase the distance to the subject marginally.

If possible, use the nearest focal point then recompose. Or use a DOF which gives a little bit more free-play.

 

[joescrivens]

1

2

3

I have loads and loads more....the dog was very difficult at f1.4

Gary.

There is no exif in any of these so how do we know it's 1.4? some look a bit shallower to me considering both eyes in perfect focus on an angle, not that I know a lot of what I am talking about but just a little suspicious

 

[joescrivens]

Actually using the center focus point and recomposing can be hairy if you are going to put the eyes to the far sides of the images, as the rotation of the camera in recomposing will inevitably increase the distance to the subject marginally.

If possible, use the nearest focal point then recompose. Or use a DOF which gives a little bit more free-play.

I'm guessing you may not have read the whole thread before replying

 

[mrtoad]

I'm guessing you may not have read the whole thread before replying

life can be so complicated...reading all the thread:nuts:

 

[EdinburghGary]

There is no exif in any of these so how do we know it's 1.4? some look a bit shallower to me considering both eyes in perfect focus on an angle, not that I know a lot of what I am talking about but just a little suspicious

I will double check them all tomorrow, until then you will just have to trust me

 

[joescrivens]

I will double check them all tomorrow, until then you will just have to trust me

ok, but I don't trust easily!!!! :shake:

 

[treeman]

There is a thread kicking about portraits called P.A.I.N.T.I.N.G.S - the girl has done an absolutely incredible job in the studio on an ultra DOF. Stunning in fact.

G.

Gary, if you could point me to this, I'd love to see them