Hyperfocal distance

[FlyTVR]

The hyperfocal distance. My spin – this is the nearest point that a given lens can focus whilst still providing a sharp image from that point to infinity. When focused at the hyperfocal distance everything from half the hyperfocal distance to infinity will be sharp / acceptably sharp.

Now, lets say I turn up to shoot a landscape, my camera is in fully manual mode. Armed with the above (and a lens that helps me calculate hf), what do I do next?

Is it a case of working out how close the foreground I want in focus actually is, then twiddling the focus ring and adjusting the fstop until the minimal focus matches what I want and the max is infinity?

 

[mrtoad]

The hyperfocal distance. My spin – this is the nearest point that a given lens can focus whilst still providing a sharp image from that point to infinity. When focused at the hyperfocal distance everything from half the hyperfocal distance to infinity will be sharp / acceptably sharp.

Now, lets say I turn up to shoot a landscape, my camera is in fully manual mode. Armed with the above (and a lens that helps me calculate hf), what do I do next?

Is it a case of working out how close the foreground I want in focus actually is, then twiddling the focus ring and adjusting the fstop until the minimal focus matches what I want and the max is infinity?

Definition 1: The hyperfocal distance is the closest distance at which a lens can be focused while keeping objects at infinity acceptably sharp; that is, the focus distance with the maximum depth of field. When the lens is focused at this distance, all objects at distances from half of the hyperfocal distance out to infinity will be acceptably sharp.

Definition 2: The hyperfocal distance is the distance beyond which all objects are acceptably sharp, for a lens focused at infinity.

infinity can be measured in feet, metres, miles or kilometres...for the most part...the bit beyond is called that which is beyond infinity....like the end of the universe...

hell if you can get an object 7 miles away in focus then infinity is just around the bend

good spin..nice tie

i just try to get the main bits in focus and if you are fully stopped down then you choose the nearest point and the rest will take care of itself...its a bit theoretical...i surmise

 

[HoppyUK]

The hyperfocal distance. My spin – this is the nearest point that a given lens can focus whilst still providing a sharp image from that point to infinity. When focused at the hyperfocal distance everything from half the hyperfocal distance to infinity will be sharp / acceptably sharp.

Now, lets say I turn up to shoot a landscape, my camera is in fully manual mode. Armed with the above (and a lens that helps me calculate hf), what do I do next?

Is it a case of working out how close the foreground I want in focus actually is, then twiddling the focus ring and adjusting the fstop until the minimal focus matches what I want and the max is infinity?

For the sake of argument (and potentially lots of it - run a search ) I'll assume that you are comfortable with the concept of hyperfocal distance focusing - which is correct as stated. If so, then you really need a set of tables.

Hyperfocal distance varies with camera format, lens focal length and f/number and it's impossible to memorise that lot, so go here www.dofmaster.com and note down the distance settings you need.

Some lenses have a simplified depth of field scale marked on them (some primes anyway) and in theory you can use that, but in practise they are very hard to set with any degree of accuracy because there aren't enough distance markings to read off on modern lenses, due to the compressed scales they generally have. But if you know the hyperfocal distance data you have half a chance of being able to set at least one figure with an approximate amount of accuracy and the other points should then fall in line.

I hope that's the answer to your question but I will just say that if you follow that regime exactly you'll probably end up with some pretty soft distant views from time to time. There are other, better, more accurate ways of making sure you get the important bits sharp.

Definition 1: The hyperfocal distance is the closest distance at which a lens can be focused while keeping objects at infinity acceptably sharp; that is, the focus distance with the maximum depth of field. When the lens is focused at this distance, all objects at distances from half of the hyperfocal distance out to infinity will be acceptably sharp.

Correct.

Definition 2: The hyperfocal distance is the distance beyond which all objects are acceptably sharp, for a lens focused at infinity.

Not correct.

 

[Steve Smith]

Definition 1: The hyperfocal distance is the closest distance at which a lens can be focused while keeping objects at infinity acceptably sharp

Just a small point: When a lens is set to the hyperfocal distance then everything from half this distance to infinity is then considered acceptably shap.

EDIT: Oh yes..... you said that later!!! (note to self - read all of a thread before posting!).


Steve.

 

[markta]

I think what the OP was asking is that....your eye has seen an image that could work. It's composed (roughly), camera on tripod.

Now I don't know about whether the OP has any hyperfocal calculator, but I have one on my Ipod Touch. So the HF point is calculated.

So then is it a case of aiming the lens at the hyperfocal distance (as close as possible), switching the lens to MF, turning focus ring to infinity then AF before pressing shutter button.

To achieve an acceptably sharp shot (from back to front), presumably, you have to focus at roughly where the hyperfocal calculator says..so is simply a case of estimating for eg, where 7 metres is in front of the camera (on a wide angle lens like the 17-40 f4 L?

Mark

 

[FlyTVR]

I think what the OP was asking is that....your eye has seen an image that could work. It's composed (roughly), camera on tripod.

Now I don't know about whether the OP has any hyperfocal calculator, but I have one on my Ipod Touch. So the HF point is calculated.

So then is it a case of aiming the lens at the hyperfocal distance (as close as possible), switching the lens to MF, turning focus ring to infinity then AF before pressing shutter button.

To achieve an acceptably sharp shot (from back to front), presumably, you have to focus at roughly where the hyperfocal calculator says..so is simply a case of estimating for eg, where 7 metres is in front of the camera (on a wide angle lens like the 17-40 f4 L?

Mark

Yep - I believe this is the very question I am asking

Come on 'landscapers' in simple terms tell us how you compose your shots, consider (or maybe not consider) hyperfocal.

 

[artyman]

Whatever happened to the old DOF scales that we used to have on lenses in the old days

 

[Steve Smith]

Whatever happened to the old DOF scales that we used to have on lenses in the old days

Mine are all still there!


Steve.

 

[FlyTVR]

Only seems to be the seasoned togs that are interested in this thread (plus me)

 

[Forbiddenbiker]

Yep - I believe this is the very question I am asking

Come on 'landscapers' in simple terms tell us how you compose your shots, consider (or maybe not consider) hyperfocal.

For me and for instance, I'd shoot with a wide lens that I know from experience can achieve hyper-focal ranges very very easily at almost and f number depending on the distance of my foreground subject.

So depending on the foreground interest of the scene I want to capture I'd work backwards from having the foreground in focus to then calculate a suitable f number to render the background in focus with a fitting hyper-focal distance.

Being as I'm using a wide lens that choice is usually huge.

This is an extreme example at f2.8 with a 28mm on a 1.6 sensor (the boat is my chosen foreground interest)...the rear dof is at infinity. (just) Imagine if there was no foreground, like off the edge of a cliff, it would all be in focus. (Just, I must point out)

 

[Chaz Photos]

Whatever happened to the old DOF scales that we used to have on lenses in the old days

Don’t work you have to have different scales on them if Canon you have full frame 1.3 and 1.6 crops so each will need there own scale.

 

[mrtoad]

dear friends...that shot of the boat is what i assume the taker wanted and got...using common sense and a bit of experience
as for how i compose a landscape...i reckon the faraway stuff doesnt need to be as sharp as the front stuff...the middle stuff can get stuffed...
as i dont have the markings anymore on my super p.o.shoot..notice 2 o's...
if its got to be a front to back shot...stuff oof in the foreground should not be there anyway
duff stuff at the edges and bright colours detract

an old chestnut...where do i focus....well with all the theorems and no stop down button i just guess....if the closest thing is around 2 metres i spot focus around 2 metres beyond

that would be with my 'wide angle' of 36 and f8 or so

if i had a proper big boys camera i would do the same but use the dof preview and/or if it was there the ring on the lens for dof...and the smallest aperture

having studied for years in college all the theorems for physics and thermodynamics..then being let loose on the wide world...i soon learned that empirical was sometimes best...intelligent engineering..sometimes known as inch by thick

 

[mrtoad]

For me and for instance, I'd shoot with a wide lens that I know from experience can achieve hyper-focal ranges very very easily at almost and f number depending on the distance of my foreground subject.

So depending on the foreground interest of the scene I want to capture I'd work backwards from having the foreground in focus to then calculate a suitable f number to render the background in focus with a fitting hyper-focal distance.

Being as I'm using a wide lens that choice is usually huge.

This is an extreme example at f2.8 with a 28mm on a 1.6 sensor (the boat is my chosen foreground interest)...the rear dof is at infinity. (just) Imagine if there was no foreground, like off the edge of a cliff, it would all be in focus. (Just, I must point out)

this is a good instance where infinity just isnt worth a damn!
the corrugated part would have been a good foil for the boat

 

[The23rdman]

I'm still a bit lost. I feel the only way I'll ever get to grips with where to set my focus is with someone who knows the score coming along with me and showing me.

 

[mrtoad]

I'm still a bit lost. I feel the only way I'll ever get to grips with where to set my focus is with someone who knows the score coming along with me and showing me.

take several shots...with wide angle you really cant go wrong...even with it set at infinity and around 3 metres to the nearest desirable focal point

you can practice this in any surroundings...it doesnt need to be the final final landscape...many shots rid the brain of too much theory

 

[neo2810]

If you have a Hyperfocal Calculator (either charts printed off DOFMaster, or Iphone app) you set your shot up, and using the chart work out your hyperfocal distance. Basically, you look at the nearest point you want in focus, then measure the distance. From the chart you have a few constants like lens type, focal length (set to compose how you want) and circle of confusion so the only variable is the aperture size. you know how close you want to focus so from your chart or app, you work out what aperture size you need in order to get double the distance of your min focus point (or the hyperfocal point for this particular shot setup).
Once you know your hyperfocal point (say 4ft if your foreground is 2ft min) then just manually focus at 4ft and you will have everything from 2ft to infinity in focus with given aperture set.

For every compsition you have to redo the calculation obviously.

Focussing to infinity is dangerous unless you are certain you have the depth to get your foreground sharp (the boat shot is a perfect example of where this went wrong)...

 

[jerry12953]

Whatever happened to the old DOF scales that we used to have on lenses in the old days

Most lenses are zoom lenses these days and you would need an infinite number of DoF scales on each one.....

I think I understand how to use hyperfocal distances, but if I didn't I don't think the replies on this thread would help me very much .

If the OP has a lens with a focus scale on (which s/he has - if I understand his post correctly), what I would do is this.....

1) Choose an aperture, say f11.
2) Rotate the focus ring until infinity is just inside the f11 mark on the focus scale.
3) Look at the other end of the focus scale.
4) Decide if the closest point he wants to be sharp is within the OTHER f11 mark on the focus scale.
5) If it is - bang away. If not, choose f16 and repeat the process.
6) At any part in the process check with DoF preveiw button (or liveview screen)

Is that any simpler?



j

 

[Forbiddenbiker]

Focussing to infinity is dangerous unless you are certain you have the depth to get your foreground sharp (the boat shot is a perfect example of where this went wrong)...

No quite incorrect, a random judgment based on not actually knowing what the photographer intended…even though it pretty obvious.

The foreground being out of focus was all intended, the idea being the viewer is guided to look at the detail in the boat, works perfectly IMO.

The point of posting up that shot is simply to demonstrate that infinity can be easily achieved even at f2.8.

Mcrow. The detail in the background might seem kind of pointless being in focus, but the idea is to emphasise the oof part in doing so. ...if it where oof also the shot wouldn't work so well IMO.

I hope thats clear now.

 

[Steve Smith]

Most lenses are zoom lenses these days and you would need an infinite number of DoF scales on each one.....

I only have one zoom lens but that has the DOF scale in curved lines so you can read off whichever part of it refers to the focal length you are set to.

Like this:

1) Choose an aperture, say f11.
2) Rotate the focus ring until infinity is just inside the f11 mark on the focus scale.
3) Look at the other end of the focus scale.
4) Decide if the closest point he wants to be sharp is within the OTHER f11 mark on the focus scale.
5) If it is - bang away. If not, choose f16 and repeat the process.
6) At any part in the process check with DoF preveiw button (or liveview screen)

That's it. That's exactly how it works. No further explanation needed!


Steve.

 

[existent]

HF distance is something I'm curious about as well. I think I understand what's been said in this thread so far, but..

if I have a ultra wide angle such as ef-s 10-22mm. It's focus markings go up to 1m and then infinity.

if my closes subject that I want is focus is more than 1m away, lens will focus to infinity (correct me if I'm wrong). So will there be any difference whether I focus on this closes subject or to something in the very far distance? In both cases lens will focus to inifinty.

So for a lens like 10-22mm, hyperfocal distance matters if my foreground subject is really close.. i.e less than 1m away. :shrug:

 

[mrtoad]

nikon el2 28 nikkor f 16.could be 32..i cant remember ...focussed on seaweed...

scanned from a 100asa fuji transparency

does the background have to be dead sharp to sea it properly..

 

[Forbiddenbiker]

That all depends how large you print it out. ...so yes it does matter.

 

[mrtoad]

That all depends how large you print it out. ...so yes it does matter.

and how close you get to it afterwards

 

[Forbiddenbiker]

That's it. That's exactly how it works. No further explanation needed!


Steve.

It s indeed. But unfortunately the OP had moved on from an explanation and is now looking for personal techniques on how to use it to compose

.

 

[Forbiddenbiker]

and how close you get to it afterwards

lol, yes indeed.

 

[jerry12953]

HF distance is something I'm curious about as well. I think I understand what's been said in this thread so far, but..

if I have a ultra wide angle such as ef-s 10-22mm. It's focus markings go up to 1m and then infinity.

if my closes subject that I want is focus is more than 1m away, lens will focus to infinity (correct me if I'm wrong). So will there be any difference whether I focus on this closes subject or to something in the very far distance? In both cases lens will focus to inifinty.

So for a lens like 10-22mm, hyperfocal distance matters if my foreground subject is really close.. i.e less than 1m away. :shrug:

With ultra wide angles depth of field is very large anyway. You would have little difficulty getting an image sharp from front to back.

 

[neo2810]

No quite incorrect, a random judgment based on not actually knowing what the photographer intended…even though it pretty obvious.

The foreground being out of focus was all intended, the idea being the viewer is guided to look at the detail in the boat, works perfectly IMO.

The point of posting up that shot is simply to demonstrate that infinity can be easily achieved even at f2.8.

Mcrow. The detail in the background might seem kind of pointless being in focus, but the idea is to emphasise the oof part in doing so. ...if it where oof also the shot wouldn't work so well IMO.

I hope thats clear now.

No, you misunderstood, but that's more down to my wording.

I didn't mean the shot was incorrectly focused, I used it as an example of where focusing on infinity isn't the best method to use if you want the whole shot sharp. I understood from your post that having the iron OOF was intentional as the boat was your foreground.

Badly worded, my fault...

 

[Forbiddenbiker]

Cool, typical me, wrong end. etc. ta and soz then.

 

[mrtoad]

Mcrow. The detail in the background might seem kind of pointless being in focus, but the idea is to emphasise the oof part in doing so. ...if it where oof also the shot wouldn't work so well IMO.

I hope thats clear now.

well we cant all get it right all of the time for some of the people...

i understand now...well illustrated from that description...could you have used a larger aperture and longer lens
they really set out the limits of dof and focal length/aperture constraints

cheers
geof

 

[markta]

Ok, so say the foreground interest ie. a rock is 3 metres in front of the camera. Would you input the hyperfocal distance into a calculator (Ipod Touch in my case) as 3 metres and then input the chosen aperture and it will then tell you how much in front and back is in sharp focus.

I've just used the PhotoBuddy app for a full frame 5D Mk II calculation. I've input 17mm focal length, f/11 and object (foreground interest in this example) as 4 metres away then pressed the HD button (hyperfocal distance). It's then come up with a hyperfocal distance of 89.3cm, near limit 72.1cm, far limit infinite.

So would I still focus at 4 metres in front (ie. the foreground interest) or at the hyperfocal distance of 89.3cm away from camera?

 

[mrtoad]

Ok, so say the foreground interest ie. a rock is 3 metres in front of the camera. Would you input the hyperfocal distance into a calculator (Ipod Touch in my case) as 3 metres and then input the chosen aperture and it will then tell you how much in front and back is in sharp focus.

I've just used the PhotoBuddy app for a full frame 5D Mk II calculation. I've input 17mm focal length, f/11 and object (foreground interest in this example) as 4 metres away then pressed the HD button (hyperfocal distance). It's then come up with a hyperfocal distance of 89.3cm, near limit 72.1cm, far limit infinite.

So would I still focus at 4 metres in front (ie. the foreground interest) or at the hyperfocal distance of 89.3cm away from camera?

for that lens i would just focus on the item....use f11 and i am sure there will be loads in apparent and acceptable sharpness
sorry to be blase but i dont have the little calculator you have so i tend to rough it out
i think you may be on the right track

ps does your camera have 89cm marked

 

[Suvv]

Ok, so say the foreground interest ie. a rock is 3 metres in front of the camera. Would you input the hyperfocal distance into a calculator (Ipod Touch in my case) as 3 metres and then input the chosen aperture and it will then tell you how much in front and back is in sharp focus.

I've just used the PhotoBuddy app for a full frame 5D Mk II calculation. I've input 17mm focal length, f/11 and object (foreground interest in this example) as 4 metres away then pressed the HD button (hyperfocal distance). It's then come up with a hyperfocal distance of 89.3cm, near limit 72.1cm, far limit infinite.

So would I still focus at 4 metres in front (ie. the foreground interest) or at the hyperfocal distance of 89.3cm away from camera?

Hyperfocal will give you the maximum depth of field. If you focus at 89.3 cm them everything from half that distance, about 45cm, to infinity will be in focus, including your object 4m away.

If you focus at 4m then everything from 70cm (according to dofmaster, Photobuddy may be slightly different) to infinity will be in focus.

You choose what you want

If you calculate an example using a longer focal length you will see more of a difference.

for example - using dofmaster again, 5D MKII
Focal length 55mm, aperture f11.
hyperfocal distance = 8.97m, so if you focus at that distance everything from 4.48m to infinity is in focus.

If however you focus on an object 5m away then everything from 3.22m to 8.02m away will be in focus.

 

[Forbiddenbiker]

well we cant all get it right all of the time for some of the people...

i understand now...well illustrated from that description...could you have used a larger aperture and longer lens
they really set out the limits of dof and focal length/aperture constraints

cheers
geof

I'm certainly not getting much right today, lol.

I like the perspective of the 28mm on my camera, and 2.8 is as big as it will go ...not quite sure what your driving at.

 

[existent]

With ultra wide angles depth of field is very large anyway. You would have little difficulty getting an image sharp from front to back.

thanks mate. that's what I thought. I tried out some number with the dofmaster, and pretty much everything is in focus.

dofmaster is a great app if anyone wants to calculate hd in the field

 

[mrtoad]

I'm certainly not getting much right today, lol.

I like the perspective of the 28mm on my camera, and 2.8 is as big as it will go ...not quite sure what your driving at.

sory FB...i am not sure what i meant either

i was enjoying the aspect of dof being large and everyone calculating this and that...and it came to mind the focal length and aperture being able to REDUCE dof...which also is a desirable effect when shooting long shots where everything you want is to be at infinity...
as in photo journalism

its late here in blackburn...need to get back to manchester

 

[HoppyUK]

I only have one zoom lens but that has the DOF scale in curved lines so you can read off whichever part of it refers to the focal length you are set to.

Like this:

Steve.

Wonderful Shame they don't make them like that any more.

Hardly any push-pull zooms today with a large area of barrel to engrave on, and compressed focusing scales with about half the number of distance markings we used to have.

And even when you do get all that, shooting with crop format digital everything is going to be over a stop out!

 

[markta]

Right, just so I've got this correct, for me and for others (hardly anything online about talking the tog through start to finish how to do hyperfocal focusing..

You obviously see a picture that appeals, compose on a tripod and measure where in the frame you'd like to focus ie. foreground rock or other obstacle in the distance if no foreground interest etc.

You then measure how far the rock is, in front of the camera, and input the focus distance into the HF calculator. You select an aperture (usually f/11 to 14 for me) and a focal length and then it calculates the HF distance so that the area of sharpness in front of the focus area and infinity behind it is given..

Once the photographer is satisfied with the correct aperture and focal length etc. you switch the lens to MF, focus to infinity and shoot...

Do I have this correct?

I do have a 5D Mark II and purchased it with the intention of doing landscapes but haven't done much at all of late, but will be concentrating on this next year for sure and maybe later this year.

Thanks and please do correct me if I have any of the above wrong

 

[HoppyUK]

Right, just so I've got this correct, for me and for others (hardly anything online about talking the tog through start to finish how to do hyperfocal focusing..

You obviously see a picture that appeals, compose on a tripod and measure where in the frame you'd like to focus ie. foreground rock or other obstacle in the distance if no foreground interest etc.

You then measure how far the rock is, in front of the camera, and input the focus distance into the HF calculator. You select an aperture (usually f/11 to 14 for me) and a focal length and then it calculates the HF distance so that the area of sharpness in front of the focus area and infinity behind it is given..

Once the photographer is satisfied with the correct aperture and focal length etc. you switch the lens to MF, focus to infinity and shoot...

Do I have this correct?

I do have a 5D Mark II and purchased it with the intention of doing landscapes but haven't done much at all of late, but will be concentrating on this next year for sure and maybe later this year.

Thanks and please do correct me if I have any of the above wrong

As I said over the page, I think the easiest way to do it is to have a set of basic tables to hand. There is a different hyperfocal distance for every focal length, and every f/number - assuming the camera format remains the same, and that you don't crop the image (which is effectively changing the format). And with every hyperfocal distance there is a hyperfocal range, from infinity to the nearest point of acceptable sharpness.

In practise, the only figure you need to know is the near point of the hyperfocal range - the nearest point of acceptable sharpness, for every focal length and f/number. It's not hard to note down those numbers for reference in the field and that's all you need.

Here's what you do. Frame your picture, and note your focal length setting. Estimate the distance to the nearest part of the subject you want to be sharp. From your tables for that focal length, choose the f/number that has the near point of the hyperfocal range the same as (or less than) your estimated close subject distance.

Now double the distance of the near point of the hyperfocal range - which is the hyperfocal distance - and set the lens focus to that distance, at the appropriate f/number. That's it

I think that's the easiest way of doing it, and all you need is to go into www.dofmaster.com select the numbers you need, and jot them down on a piece of card. It's a maximum of six or seven numbers for each focal length - that's all you need to know.

 

[FlyTVR]

As I said over the page, I think the easiest way to do it is to have a set of basic tables to hand. There is a different hyperfocal distance for every focal length, and every f/number - assuming the camera format remains the same, and that you don't crop the image (which is effectively changing the format). And with every hyperfocal distance there is a hyperfocal range, from infinity to the nearest point of acceptable sharpness.

In practise, the only figure you need to know is the near point of the hyperfocal range - the nearest point of acceptable sharpness, for every focal length and f/number. It's not hard to note down those numbers for reference in the field and that's all you need.

Here's what you do. Frame your picture, and note your focal length setting. Estimate the distance to the nearest part of the subject you want to be sharp. From your tables for that focal length, choose the f/number that has the near point of the hyperfocal range the same as (or less than) your estimated close subject distance.

Now double the distance of the near point of the hyperfocal range - which is the hyperfocal distance - and set the lens focus to that distance, at the appropriate f/number. That's it

I think that's the easiest way of doing it, and all you need is to go into www.dofmaster.com select the numbers you need, and jot them down on a piece of card. It's a maximum of six or seven numbers for each focal length - that's all you need to know.

OP here. I like this description - thanks.

Also, sorry for starting all this up :bonk:

 

[markta]

OP here. I like this description - thanks.

Also, sorry for starting all this up :bonk:

Well it's improved my understanding for when I start landscape photography proper and yours and probably lots of others who are reading it, so it's good that you started it!

When I've tried to look up online the techniques and talking people through it, there hasn't been one single explanation until now, nowhere, so hopefully this'll help budding landscapers and we can see fruits of the labour posted on here