Shutterstock Photographer Forum :: View topic - Do landscapers carry/ and use DOF charts?

mreco · Joined: 12 Mar 2009 Posts: 1155 Location: Hampshire, UK

Hi

Do landscape photographers really carry and use DOF charts?

Thanks

ruxpriencdiam · Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 7:22 am

I dont for the landscapes i do.

And anything beyond 40ft DOF doesn't come into play.

hhltdave5 · Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 8:44 am

I never carry one for any type of shooting I do. Barry is right. Once you get past 40 feet DOF no longer comes into play because you are in the infinity area. Whether you shoot it at 1.8 or 22, everything past that 40 foot point will be in equal focus.

Here are two videos that Laurin and I did that have information regarding this and infinity focus.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_osWE8YvNyk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlUhbdhOc5c

mreco · Joined: 12 Mar 2009 Posts: 1155 Location: Hampshire, UK

Thanks for the video links, first time ive seen you two in a video, good job.

hhltdave5 · Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 10:02 am

pjmorley · Joined: 15 Apr 2005 Posts: 3302

I don't think this 40 feet rule is really the full story on DOF. It may be true that anything beyond 40 feet stays in acceptable focus feet when you focus at 40 feet or more but not everything within 40 feet will be. Perhaps very wide angle lenses.

Some of the best landscapes I have seen have foreground interest that is much closer to the camera than 40 feet and then aperture does make a big difference to the near limit for DOF.

The longer the subject/focus distance is, the more you sacrifice at the near distance.

hhltdave5 · Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 7:35 pm

mauijon · Joined: 02 Mar 2005 Posts: 4311 Location: Maui, Hawaii

"And anything beyond 40ft DOF doesn't come into play."
Yes for landscapes with normal/wa lenses. But when shooting far-off wildlife or sports with a 500mm or longer, DOF is still meaningful.

kenny123 · Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 5:01 am

no-sheer waste of time-those dof figures were developed in the 1940's for looking at 11 x 14 prints at arm's length,just focus one third into the scene.
,

chbaum · Joined: 19 Sep 2010 Posts: 401 Location: Karlsruhe, Germany

Focus is my main problem as well, even with landscapes! What do you mean with this 1/3? Don't get it... Got the 40 feet, but my lens is not so great, so I still have kind of a "haze" beyond 40 feet. Let's say I got a nice landscape with trees in the foreground being 40 feet away. So I focus on the trees (I talk about autofocus of my T2i), and everything behind them should be in focus, too, right?
But what about focusing "1/3 in"?

If I had an object close to me and wanted to capture the landscape in the background as well, I would focus on the close object and try to get the rest via an aperture of f11 or higher. Would that be right?

Best,

Christian

Mike Price · Joined: 06 Jun 2008 Posts: 2933 Location: South Wales

hhltdave5 · Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 8:54 am

Mike Price · Joined: 06 Jun 2008 Posts: 2933 Location: South Wales

pharm · Joined: 09 Jul 2006 Posts: 9422 Location: Never quite sure

If you really want to get a grip on this, experiment.

Find a scene, focus on something 10 feet away and shoot the same scene at different apertures. Then focus on something 40 or 50 feet away and shoot that scene at different apertures. Then examine the images. You'll get a better feel for it that way.

pjmorley · Joined: 15 Apr 2005 Posts: 3302

When they say shoot 1/3 into the scene, they don't mean 1/3 of the distance that you can see.

They mean whatever is at 1/3 of the way from the bottom of the viewfinder as in this diagram. But then again, it's one of those general statements that generally works OK but doesn't suit all situations.

And although it may give an approximation of hyperfocal distance, remember that setting hyperfocal distance doesn't necessarily mean front to back sharpenss.

It only means the maximum depth of field for a given aperture and focal length so this technique works best for wide angle and small apertures.