Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Al Tee
Hi all....I took some landscape pics the other evening & was very dissapointed at the sharpness of them when downloaded onto the computer. I used a tripod & remote so I took possible camera shake out of the equation & I focused manually, therefore discounting any autofocus problem there might have been.
I then read in a mag that there's something called "hyperfocal distance" that can be calculated; the mag didn't go into it in depth but said that as a general rule of thumb you should aim to focus at about 1/3rd of the way into your scene, (assuming you want a deep depth of field), as I did.
I would like some advice as to where any of you 'pro's have best success in focusing for landscape photography & ask if anyone has any further explanation to the term 'hyperfocal distance'.
Thanks,
Al.
PS: Thanks for all other replies to my threads.
|
Ah the 1/3rd thing is because when you focus on something with a given aperture the depth of field includes an area 1/3rd infront and 2/3rds behind the point of focus.
So for a landscape, if you set focus to infinity, the leading edge of the area in focus in front of infinity would be the hyperfocal point and therefore if you focus on that point you get the greatest depth of field and therefore sharp area within your image.
In reality however it isn't always easy to find this point, and obviously with a lot of landscapes you have a point of interest in the foreground which you need in focus as well as the distance, and this is where using small apertures becomes so important in order to achieve focus on all parts of the image. I certainly ain't a mathematician or am not prepared to look at charts etc to show the optimum aperture and focus point. Its something I simply achieve through practice and trial and error
13-07-06, 08:37
Hyperfocal distance
