Any Pro Landscape Photographers Here ?

[ianbarber]

I am desperate for some advice from any Pro Landscape Photographers.

I have been shooting landscapes and Seascapes for nearly 2 years now but there is one area that I just cannot seem to grasp.

Using Hyperfocal Distance in the field..

I understand the theory and have a bag full of DOF charts.

When out in the field, I get all flustered when it comes to working out where to focus.

I compose the image to how I want it, look at what the focal length is and the Aperture (usually f11) and then drag a chart from my bag and look at what the hyperfocal distance is, but judging the distance without a Tape measure is difficult. I have even considered buying one of these Laser Tape Measures.

When I get home and view them on the screen, they just do not seem to pop ilike I want them to.

I have been looking at other togs websites, David Clapp and a few others and the range of what is in focus is amazing. (Do they apply a ton of sharpening during the post processing)

So the question is... When out in the field, do you as a Pro Landscape Photographer use these charts or is there a quicker and less painfull way.

Not sure if this is relavant but my main lens I use for landscape is Nikon 24-70 f2.8

 

[Uneducated_Rick]

Hyperfocal distance is purely related to sharpness not colour and 'pop'

Looking at David Clapp's site quite a few images appear to be HDR which would help the images tand out that little bit more

If you shoot RAW all images will need to be sharpened to a certain extent

 

[PSILVERMAN]

The easy way, focus one third into the frame, close down to F22 and Robert s your relative!

 

[Stu Meech]

But then reduce overall sharpness due to diffraction...

 

[Donki]

The easy way, focus one third into the frame, close down to F22 and Robert s your relative!

thats a little bit to far up the Fstop scale for me mate I would rarely reach F16 never mind go over it. I do however usually focus a third of the way in.

What makes landscapes pop is the lighting which is dependant on the tiem of day and the light, as has been said PP can sort any sharpening issues you may have.

 

[PSILVERMAN]

It always works for me and I have been shooting landscapes since 1987. But each to their own I suppose. Do what works for you.
A further thought, there's a free DOF calculator iPhone app that's pretty good. You input all relevant details like distance,lens etc an it works it out for you.

 

[Comfy]

Hi Ian, I use the same lens (well, the canon version) for a lot of land/seascapes and rarely have focussing issues.
At 24mm I just focus at about 5-10m out and aslong as you're above F5.6 (you said F11 so that's even better) you will have a good clear sharp shot all the way through to the sky.
At 70mm I'm 'usually' shooting over 50m away so I just focus on something in the lower half of the image (or a focal point).
What you may not be aware of is that some (if not all) pro landscapers focus stack their images to get a tack sharp foreground object plus a super sharp horizon. The effects are usually very nice.
And to address a reply from Phil; It doesn't matter how long you've been taking photographs, if you're technique is flawed then all of the pictures you've taken could have been sharper. That's not a dig, it's just a fact

 

[awp]

Never used a chart in my life! Focus approx 1/3rd of the way into the shot - if you're using wide angles and f/8+ then it's not that critical. Nothing simpler really.

 

[Stu Meech]

Another way to get excellent sharpness through the frame is to use a tilt shift lens - if you have plenty of cash for one, that is!

 

[Graham00]

I was told by Tony Gill to focus a third into the landscape and go no higher than f16 too, as f22 can render the background too soft long distance.

 

[PSILVERMAN]

[QUOTE
And to address a reply from Phil; It doesn't matter how long you've been taking photographs, if you're technique is flawed then all of the pictures you've taken could have been sharper. That's not a dig, it's just a fact [/QUOTE]

Point taken and no offence taken but having shots published in the national press and internationally tells me that my technique isn't flawed.

 

[charlottemarie_15]

Hi Ian, I use the same lens (well, the canon version) for a lot of land/seascapes and rarely have focussing issues.
At 24mm I just focus at about 5-10m out and aslong as you're above F5.6 (you said F11 so that's even better) you will have a good clear sharp shot all the way through to the sky.
At 70mm I'm 'usually' shooting over 50m away so I just focus on something in the lower half of the image (or a focal point).
What you may not be aware of is that some (if not all) pro landscapers focus stack their images to get a tack sharp foreground object plus a super sharp horizon. The effects are usually very nice.
And to address a reply from Phil; It doesn't matter how long you've been taking photographs, if you're technique is flawed then all of the pictures you've taken could have been sharper. That's not a dig, it's just a fact

Hi, sorry to intrude on your post but just wondered what you meant about 'stacking?' Literally taking the picture mutliple times with different focussing on other areas? I'm also trying to get my landscapes sharper and have that 'wow' factor and this seems interesing....

 

[MisterE]

Hi, sorry to intrude on your post but just wondered what you meant about 'stacking?' Literally taking the picture mutliple times with different focussing on other areas? I'm also trying to get my landscapes sharper and have that 'wow' factor and this seems interesing....

That's exactly what it is. I believe the macro photographers [not dwarves with cameras] developed it - macro photography having a very narrow depth of field. I think there's a program to process the stack but I don't know it off the top of my head.

 

[charlottemarie_15]

Nice - I'll give it a go!

 

[tirc83]

That's exactly what it is. I believe the macro photographers [not dwarves with cameras] developed it - macro photography having a very narrow depth of field. I think there's a program to process the stack but I don't know it off the top of my head.

Photoshop - Edit -> Auto Align Layers and Auto Blend Layers

 

[canon_togger]

You dont need to stack or use a tape measure..the sun would be set by the time you did that

As said above, focus about a third in at F16 and you should have an acceptably sharp image. You can sharpen further in pp as necessary.
If you have a foreground object make sure that's 'acceptably sharp' i.e. not oof

 

[MisterE]

Photoshop - Edit -> Auto Align Layers and Auto Blend Layers

There's that. But I was thinking of a standalone prog that one of the camera mags used to demonstrate the process a while ago.

 

[Simonhi]

I focus hyperfocally using live view.

I use prime lenses so it helps a bit and the DOF markings on the lens help as well.

I zoom in to maximium on the live view screen and focus the lens to an area along the bottom edge of the screen, usually centre but not always. This would be different of you were shooting along a wall as the point on the wall nearest to the camera will probably be along one side and not the bottom.

In any case, what I am trying to do is use the lens to tell me how far the camera is from the nearest object or part of the composition that I want to be in focus. This then tells me exactly (from looking at the distance scale on the lens) the distance to that object.

I then double the distance in my head. Hyperfocal distance gives you everything from half that distance to infinity at an acceptable sharpness.

Therefore, once you have taken a distance reading you know that if you set the lens to twice that distance eveything will be in focus (providing that the infinty mark falls within the range once set, but I'll get onto that in a bit).

For example, if my initial focusing says that the nearest object to me that I want in focus is at one metre I will then set the lens focus point (the centre mark on the lens) to two metres. This has to sometimes be an approximation due to the markings on the lens, but it always get you very close, i.e. if the initial focus is at between one and two metres I will interpolate (estimate) the distance that it is reading.

Once I have hyperfocally focused the lens I will see where the infinity sign is in relation to the aperture scale. My lenses have the infinity sign on the left of the focus mark therefore the left hand edge of the infinity mark is what I am looking at. If the left hand edge is slightly clipping a particular aperature, e.g. just clipping f11, I will set the camera to a slightly larger aperture to make sure that the DOF, i.e. my focussed distance to infinity fits within the range given by a particular f-stop.

If it does fit within the range, i.e. the left hand edge (on my lenses) of the infinity mark is slightly inside of an aperture reading, i.e. within the DOF range of the lens at that particular f-stop I will use the same aperture. In other words, if the DOF range from my focus point to infinity fits between the F11 markers I will use F11, or smaller if able to, if slightly outside or overlapping I will then stop down to the next availabel aperture.

It can be a bit hard to explain but once using it for a short while it becomes second nature.

After my initial set up, once I am happy with the composition I will focus using the live view screen, and then before I continue I will switch to mirror lockup, set the lens and then make an exposure. It takes less that ten seconds once you get used to it.

I wouldn't recommend in relying on sharpening when you PP. PP should not make up for sloppy technique and you will notice that oversharpened images have nasty halos and artefacts to them which are unnatural and easily avoided.

 

[Dune]

There is an old trick that works for me. focus on the most distant subject, note the distance, focus on the foreground interest, note the distance. Now move the focus ring to halfway between the two. That works out at somewhere very near your hyperfocal distance.

Oh and use about f11 ish, well thats what I do.