Hyperfocal Distance/DOF Questions!

[wibbly]

OK, I'm starting to get into a bit of a pickle here trying to understand DOF and getting more of the background image in focus. (probably why I stick to f/1.4 ).

I shot this only just this morning, and being smart thought I'd whack the aperture up (way up for me), and get some of the background in and see what kind of photo it would look like.

It seems it's just as blurred out, as if I'd taken it at f/1.4 and I'm starting to get a little confused now.

Anyone care to help me out here please.

I've left the exif info intact (hopefully), so you can see what I've done (or not as the case maybe :bonk:

Thanks


IMG_0098 by mrdaveyoung, on Flickr

 

[tijuana taxi]

Just had a look at the exif and f/5 isn't going to give you much background detail Dave

Have a try at something like f/11 or f/16 and see what results you get, watch the shutter speed though if you are hand holding

 

[Stuart M]

What also makes a difference is how far away the background is from your shooting position and your point of focus.

 

[wibbly]

Thanks guys, I'll give it another go sometime.

I was thinking f/5 was going way up the scale for me I also shot one at f/7.1 but that was little different to be honest.

The point of focus was relatively close, and the background focus was quite a way away, I was hoping there would be more in focus though. I wasn't expecting sharp detail, just some kind of outline form.

 

[HoppyUK]

To maximise depth of field, you need to bone up on hyperfocal distance. Lots of threads on this if you search against my user name.

But HFD focusing only really works for wider angle lenses when you want subjects a few feet away sharp as well as distant landscape. The principle works for longer lens too of course, but in practise you need impractically high f/numbers to do much.

Edit: check it all out here with this DoF calculator http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

 

[tijuana taxi]

Maybe try a landscape shot, focus about a third into the scene with a small aperture setting and you should get foreground and background with detail.

 

[mortimerhill]

OK, I'm starting to get into a bit of a pickle here trying to understand DOF and getting more of the background image in focus. (probably why I stick to f/1.4 ).

I shot this only just this morning, and being smart thought I'd whack the aperture up (way up for me), and get some of the background in and see what kind of photo it would look like.

It seems it's just as blurred out, as if I'd taken it at f/1.4 and I'm starting to get a little confused now.

Anyone care to help me out here please.

I've left the exif info intact (hopefully), so you can see what I've done (or not as the case maybe :bonk:

Thanks

http://www.flickr.com/photos/iwibbly/8420077960/
IMG_0098 by mrdaveyoung, on Flickr

Have a look at depth of field calculators to see how much dof you get for given focal length, aperture and subject distance

Dofmaster.com is one

Or, hold of an old fashion fixed focal length lens with a dof scale and learn from that

 

[wibbly]

Thanks guys, I think I've got some reading up to do!

 

[woof woof]

DoF table are IMVHO at best a guide. Read the small print and you'll see the narrow parameters at which they work, deviate too much and the numbers may no longer seem to make such precise sense so a practical demonstration may be better for you and how you view your images.

You could take the same shot over and over stepping through the aperture range one by one. You can then move on to taking shots at different apertures and distances to see the effect. Once you see the effect on the same shot it'll make a lot more sense