Estimating depth of field

Started Feb 21, 2013 | Discussions thread
gardenersassistant
Contributing MemberPosts: 845
Like?
Re: Estimating depth of field
In reply to Anders W, Feb 28, 2013

Anders W wrote:

richarddd wrote:

Anders W wrote:

richarddd wrote:

Are there any good illustrations showing DOF v. diffraction? For example, a series of landscape shots showing that apparent DOF increases with f-stop, but that at some point diffraction takes over? Or are there too many variables for such a series of photos to be useful?

No, I haven't seen an illustration of both things simultaneously, only of one or the other. But I see no problems of accomplishing one where you could see the trade-off with your own eyes.

Do you have any suggestions for designing and executing such a test?

Just about any "macro" (meaning close-up) scene should do, stopping down from the point at which the lens is at peak (about f/4 is a fast prime) to the minimum that the lens allows (f/22 with MFT usually). A landscape with the foreground beginning really close (or at high magnification) and extends to "practical" infinity (what this is depends on the lens used) would be another option.

There is a little macro series I did a couple of years ago here , going from f/5.6 to f/22 (using a Raynox 250 on a 45-200mm at 200mm on a G3). My apologies for the images not being perfectly aligned, but they might be of some interest.

I am one of the macro shooters you mentioned in another post in this thread who doesn't hesitate to use f/22. In fact, f/22 is my default aperture for non-stacked shots (which is most of them) of invertebrates. For invertebrates I only use larger apertures when the subject is small in the frame. For flowers I use larger apertures a bit more often.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
prayNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow