Hyperfocal DoF calculator app....

This is at F2

....and F2.8



Maybe I am being unrealistic, maybe I need to go outside and try it. It just seems quite soft

Maybe I just needed to go outside......this is F2.8. I think this is fairly sharp but happy to be corrected. Auto ISO (400) and auto shutter speed (did not look and the EXIF will be wrong)

Are you content how both the distant trees and foreground looks? If yes, then you have found a hyperfocal distance (for this scene and the size of displayed picture). Others might have quite different sharpness expectations.

Also, you might try stopping the lens down to expected working aperture (like f8 or f11) and compare it with these pictures, to see how the depth of field grows.

myn said:

Are you content how both the distant trees and foreground looks? If yes, then you have found a hyperfocal distance (for this scene and the size of displayed picture). Others might have quite different sharpness expectations.

Also, you might try stopping the lens down to expected working aperture (like f8 or f11) and compare it with these pictures, to see how the depth of field grows.

Click to expand...

My understanding of hyperfocal distance is limited but, I understood that using techniques describes I should have everything from 1.5m to infinity in focus at F2.8.....I can't decide if I have or not. If not, is that my technique or the lens.......

bmdncl said:

myn said:

Are you content how both the distant trees and foreground looks? If yes, then you have found a hyperfocal distance (for this scene and the size of displayed picture). Others might have quite different sharpness expectations.

Also, you might try stopping the lens down to expected working aperture (like f8 or f11) and compare it with these pictures, to see how the depth of field grows.

Click to expand...

My understanding of hyperfocal distance is limited but, I understood that using techniques describes I should have everything from 1.5m to infinity in focus at F2.8.....I can't decide if I have or not. If not, is that my technique or the lens.......

Click to expand...

At f/2.0 with the 50mm lens, the HFD is at 63m with everything from 32m to infinity in focus

At f/2.8 with the 50mm lens, the HFD is at 30m with everything from 15m to infinity in focus

bmdncl said:

myn said:

Are you content how both the distant trees and foreground looks? If yes, then you have found a hyperfocal distance (for this scene and the size of displayed picture). Others might have quite different sharpness expectations.

Also, you might try stopping the lens down to expected working aperture (like f8 or f11) and compare it with these pictures, to see how the depth of field grows.

Click to expand...

My understanding of hyperfocal distance is limited but, I understood that using techniques describes I should have everything from 1.5m to infinity in focus at F2.8.....I can't decide if I have or not. If not, is that my technique or the lens.......

Click to expand...

Only you decide, if everything from from infinity to some close distance is in focus. If you like it, it is sharp. Look at the distant trees, if they look sharp to you, this is the hyperfocal distance. If they seem slightly blurry (not by motion) and defocused, focus slightly further. Keep in mind how big the final image will be and viewing distance. For smaller images you can ignore some blurriness or downscale the file.

You might want use remote shooting with wifi and compare various focusing distances and apertures on a tablet, because of larger and usually fine displays. Try also smaller apertures, because by stopping the lens down, lens performance changes and improves.

bmdncl said:

....and F2.8

Maybe I am being unrealistic, maybe I need to go outside and try it. It just seems quite soft

Click to expand...

You are probably shooting correctly for the maximum depth of field from the 50mm at 2.8 but the DoF will still be quite narrow. Assuming you focused at 3M then DoF (area of sharpness0 will extend only about 0.2m either side of 3M - a total of about 0.4m

Even at f8 the area of sharpness will be only 1.25m. The field of view of the 50 on your crop sensor is approx 75mm. If you a wide DoF at this close distance you need to use a wider angle lens - 35mm will stretch the DoF from 2M back to 5M +.

--
The sky is full of holes that let the rain get in, the holes are very small - that's why the rain is thin.
Spike Milligan. Writer, comedian, poet, Goon. 1918 - 2002

Vic Chapman said:

bmdncl said:

....and F2.8

Maybe I am being unrealistic, maybe I need to go outside and try it. It just seems quite soft

Click to expand...

You are probably shooting correctly for the maximum depth of field from the 50mm at 2.8 but the DoF will still be quite narrow. Assuming you focused at 3M then DoF (area of sharpness0 will extend only about 0.2m either side of 3M - a total of about 0.4m

Even at f8 the area of sharpness will be only 1.25m. The field of view of the 50 on your crop sensor is approx 75mm. If you a wide DoF at this close distance you need to use a wider angle lens - 35mm will stretch the DoF from 2M back to 5M +.

--
The sky is full of holes that let the rain get in, the holes are very small - that's why the rain is thin.
Spike Milligan. Writer, comedian, poet, Goon. 1918 - 2002

Click to expand...

In your comment are "area of sharpness" and perceived to be in focus two different things. Most people have said that when using the hyperfocal length everything from 1.5m to infinity should be in focus.....you would imply that is not the case?

bmdncl said:

Vic Chapman said:

bmdncl said:

....and F2.8

Maybe I am being unrealistic, maybe I need to go outside and try it. It just seems quite soft

Click to expand...

You are probably shooting correctly for the maximum depth of field from the 50mm at 2.8 but the DoF will still be quite narrow. Assuming you focused at 3M then DoF (area of sharpness0 will extend only about 0.2m either side of 3M - a total of about 0.4m

Even at f8 the area of sharpness will be only 1.25m. The field of view of the 50 on your crop sensor is approx 75mm. If you a wide DoF at this close distance you need to use a wider angle lens - 35mm will stretch the DoF from 2M back to 5M +.

--
The sky is full of holes that let the rain get in, the holes are very small - that's why the rain is thin.
Spike Milligan. Writer, comedian, poet, Goon. 1918 - 2002

Click to expand...

In your comment are "area of sharpness" and perceived to be in focus two different things. Most people have said that when using the hyperfocal length everything from 1.5m to infinity should be in focus.....you would imply that is not the case?

Click to expand...

When setting the focus to the HFD, everything from about half that distance to infinity is in focus. It's not 1.5m in general! The HFD depends on the focal length, aperture and CoC, and so will the depth of field.

What is at the focus distance will have maximum sharpness. Sharpness then drops off both in front and behind the focus distance. The farther you go away from the focus distance, the blurrier it will get. You will need to decide when it becomes too blurry for your taste, standards, and applications. You can formalize your decision through CoC. A small value means you are very stringent and don't allow a large blurriness. And vice versa for large values of CoC. You can then use that CoC in calculations that will allow you to see what DoF you will get when focusing on the HFD for a given focal length and f-stop.

bmdncl said:

Vic Chapman said:

bmdncl said:

....and F2.8

Maybe I am being unrealistic, maybe I need to go outside and try it. It just seems quite soft

Click to expand...

You are probably shooting correctly for the maximum depth of field from the 50mm at 2.8 but the DoF will still be quite narrow. Assuming you focused at 3M then DoF (area of sharpness0 will extend only about 0.2m either side of 3M - a total of about 0.4m

Even at f8 the area of sharpness will be only 1.25m. The field of view of the 50 on your crop sensor is approx 75mm. If you a wide DoF at this close distance you need to use a wider angle lens - 35mm will stretch the DoF from 2M back to 5M +.

--
The sky is full of holes that let the rain get in, the holes are very small - that's why the rain is thin.
Spike Milligan. Writer, comedian, poet, Goon. 1918 - 2002

Click to expand...

In your comment are "area of sharpness" and perceived to be in focus two different things. Most people have said that when using the hyperfocal length everything from 1.5m to infinity should be in focus.....you would imply that is not the case?

Click to expand...

It is as Nixda said but I think you misunderstood him. The calculations will give the maximum DoF or area of sharpness that the lens can provide at any given aperture but smaller apertures (f8-f16) will always allow greater DoF. Large apertures such f2.8-f1.2 will give increasingly narrow DoF. The closer you focus the narrower the DoF - hence the tiny DoF at macro distances. There is more apparent sharpness available when shooting a wide angle lens than a long lens (consider 35mm to be in the middle for crop sensors).

Personally I feel that many of the scientific explanations given, while no doubt correct - only serve to muddy the waters and leave the questioner worse off than before they asked. Often, a brief simple explanation is better. There are several DoF calculators recommended earlier in this thread and also I believe, a DoF simulator which may be of help.

Circles of confusion are well named.

Vic

--
The sky is full of holes that let the rain get in, the holes are very small - that's why the rain is thin.
Spike Milligan. Writer, comedian, poet, Goon. 1918 - 2002

Vic Chapman said:

Vic Chapman said:

In your comment are "area of sharpness" and perceived to be in focus two different things. Most people have said that when using the hyperfocal length everything from 1.5m to infinity should be in focus.....you would imply that is not the case?

Click to expand...

It is as Nixda said but I think you misunderstood him. The calculations will give the maximum DoF or area of sharpness that the lens can provide at any given aperture but smaller apertures (f8-f16) will always allow greater DoF. Large apertures such f2.8-f1.2 will give increasingly narrow DoF. The closer you focus the narrower the DoF - hence the tiny DoF at macro distances. There is more apparent sharpness available when shooting a wide angle lens than a long lens (consider 35mm to be in the middle for crop sensors).

Personally I feel that many of the scientific explanations given, while no doubt correct - only serve to muddy the waters and leave the questioner worse off than before they asked. Often, a brief simple explanation is better. There are several DoF calculators recommended earlier in this thread and also I believe, a DoF simulator which may be of help.

Circles of confusion are well named.

Vic

Click to expand...

I think this goes to the misunderstanding that many have that focus (sharpness) is a binary property and therefore do not understand what DoF really means. When you focus at a given distance say 10 ft the only objects that are critically sharp are those at 10 ft, everything else closer or farther will be less than critically sharp. DoF is simply an estimate of how far from critical focus you need to be before you notice. According to urban legend DoF is based on a person with 20/20 vision viewing an 8x10 print at 18 inches. Whether that all is literally true or not I am not sure but it illustrates the point that DoF is based on a number of assumptions that people tend to forget about or not be aware of. If you make that 8x10 print a 16x20 instead it may not look sharp when viewed at 18 inches but it may appear sharp if you step back so you can see the whole print. In todays world where people may be judging sharpness on a 27 inch 4k/5k retina display at 100% and their eyes 18 inches from the display they are likely to be disappointed. Under those conditions you will need a much smaller circle of confusion than traditionally suggested.