How to take photo of a object without focus stacking?

[dpyy]

I'm trying to get into product photography and took some fun shots. I'm talking about shots of my iPhone and things like that.

What I quickly realize is that I am unable to get enough DOF. I'm using a FF camera with a 135mm price. Shooting at f/8.

It's obviously fine if I take the shot straight on, but as soon as I take the shot from an angle, either the front of the phone was in focus or the back, but not the whole thing.

I then went online and did some quick DOF calculator. Turns out when I am shooting at around 2 feet away, I am only getting 0.04 feet of DOF. Which is tiny, even for a small object like an iPhone.

So my question is how do I solve this? I could change the focal length but I'm not sure that will help since I will be adjusting the subject distance accordingly?

It seemed like using a point and shoot is much better at doing this job than a FF DSLR.

 

[drh681]

I'm trying to get into product photography and took some fun shots. I'm talking about shots of my iPhone and things like that.

What I quickly realize is that I am unable to get enough DOF. I'm using a FF camera with a 135mm price. Shooting at f/8.

It's obviously fine if I take the shot straight on, but as soon as I take the shot from an angle, either the front of the phone was in focus or the back, but not the whole thing.

I then went online and did some quick DOF calculator. Turns out when I am shooting at around 2 feet away, I am only getting 0.04 feet of DOF. Which is tiny, even for a small object like an iPhone.

So my question is how do I solve this? I could change the focal length but I'm not sure that will help since I will be adjusting the subject distance accordingly?

It seemed like using a point and shoot is much better at doing this job than a FF DSLR.

There is part of the problem. If you read around a bit, you'll find that the smaller sensor are conducive to a greater DOF. It's a matter of optical physics

The usual way to get the plane of focus more on a flat subject is with a tilt/shift lens

If you are going to be doing product photography it might be a good investment.

One thing you can do right now is tilt the phone up a little bit, maybe even stand it up.

 

[Ellis Vener]

Simple answer use a shorter focal length lens and/or stop down more. The 135mm f/2L is pretty sharp all the way down. If you are printing large you'll see a resolution difference between f8 and f/22 but if you aren't printing large you and your client won't notice it.

whether you use a ff or smaller format camera, as long as you are using the same focal length lens the depth of field at any given aperture remains the same, only the angle of view changes.

A lens that tilts will only add depth of field if the main plane of the subject is at an angle to the plane of the sensor

 

[hotdog321]

Here are your options:

1. Stop down for more depth of field.

2. Rearrange the subject so your depth of field is sufficient.

3. Tilt/shift lens. This is rather tricky and takes a bit of study to get the knack.

4. Focus stacking is very easy and fast. Why fight it?

 

[DVT80111]

4. Focus stacking is very easy and fast. Why fight it?

 

[Ellis Vener]

4. Focus stacking is very easy and fast. Why fight it?

--
photojournalist
http://craighartley.zenfolio.com/

May you please share your workflow?

Mine is pretty straightforward1)

1) chose an f-stop that is two to three down from wide open (best lens performance with most lenses

2) starting at the front of the set and using live view, manually focus the lens, make an exposure and progressively focus back through the subject. (Because this is a tedious process, I now use a CamRanger to automate the stepping; choosing extra-fine, fine, or medium stepping depending on the subject. http://www.camranger.com)

3) Batch process the raw files in Lightroom CC ( any raw processing program will do) and output as TIFFs or JPEGs.

4) Use Helcon Focus to do the stacking work.

 

[hotdog321]

4. Focus stacking is very easy and fast. Why fight it?

--
photojournalist
http://craighartley.zenfolio.com/

May you please share your workflow?

I just handhold the camera, and focus from the closest area I want sharp, click, move the focus just a hair, click, move the focus, click, until the focus hits the rear of the object. This usually only takes a few seconds--no precision required.

Then I take the stack of images into a program (I'm using CS6, but there are lots of others, some free) and let the computer assemble the image. It is much easier than it sounds and it's kinda magical how you achieve impossible depth of field.

My very first try using eight shots sitting in front of my computer:



A couple of other times shooting for Houston Chronicle stories--in a liquor store:



In a lab shooting for a story on new fracking chemicals:



--
photojournalist
http://craighartley.zenfolio.com/

 

[otto k]

First of all, focal length has nothing to do with DoF so don't worry about that. DoF is exactly the same for f/8 for 200mm from 4ft away and for 50mm from 1ft away (to keep same object size in both cases). Go check.

Smaller sensors also make almost no difference. If you have full frame 12MP and 1" 12MP sensor, for the same f-stop you will get larger DoF on smaller sensor, BUT you will hit diffraction sooner on smaller sensor meaning that you can stop down more on full frame while keeping the same resolution. How much more? About as much to compensate the difference (2.7 times here). Seriously, with f/6.3 you are getting barely few megapixels, regardless of sensor resolution, on small sensor (1/2.3" as used in most compact cameras, super zooms, etc) and to suffer that much from diffraction on full frame you would need to stop down to around f/40. Cambridgeincolour com is your friend.

TL;DR Use stacking, plenty of commercial and free software, I use enfuse (hugin).

 

[Nixon Glenn]

Another tips :

Some lenses have "Focus Breathing", that is it shifts the angle of view of the lens when you change the focus distance.

 

[AceP]

First of all, focal length has nothing to do with DoF so don't worry about that.

Not true. Focal length does affect DOF. But as you say in the next sentence:

DoF is exactly the same for f/8 for 200mm from 4ft away and for 50mm from 1ft away (to keep same object size in both cases). Go check.

That is correct. You and I know this but to explain to someone more completely, one should add that the distance to the subject affects DOF in exactly the opposite way as the focal length. When you keep the object the same size in both cases, the two cancel each other out and you get the same DOF.

Smaller sensors also make almost no difference. If you have full frame 12MP and 1" 12MP sensor, for the same f-stop you will get larger DoF on smaller sensor, BUT you will hit diffraction sooner on smaller sensor meaning that you can stop down more on full frame while keeping the same resolution. How much more? About as much to compensate the difference (2.7 times here). Seriously, with f/6.3 you are getting barely few megapixels, regardless of sensor resolution, on small sensor (1/2.3" as used in most compact cameras, super zooms, etc) and to suffer that much from diffraction on full frame you would need to stop down to around f/40. Cambridgeincolour com is your friend.

All that means is that for the same DOF the larger frame sensor must stop down by the crop factor. At which point both sensors reach the same diffraction effects. So no difference.

TL;DR Use stacking, plenty of commercial and free software, I use enfuse (hugin).

+1

 

[rockjano]

I'm trying to get into product photography and took some fun shots. I'm talking about shots of my iPhone and things like that.

What I quickly realize is that I am unable to get enough DOF. I'm using a FF camera with a 135mm price. Shooting at f/8.

It's obviously fine if I take the shot straight on, but as soon as I take the shot from an angle, either the front of the phone was in focus or the back, but not the whole thing.

I then went online and did some quick DOF calculator. Turns out when I am shooting at around 2 feet away, I am only getting 0.04 feet of DOF. Which is tiny, even for a small object like an iPhone.

So my question is how do I solve this? I could change the focal length but I'm not sure that will help since I will be adjusting the subject distance accordingly?

It seemed like using a point and shoot is much better at doing this job than a FF DSLR.

Helicon Focus with it's own Helicon remote to automate the process. using USB cable and tripod of course.

Or tilt lens or tilt adapter and medium format lens (I use it I love it a lot cheaper ukranian adapter for Nikon and a cheap manual 80mm medium format lens)

But than you tilt the focus plane and if you photograph something taller you could be in trouble again…

rockjano

 

[Seedeich]

Depending on the look I want, I use mainly 1” sensor Nikon mirrorless cameras for product shots. Most the images are for web or smaller print, so the IQ and resolution is more than good enough. The DoF is a lot deeper than with a FF DSLR at the same angle of view.
Triggering studio flashes is unfortunately only possible optically or with a DIY hotshoe adapter since Nikon uses an idiotic special hotshoe for the N1 system.

I also use a Nikon P7800 compact camera.
Also good enough for web and smaller print. And it allows to get close-ups with a relatively deep DoF.

These modern small sensor cameras deliver a pretty good IQ. The rest is up to your lighting skills.

My FF DSLR gets only used for product shots when I want a shallow DoF.