ClioSport.net
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
Photo Stitching - DOF
- Thread starter BenWall
- Start date
He's determined for this to catch on lol. Is cool though.
Focus TDCi
Slow red one
Whats the method to do this?
LY 182 FF CUPPED
Not quite understanding this Ben, to me not a lot has been achieved regarding Depth of Field?
It almost has a "tilt shift" approach to it though.
It looks very well done, but just can't see the benefits - I know it can be used to great advantage when taking very detailed macro stuff, as I saw a demo at Focus earlier this year.
It almost has a "tilt shift" approach to it though.
It looks very well done, but just can't see the benefits - I know it can be used to great advantage when taking very detailed macro stuff, as I saw a demo at Focus earlier this year.
Fiat Panda 100hp
It's looks amazing, and gives a dof which wouldn't be achievable from just one shot at 1.4.
riz
ClioSport Club Member
Jaguar XFR
+10
LY 182 FF CUPPED
I still look at that top image and can't help think - it could of been achieved in camera?
There is no increase in Depth of Field, looking at the principles of Hyperfocal distance - you have actually ended up LOSING Depth of Field.
Depth of field will always give you 1/3rd in front of a subject and 2/3rds behind the subject at any given aperture and focal length right???
Your Depth of field is sharp up until the point of say 1 ft behind the subjects feet, then drops off drastically - therefore i can't see how this image works???
Also remember Depth of Field is determined by focal length/F no/distance from subject.
So a 1.4 lens from that distance with a 50mm focal length focused on the subject would have much more depth behind the subject when that much in front has been rendered sharp????
There is no increase in Depth of Field, looking at the principles of Hyperfocal distance - you have actually ended up LOSING Depth of Field.
Depth of field will always give you 1/3rd in front of a subject and 2/3rds behind the subject at any given aperture and focal length right???
Your Depth of field is sharp up until the point of say 1 ft behind the subjects feet, then drops off drastically - therefore i can't see how this image works???
Also remember Depth of Field is determined by focal length/F no/distance from subject.
So a 1.4 lens from that distance with a 50mm focal length focused on the subject would have much more depth behind the subject when that much in front has been rendered sharp????
+1, I'm not really sure whats being achieved that can't be done in the camera.. its probably so subtle that its not worth doing IMO.. maybe its for huge prints? but a 5D + 85L/135L would produce a very similar image.
Last edited:
only for wide angles, gets to 50/50 once you go longer. but I agree with what you are saying
when a lens is focused at the hyperfocal distance, the scene is in "sharp" focus from 1/2 the focused distance distance to infinity. That certainly doesn't fit the 1/3 in front, 2/3 in back rule of thumb, does it!
This widely used rule of thumb is only good when the lens is focused at about 1/3 of the hyperfocal distance (for the aperture set). But in many photo situations, focus distances are considerably shorter than 1/3 the hyperfocal distance, such as with:
- macro or close-up photography
- portrait or animal shots with telephotos
A better rule of thumb for depth of field in these situations is 1/2 in front and 1/2 in back.
A red missile
Might not be achieveable at f1.4, but i'd just slap the 100-400 on and get pretty much the same effect in one go. Seems a pointless exercise to me.
