Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 24

Thread: Hyperfocal Distance and Depth of Field

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,956

    Re: Hyperfocal Distance and Depth of Field



    Great post, electric eel. One brief comment:


    Quote Originally Posted by electric eel
    Btw- depth of field is 1/3 in front of the focus mark and 2/3 behind, so if you focus at 30' , the depth of field would extend from 20' to 50', this is just a hypothetical example.

    That's true near the hyperfocal distance but for other distances, the DOF can be the other way around (2/3 in front and 1/3 behind), it depends on the specifics.

  2. #2
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    17

    Re: Hyperfocal Distance and Depth of Field



    Thanks Daniel, I wasn't aware of the switch, I'll definitely want to learn more about that, if you have any examples could you post?

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,956

    Re: Hyperfocal Distance and Depth of Field



    Sorry, my mistake. It doesn't become the other way around, but it does slowly go from 50/50 out to 1/3, then 1/100:


    http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html


    With Canon 50D, 55mm focal length, f/16, 11 feet subject distance: 2.74 ft in front of subject (33%, 1/3rd), 5.45 ft behind subject (67%, 2/3rds).

    The closer you get to infinity, the more it stretches out behind the subject until it gets to infinity:

    32-ft subject distance: 15.8 ft in front of subject (1%), 1231 ft behind subject (99%).


    The closer you get, the more it becomes 50/50:


    3-ft subject distance: 0.24 ft in front of subject (46%), 0.28 ft behind subject (54%).

  4. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    17

    Re: Hyperfocal Distance and Depth of Field



    Thanks Daniel, I never paid much attention to the tables but it appears they are valuable, have you ever checked the tables against the depth of field markings on a lens, I wonder how accurate the markings are against the tables? Time to drag the older lenses out and check this.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •