Hyperfocal Distance - Double The Distance Method Explained
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ธ.ค. 2024
- In this video, we go over Hyperfocal Distance, how it works and how a simple "Double-the-Distance Method" can simplify the process of focusing in the field in order to get everything in your scene as sharp as possible.
~Spencer
/ spencercoxphoto
👇👇👇
This video is not sponsored! You can support Photography Life and Spencer Cox Photography by buying anything through my affiliate links!
Here is all the photo equipment I use: bhpho.to/3XUv32a
And here’s my video gear to film this video: bhpho.to/3Yt8th1
#LandscapePhotography
Like many other photographers, I've downloaded hyperfocal distance charts to my phone. Have I ever used them in the field...? Nope. I've also used the 'focus a third into the image' method, but your explanation here is so simple and effective that I'm surprised I've not come across it before. Thanks for another great video. Your delivery technique and straightforward explanations are a breath of fresh air. Thanks for all the effort you put in to help us.
I calculated a hyperfocal distance that delivered a result outside the narrow depth of field of a telephoto lense. Is this calculated distance real or just an artifact?
One of the best video about hyper focal distance to understand. Very well explained. Hats off
Smart,short and concise with a soothing voice without the need to pose hip and super fun and fast talk. Thank you,I loved it.
Thanks, Carmen! I’m not so hip in real life, so why pretend for a video 😜
Watched three videos explaining the same thing and this was BY FAR the best. Thank you!
Yeah.. even I felt the same
Nice work on the vid. Wide angle lenses like you used here are a little easier to work with for a larger distance. Does your technique work either longer focal lengths also? Or do you do any focus stacking? Either way, great vid & I’ll give it a go. Checked out your gear page. You’re definitely an outdoor, nature photographer! Does that M2 13” MacBook Pro handle LRC & PS layers & local brush work without bogging down. I really like the price on it & need something when on the road & would probably bump it up to 512gb & of course, use externals for storage. I’m a pc user when it comes to computers but thinking of trying a Mac. Happy shooting.
Great, instructive video. No math or in-the-field calculations required. More effective than all the other videos I viewed, with reference to this subject. Thank you 😊.
Your explanation for hyper focal is the best I have ever seen on youtube. Bravo. This is exactly how I do my focus in landscape.
There is so much conflicting advice available on how to achieve sharp photos from just in front of the camera to infinity, your straight forward and simple advice was like a breath of fresh air! Thank you so much Spencer, extremely helpful, useful and practical advice. Alun
Very glad to hear it! I think a lot of videos overcomplicate it with hyperfocal charts and calculations. Double the distance is easy and actually more accurate than the other methods.
I’ve read and read and watched and watched, haven’t found a single tutorial that’s as clear as this - thank you! 🙏
Much appreciated!
Sensible and practical: you win! 👍
You have just explained it to this newbie better than anyone has. NOW I don't feel so dumb. I'm doing a diploma and this has not been explained at all like this. Bless you. x I have subbed.
So happy to hear it! Welcome to the channel, and that’s awesome, good luck on your degree!
Well done young man, you're smart and a great teacher
You make hyperfocal very simple and easy to work in the field. I always focus a third into the image when I need to be on hyperfocal, but I will change for this method. Your explanations are very clear. Thank you, you are an excellent teacher and photographer!
Thank you, France, happy you found it useful!
Very practical explanation of a very important concept,Absolutely wonderful.All the best.
OUTSTANDING. Thanks for taking this complicated subject and making it easy to understand and apply. I have watched dozens of videos on this topic and yours was way superior to them. Thank you
You sound like a bright young man. Well done and keep at it.
Excellent explanation and great tips. Bravo.
Very glad you liked it, thanks, Christopher!
I teach photography in my local community, and this is definitely the way to do most landscape photography with a wide angle lens. Definitely you can even use it with zoom lenses as well. It will work I see so many people who would focus on the mountain thinking that everything in the foreground would then be sharp as well, but it doesn't work like that. In fact, you get the opposite with a very soft image.
That's all I needed to understand, Focus at double the distance of yr closest subject, Stop down & shoot! cheers mate!
I have already tried many things but I did not know that it is so easy and works. Thank you for that and greetings from Germany
Definitely the easiest explanation I've come across. Now I need to learn what apertures etc to use for specific photography subjects. It does seem to be a trend for people saying that around F11 is the best for landscape? Why? Landscape is mostly my subject.
Thanks again!
Thanks Andrew! This video might answer your questions:
th-cam.com/video/ZXLm7-EkYSI/w-d-xo.html
@@PhotographyLifeChannel thanks! Very informative! Just getting into DSLR (Canon APS-C) and trying to learn as much as I can. Always got decent pictures on our road trips with my Canon SX using manual settings and auto focus, along with my GoPro and my phone but hoping to step it up a notch!
Thanks again!
I am so happy you made this video. I loved the article you wrote a while back and this video is icing on the cake.
Thank you, Michael! Glad to hear you liked it. Hyperfocal distance is so valuable for landscape photographers, and the DTD method means it’s not as difficult as some tutorials make it appear.
Well explained......... I will apply this to my passion
Great explanation. I’m certainly impressed by your delivery.
Much appreciated, Darrien!
Thanks. I've just experimented outside my home and it worked pretty well. I'm going to try it on a street photography session
Thank you for your easy explanation, I've been trying to figure out hyperfocal distance, I've come from macro photography to now attempting landscapes, but for some reason couldn't get it right. After watching this I went in to my back garden, put an object on the edge of a paving slab, stepped 2 paving slabs back and focused on the edge of a paving slab 2 past the object, nailed the shot 1st go, I now need to go out and try in the field. Once again thank you.
Simple explanation to understand,thank you.
Glad it was helpful!
Thank you for this. You explained well and it was easy to follow. I am going to use this method.
wonderful and simple explanation
Much appreciated!!
Cheers Spencer for taking time to create this video and upload it, I found it very useful indeed.
Excellent explanation! Thanks.
Sure thing!
Another great video. What focus area setting did you use?
I usually stick to single-point and AF-S for landscapes. I don’t like the imprecision of the larger area modes, and don’t need tracking or anything like that for 99% of landscapes.
Thank you, that’s very straight forward. I shall try your method 🤗
How does this method take the aperture in account?
Well presented as always. I am wondering what focus mode you are using for your landscape. I am shooting with a Nikon Z7. Thank you.
Excellent explanation of this concept and how to put it into practice.
Thanks, Mac, glad you liked it!
Clear and simple. Thank you! Love the Dodge and burn t-shirt :)
Thanks! It’s my favorite shirt 😄
This is fantastic explanation on focusing. I like the double the distance focus method. Thanks
Thanks for the great explanation! I've been trying to wrap my head around this all day in preparation for Chile next week!
Happy to hear it, Ryan. Have fun in Chile, and keep the Double the Distance method in mind when you need to maximize depth of field!
this was really so helpful. I have given up on hyperlocal distance before, but now i feel like i get it!
Such a good straight forward explanation, totally in line with yr the articles on PL.
I also like yr explanation regarding the lens quality influence, it really made the video complete.
btw I often wonder why so few landscape photographers use prime lenses to reduce this edge unsharpness.
Very well done.
Maybe because landscape shooters are hiking to nice locations and they don't want to carry 3 or 4 (or more) lenses vs 2? I personally find myself wanting every lens I own when I'm out shooting, just incase I need it. And my bag is really heavy.
Glad you liked it, Hans, thanks! I’m definitely among those who have gravitated away from primes recently (used to shoot an all-prime kit) so I’ll try to answer your question. For me, there is a point at which image quality is not what holds a photo back. The 14-24mm f/2.8 does not have perfect image quality, but even at its worst it is not going to be distracting (even to a photographer’s critical eye). The 200% view in the video is quite exaggerated. (Wide angle lenses are also just super hard to design; I’ve only seen one 14mm prime with better image quality than this zoom, having tested 7 by my count from various manufacturers.)
Don’t get me wrong - primes ARE better than similarly priced zooms in image quality, at least in the vast majority of cases. But zooms also weigh less because they replace several primes, and if their image quality doesn’t take away from the photo even in a large print (my personal threshold), they win out overall.
@@PhotographyLifeChannel ...And image which moves us are not necessarily related to the perfect technique...in the contrary, sometimes a bit of imperfection makes the work more human...altough I really know pretty well my craft and that I always want to learn more and more, I do not want to become a technique freak...I want to be touched when I take my photo and to offer that...
Great presentation !!! Very clear.
Much appreciated!
Hello There, Very clear explanation! Thanks a lot! God bless you all!
Love the simple explanation! Crystal clear! Thanks
This is a great tutorial which is practical and doable compare to the DOF calculator and figuring the length on the field which is way to complicated
I too am new to this amazingly simple concept, and I'm most grateful. Anything that makes life easier is really welcome.
It’s remarkable to me that such a useful, simple, and mathematically accurate technique hasn’t caught on very much yet! Hopefully it will soon. Glad we could introduce you to it.
Brilliant, simple explanation - thank you
This was an absolutely brilliant informative video; thanks for a fabulous upload. I learned loads and really enjoyed it.
I like this guy. Very simple method I can understand. Thank you.
Beautifully described, thank you.
Nailed it dude, ever since I started learning photography.
Portraits - 1.4
Landscape - F11
Complete BS. Nailed a landscape today, 1.4 @ 24mm
Can I see that photo somewhere?
Thanks for the video. How do you determine the aperture?
Great video! Thanks for explaining this so simply...
Sure thing! Glad it could be of use.
Thanks a bunch!! Excellent video and simple, easy to use methodology. I will definitely be trying this out.
Sure thing! Yeah, it’s strange how this method is easy to use and mathematically optimal, but so rarely talked about.
Thank you for explaining that. I have asked other vloggers and never got an answer.
Awesome, glad to hear it was useful!
Thanks for letting me understand this in less than 10 minutes! Great explanation!
Jamie This is false.
It doesn’t work that way. Hyper focal distance depends on the size of aperture also. You can’t focus on the same point (per your doubling distance rule) on different aperture to get the crisp picture.
@@Notaphily I get that you'll need a certain aperture, as wide open would only give you a rather shallow dOf in any case.
The way I understood it is that it's comparable to zone focus as in you have a certain depth of field in which subjects remain acceptably sharp and you try to move this zone to a point where it includes both your nearest and your furthest subject.
Am I mistaken?
Jamie, you’re correct - the other commenter is misunderstanding the video. I never said that aperture is irrelevant. Certainly shooting at f/1.4 for a landscape will give you a blurry result in both the foreground and background! What the double the distance method does, which is critical, is EQUALIZE foreground and background sharpness. If your goal is maximum depth of field, that’s exactly what you’d want most of the time. DTD equalizes foreground and background sharpness *even at* super wide apertures, for what it’s worth - though at those apertures, “equalizing” doesn’t mean much because they’re both extremely blurry. So, you still need to pick a good aperture for your shot (probably f/8-11 on average, when shooting full frame) if you want maximum depth of field without extreme levels of diffraction. But as far as focus point, DTD is the way to go if you want your foreground and background equal in sharpness.
brilliant well said and demonstrated
good stuff, well appreciated.
I'm impressed that you can walk on uneven ground while talking and holding a selfie stick! Thanks for the great info.
Very useful info as always. Thanks
Glad you liked it, thanks!
Great job explaining, I learned a lot
To be honest, I've tried the calculators and such and have had the best luck (if I need most or all of the the scene in focus) doing focus stacking instead. Yes, it's a bit more work in post, but in general, I've had fewer issues, and part of this is because I can keep the lens at something like f/8 or f/11, which many lenses are most sharp at those apertures anyway. Now I'm not into the roundtable debates about never shooting beyond f/16 or at f/22 but I do like to shoot at the sharpest apertures possible, and I think that focus stacking, while a bit more work, gives you this benefit while still getting sharp photos.
Focus stacking is absolutely the best option if it works for your scene! Not always possible, especially if your subject is moving, of course. But when it works, it’s a great technique.
f/16 and f/22 does look not great tho.
Great video and you made it so simple. My head was spinning when I was reading about hyperfocal distance and the calculators and the circle of confusion. Going to try out what you said
Awesome! Glad to hear it. It’s amazing to me how much this subject has been overcomplicated. Admittedly, picking the perfect aperture can take some practice, but the actual focusing component is so simple.
If people have trouble estimating the distance to the focus point, they can use a laser distance measurer. They are easy to use.
At about 3:25, you say that tilting the camera downward increases camera-to-subject distance, giving you a larger depth of field. First, wouldn't tilting downward *decrease* camera-to-subject distance -- if by "subject" you mean the object closest to the lens? Second, how does tilting downward affect the halve-the-distance formula you recommend? Thanks!
Good questions. To visualize this, you have to imagine your camera sensor extending as a plane in every direction. Tilting downward means that the plane intersects with the ground much farther back, probably even behind you. Double the Distance isn’t exactly concerned with how far away your subject is from your camera; it’s concerned with how long the shortest path is from your nearest subject to the plane of your camera sensor. So raising your camera on the tripod and tilting down will increase that distance, except in the special case that your nearest subject is something like a tree branch right over your head. Hope this helps! Wish I could post a diagram here.
@@PhotographyLifeChannel I shall ponder that. Thanks for responding.
@@PhotographyLifeChannel So you measure the diagonal distance from your camera sensor to your subject on the ground, instead of the horizontal distance from the camera sensor to your subject? And what if your foreground subject is lower than the point where you're standing? For example, if you’re standing on a slope? Thanks for putting out all the well explained and substantiated content!
@Juul Sam - In reality, what you do is extend the plane of your camera sensor in all directions, and then find whatever the closest distance from anywhere on that plane is to your nearest object. So tilting your camera extensively can change the equation. I simplified the explanation a bit in the video, because this geometry isn’t easy to visualize quickly for most people!
@@PhotographyLifeChannel Makes sense, thanks! The JPG preview on the back of my LCD seems sharp many times, but when I open the RAW file, the background doesn't seem as sharp as it looked like on my camera, which can be pretty disappointing. Can this have to do anything with the in-camera sharpening? On my D810, I found out that Picture Control is automatically applying maximum sharpening (9). Could this be the reason my JPG preview is fooling me?
I was also wondering if there is a maximum focal length where you can use the DTD method with, or that it just doesn't work that well with some lenses? I'm using a Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD and trying to understand which factors can involve my issues so I know what to work on :-) Thanks!!
best explanation I have seen to date
This video is so useful. Thanks for investing the time and effort.
Sure thing, Brian! Thanks for the feedback :)
Well explained sir.👉👍
Informative and well-spoken. Nice job.
Super explanation
Very helpful, very practical! Thank you!
Sure thing! Glad it was useful.
Thanks Spencer!
You are quite welcome!
When you mention distances of 2 feet and 4 feet from the camera, are you referring to the direct distance to the subjects, or the distance between the sensor plane and a plane passing through the subject, which is parallel to the sensor plane?
The latter! It’s the distance between the plane of your camera sensor and the shortest line to the subject.
very useful...thank you...
So much to learn and this video was great!!
I feel like I missed something. There is no mention of focal length or aperture. How do you select the proper aperture? How does focal length affect this formula?
Basically, the longer your focal length, the shallower the depth of field, the smaller aperture you'll want to use. But that's also a compromise because you'll probably have to use a tripod and also depending on sensor size, you'll get diffraction if you go too small aperture.
I'd say a bit of trial and error. Try the "double the distance method" and use different apertures to see when everything is acceptably sharp, because it really depends on the lens and sensor size. That's why giving numbers isn't really helpful for this video and I'd guess he left them out on purpose for that reason.
This is where you need a chart or a calculator. Or you can google the formula so you can determine what FL/aperture you need for a particular range.
Normally, what I do is.... Set to manual focus, turn the lens focus ring to infinity (∞), zoom in live view to make sure both foreground and backgrounds are in focus then release the shutter. This is in aperture priority mode since I already know my preferred lens is perfectly sharp at f/8 with a wide enough DoF. However, your method should work perfectly fine, especially if you have the PhotoPills app to calculate the hyperfocal distance (for visual confirmation). I'll definitely try this method during the weekend. Thanks for the video :)
Thanks for the simple yet great explanation.
Great explanation!
Thank you!
Very beautifuly explained. I loved it. Can i have the image u shown in the video. Or if possible can u show the focus point in the image. ?
Thank you, glad you liked it! I don’t have the RAW image available for download right now, but I’ll let you know - I think we will add it to the main Photography Life website before too long. The focus point is at the very front of the island, the closest part of it to me (far left side of the island).
Question. Lets say i focus on an object 10 feet away and lock in the focus. Then i move forward 5 feet. wouldn't this achieve the same thing?
Good question Quentin. The answer is, only loosely. If your landscape has contours or a variety of different nearby elements, there’s no way that your composition will always have its closest object 5 feet from the camera as you move around. In turn, 10 feet will not always be the optimal focus distance of your lens, even if it was correct for the first shot. Remember - the hyperfocal distance method in this video is to compose the photo, find the closest object in your composition (even if it’s an empty area of dirt at the bottom of your frame), and double that distance. Unless you can guarantee that the closest object will be the same distance away in every one of your compositions - like *maybe* salt flats if you don’t change your tripod height or position of ballhead whatsoever as you walk around - focusing is something you need to do each time you change your composition.
The Photopills app is pretty much the industry standard for dof calculations. It does a lot more besides. Great value for what it does.
Newbie question: If I use a small aperture, say f16 to take landscape photos, then I wouldn't need to worry about the hyperfocal distance?
Fantastic explanation, Spencer!
One question : is the hyperfocal technique going to give you as sharp focus at near and far points as focusing on each and using focus stacking ( which of course is cumbersome). In other words , do you only recommend focus stacking when the hyperfocal technique isn’t really working well or do you use focus stacking to make both near and far images maximally sharp?
I sometimes think using hyperfocal technique that my far part of the image are still a bit soft.
Thanks,
Tim
Focus stacking technically gives you sharper results, but I rarely use it. Too much can go wrong and focus stacking almost always gives you little artifacts in the photo if anything was moving, even a blade of grass. When I focus stack, it’s only when f/16 plus this double-the-distance hyperfocal method did not give you sufficient depth of field. Even then, to minimize errors, I focus stack with photos taken at f/11 or f/16 so that I need to stack as few photos as possible.
Thanks you so much for your reply, Spencer. I understand your answer, but i am still perplexed as to why my landscape photos are softer in the distance. I am following your techn and getting the close objects sharp but not the distant parts. Using a z5 with z24-200 at 24mm so must be operator error. I have searched far and wide on the internet but no help.
Any advice would be very welcome-and I understand if you don’t have time to respond. Your tutorials are the best!
Tim
Thanks Tim! If it’s always the further portion that’s blurrier than the nearest foreground, it either means that you’re focusing too closely (either your initial estimate is a little incorrect or your estimate of “double” is a little incorrect) or the lens has some field curvature. In other words, its plane of focus isn’t actually a plane, but rather, curves inward. The 24-200mm does have some field curvature so that might be what you’re seeing, or maybe it’s a combination of that and inaccurate focus distance. Either way, you will need to focus a bit further than you have been. And make sure that your aperture is sufficiently narrow. If the foreground is close, f/11 or f/16 is necessary. Don’t shoot at f/5.6 if you need a lot of depth of field.
Wow! Thanks so much for your fast and clear response. I will work on your recommendations.
Keep up the fantastic work work!
Nice explanation about doubling the distance, but doesn't the aperture count? Does this work with ALL apertures and ALL focal lenses?
At all apertures and focal lengths, focusing at double the distance will give you equally sharp foregrounds and backgrounds. But it’s still obviously important to pick a good aperture and focal length to get the right depth of field. If you focus at DTD with something like a 70mm lens at f/2.8, sure, your foreground and background will be equally sharp as one another - they’ll just both be blurry.
Such a simple technique but is so effective. Thank you for sharing this.
Glad you liked it!
Smiff This is false.
It doesn’t work that way. Hyper focal distance depends on the size of aperture also. You can’t focus on the same point (per your doubling distance rule) on different aperture to get the crisp picture.
झोले कामरेड़ (Given that you copy-pasted this comment from earlier, I will copy-paste my response): No, this video is correct. Even if you’re at f/1.4 with very shallow depth of field, focusing at double-the-distance will EQUALIZE foreground and background sharpness. It’s 100% true that the final sharpness of your photo also depends on your aperture, so you’re correct in that regard. But step one is focusing at the point that maximizes total depth of field regardless of your aperture. Only after that do you select an aperture like f/8, f/11, etc., that gives you as much depth of field as possible without running into excessive diffraction. In fact there is a mathematically accurate way to determine *which* aperture is the best compromise between diffraction and depth of field at this point, but explaining it went way beyond the scope of this video - you can read about it here if you want: photographylife.com/how-to-choose-the-sharpest-aperture - once you’ve read and understand that, if you disagree with any of the math related to the DTD method or choosing the sharpest aperture, I’ll update the video, but it just won’t happen, because all the information here is correct.
Photography Life it didn’t work for me. Idk
झोले कामरेड़ Not sure why that would be. Was the foreground too blurry, or the background? If it was both, you aren’t using a small enough aperture. If it was either the foreground or background, you aren’t focused on the DTD point and are either too far back or front focused.
Bloody brilliant. Thanks from North Yorkshire England. Fabulous well explained tutorial.
You do make very good tutorials, thanks!
What about stacked focusing? Can that help with getting ultra sharp landscape photos?
Yes! Double the distance is best when you’re trying to get everything in a single photo, but focus stacking is a huge help when there’s a nearby foreground or when you want to maximize sharpness.
A very helpful video that does not seem to get all the credit it deserves. Should perhaps be followed up with a video about field curvature, which can also impact image sharpness depending on where you focus quite a bit.
Useful video, thanks
Thanks for a very educative video.
Very well explained!
Glad you thought so, thanks!
well explained, i found it helpful, thank you
Glad it was helpful!
Is it true for any focal length?
How do you measure the hyper focal distance when you shoot a sunset or a sea
As he explained, look at the closest element in the foreground you want to include and double the distance and there you should focus, If all is far away just focus at infinity
Great video, thanks for your sharing!!
Does the same apply to other types of photography? Like food, for example
Hi, Thanks. Why did you opt for F9 and not anything smaller?
Thanks.
Good question. With an aperture that was too small, like f/16, I would have gotten some low-level blur in my photos from diffraction. Not enough to ruin the photo, but enough so that f/9 was sharper in this case. (And, because I had such a wide angle lens, I didn’t have any depth of field issue at f/9; with a longer lens or a closer subject, I may have needed to use f/11 or f/16 instead.)
@@PhotographyLifeChannel Thanks.
Hello, If I adapt a Nikon 35mm lens onto my Fuji X-Pro 1, will that affect hyperfocal focusing? I am using a Novotron lens adapter. Thank you ? Great videos. Thank you.
Using the doubling method described in the video I don't think it will matter if you have the manual lens and adapter set-up. I've read that that set up can sometimes mean you lose infinity focus. Experiment to find out what works
well done! thanks!