Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25

Thread: Lens Design For Maximum DOF

  1. #1
    Scott Rosenberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    The Incredible Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    859

    Lens Design For Maximum DOF

    i have a bit of an academic question for the optics experts in the group. i was recently discussing using process lenses for infinity work with someone who is quite knowledgeable on such matters. we were going back and forth on the merits and limitations of the lenses, noting the usuals...

    Pro: Lenses are small and usually very sharp at f/22 and beyond
    Cons: Lenses are not designed for infinity use, and need to be stopped down a lot to get acceptable results at infinity

    he then said something that i'd not heard or even thought about before... that process lenses, we were specifically talking about the APO-Ronar, which is, i believe, a dialyte, have shallower DOF at a given f-stop than lenses of other designs. i told him that Linos could adjust the spacing to optimize the APO-Ronar for distant shooting, but he said that would only enable one to shoot the lens with acceptable results at f-stops below f/22, it would not correct the narrow DOF inherit to the lens design.

    he held that due to the lens design, an APO-Ronar that was modified for distant work, would still have less DOF at the same f-stop as a different design, say a plasmat or tessar.

    is there any truth to this? does that mean that the fuji 300-c, which is essentially a dialyte optimized for infinity work, will have less DOF than a 300mm lens of another design at the same f-stop?

    whether this amounts to any real difference in use is a separate argument altogether; i'm just wondering about the theory.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    1,330

    Re: Lens Design For Maximum DOF

    I'm not a lens expert but it still does not make sence to me.
    The Ronars which came from the factory with shutter are optimised at 1:20 and not at 1:1 and for the others Linos is giving a service if someone likes it to optimise them at infinity!
    This was told from a Linos expert!

  3. #3
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    8,640

    Re: Lens Design For Maximum DOF

    In classical geometric optics, DOF is a mathematical consequence of the parameters you feed the equation - for a given focal length and focus distance, plus whatever assumptions you want to make about visual acuity of the observer and consequently about the applicable circle of confusion, the depth of field is unambiguously determined.

    But in his "Applied Photographic Optics" text, Sidney Ray has an interesting discussion about departures from the pure geometric theory. He mentions the following situations where the effective DOF may differ materially from the calculated values:

    * Cases where the exit pupil shape is markedly non-circular (he mentions AE cameras with 2-bladed, odd-shaped diaphragms; the Minox 35 is one specific such case that I'm aware of)

    * The presence of uncorrected coma, which gives a marked asymmetry to the blur spot

    * Undercorrected spherical aberration, which the "circle of least confusion" does not correspond to the classically-assumed shape or luminance distribution of a circle of confusion. As Ray observes, "with undercorrected SA, the foreground is better defined than the background, which is the reverse of the usual practical requirement".

    As an extreme case, he notes the soft focus lens, where aperture-dependent, undercorrected SA is used to give a soft effect with a "core" of sharpness, but as a consequence the blur circle cannot be defined and DOF calculations are pointless.

    I'd add one point to Ray's discussion: from a purely subjective point of view, the character of a lens's bokeh - its out-of-focus rendering - can have an effect on the perception of DOF. For example, a lens that frizzes out (bright-ring, double-line, or "ni-sen" bokeh) very quickly as you move away from the plane of focus may have less apparent DOF than a lens that retains coherence of shapes farther out from the plane of focus.

    I have no idea if any of this is what your friend had in mind in the specific comparative example he cited - he may not know himself. To make sense of that specific case, someone would need to be able to tell a story about systematic differences in the ways the two lens types trade off correction of different aberrations like coma and SA.

    Nor do I know whether anyone has published "corrected" DOF tables that attempt to take into account these situations - the calculation is probably pretty nasty in such cases - or how frequently the deviation from theoretically ideal behavior is sufficient to make a practical difference. At least in principle, one can tell a story about how perceived DOF could be affected by lens design. As to whether the difference between any two particular lenses would matter to you, I'm afraid there's no alternative but to make your own tests, both because of the absence of standardized calculations to account for different aberrations and iris shapes and because of the subjective character of the perception of DOF.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    8,470

    Re: Lens Design For Maximum DOF

    Scott, I don't know where your friend got the idea that Apo Ronars aren't great at distance. The optics texts say that (a) a lens can be optimized for only one set of conjugates and (b) that dialytes -- that's what the AR is -- hold their corrections very well at all distances. If you go looking, you'll find propaganda from Rodenstock that make the point, and very firmly, that an Apo Ronar will give better image quality with a distant subject than any telephoto lens.

    In general, and let's ignore the exceptions that Oren brought up as true but not relevant to what we do or the lenses we use, depth of field depends on relative aperture (f/ number) and magnification and arbitrarily selected circle of confusion. That's it. At the same magnification and f/stop and coc all lenses give the same depth of field. There is no magic way to get more DoF, even though all of us who do a lot of closeup and photomacrography wish there were one.

    And this bit about process lenses being optimized for f/22 is hogwash, pure hogwash. Many of them reach their rated coverage at f/22, but in fact are sharper centrally wider open. Remember that the rated coverage is based on MTF at a "reasonable" resolution. I've just been through this exercise with a G-Claron and a couple of Apo Ronars. With all of 'em, f/22 is worse than f/16. Same with my Apotals, Apo Nikkors, Apo Saphirs, RF-5, GRIIs, ...

    Stopping down reduces aberrations that are controlled by aperture, and these are worst at the field's margins. There's a character who posts a lot on photo.net who insists that curvature of field is the problem and that stopping down flattens the field. Not so, say my texts, stopping down kills coma. And that's why coverage (remember, adequate contrast at desired resolution) can be improved somewhat by stopping down.

    If you have a long dialyte or any other long process lens, go shoot it and be happy.

    Cheers,

    Dan

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Tonopah, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    6,334

    Re: Lens Design For Maximum DOF

    One obscure exception just to make you nuts. Long, long ago Wollensak marketed the "Beach Multifocal". It was an ordinary tessar except in the rear cemented group, one of the cemented surfaces was intentionally fresneled. Interesting lens. It was supposed to be a cake and eat it too for portraitists who needed to shoot wide open for speed but needed as much depth as possible while filling their 8X10 plates.

  6. #6
    Scott Rosenberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    The Incredible Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    859

    Re: Lens Design For Maximum DOF

    dan, i pretty much suspected what you are saying all along - BUT, my friend has a lot more expecience with such matters. i guess another way to ask this would be if you take several different lenses of the same focal length, each representing one of the various lens designs out there (dialyte, tessar, plasmat, etc) and focus them at exactly the same distance, then stop them down to exactly the same f-stop, would the area of sharp focus extend the same distance in front of and behind the point of focus for each of the lenses? sounds like from what you're saying, they'd all be the same.
    Last edited by Scott Rosenberg; 21-Jun-2006 at 17:10.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    8,470

    Re: Lens Design For Maximum DOF

    Sort of right, Scott. For DoF, focal length doesn't matter. And as long as the lenses give good image quality in the plane of best focus, design doesn't matter for DoF either. But listen, if you will, to the idiots who claim that a pinhole has infinite DoF. To my eyes, images made with by a pinhole are fuzzy everywhere. To some, that means equally sharp everywhere. Yes, indeed, but nowhere sharp enough, too.

    I have good tessars, dialytes, heliars, plasmats, 6/4 double gausses, dagor types, also bad tessars, horrible dialytes (yep, nameless Goerz Doppel Anastigmat, NOT a Dagor), a weak heliar, plasmats that aren't much good, ... With the bad ones, DoF is kind of nebulous. That's the idea behind claims that lenses with bad coma give more DoF.

    I hope I have been too confused or confusing.

    Cheers,

    Dan

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    953

    Re: Lens Design For Maximum DOF

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Rosenberg
    dan, i pretty much suspected what you are saying all along - BUT, my friend has a lot more expecience with such matters. i guess another way to ask this would be if you take several different lenses of the same focal length, each representing one of the various lens designs out there (dialyte, tessar, plasmat, etc) and focus them at exactly the same distance, then stop them down to exactly the same f-stop, would the area of sharp focus extend the same distance in front of and behind the point of focus for each of the lenses? sounds like from what you're saying, they'd all be the same.
    not quite because each wavelength focuses at a different focal length unless the lense is designed to focus all wavelengths at the same FL. APO lenses are better than non APO lenses and hence will have a slightly greater DOF as I understand it.

    If that APO lens has elements which get the wavelengths to focus at the same FL at 1:1 magnification, then adjusting the spacing of the elements to give optimum focussing at 20:1 magnification is likely to remove the APO designation from the lens, thereby making its DOF less than a lens designed to be APO at 20:1 magnification.

    Having said that, process lenses are expensive because they use the best of everything with the most stringent manufacturing tolerances, therefore there may be some margin to adjust to being a 20:1 or whatever magnification and still be comparable with the best normal taking lenses.

    As always, without knowing all the variables and exactly what you are comparing, it is mere speculation.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Hell's Kitchen, New York
    Posts
    525

    Re: Lens Design For Maximum DOF

    Rudolf Kingslake, in Optics in Photography tells a similar story:

    "Effect of Lens Aberrations
    If the lens aberrations are great enough to produce an aberrational "star image" larger than one-thousandth of the focal length of the lens, then our simple depth-of-field theory will be uspet because the aberrations of the lens will be visible to the observer as a deterioration in the sharpness of the image. Spherical aberration, chromatic aberration, field curvature, and astigmatism all cause a longitudinal displacement of the best image from the paraxial focal plane, and thus the depth of field may be aided for objects situated closer than the focused plane and reduced for objects lying beyond the focused plane, or vice versa. For instance many lenses have a noticeable amount of undercorrected spherical or zonal aberration, which tends to form an acceptable image of objects lying considerably closer than the focused plane, but it does not in any way aid the definition of more distant objects. This has the effect of making the near-depth equal to or even greater than the far-depth, whereas according to elementary theory the near-depth must always be less than the far-depth. In some "soft-focus" lenses the residual spherical and chromatic aberration has been deliberately made so large that there is no definite focal plane at all, and objects lying at a very wide range of distances from the lens all appear equally sharp. This is the basis of many lenses and lens attachments that claim to give increased depth of field."
    Last edited by Helen Bach; 21-Jun-2006 at 17:36.

  10. #10
    Scott Rosenberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    The Incredible Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    859

    Re: Lens Design For Maximum DOF

    Quote Originally Posted by robc
    As always, without knowing all the variables and exactly what you are comparing, it is mere speculation.
    rob, the precise scenario we were debating was whether a 300mm apo-ronar that had been optimized by linos for distant work or a 300mm fuji-c (dialyte like the ronar, but already set for distant work) would provide the same DOF as a lens of another design, say the tessar design nikon 300-m. take both of them, focus them at exactly the same point, stop them down to exactly the same f-stop - would the DOF be identical, or would the dialyte, by the nature of it's design, have a shallower DOF.

    the argument was basically does lens design have any effect on DOF. i always thought variables independent of the particular design like focal length and aperture, were what determined DOF. this is why is was surprised to hear him make such a claim.
    Last edited by Scott Rosenberg; 21-Jun-2006 at 17:59.

Similar Threads

  1. Portrait perspective: Quiz and two questions
    By Jerry Fusselman in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: 5-Jun-2006, 17:57
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 14-Apr-2006, 12:19
  3. Large format lens
    By Ho Pei Jiun in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 6-Jan-2005, 08:44
  4. Calculating DOF: from lens or film plane?
    By Peter Shier in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 4-Feb-2001, 19:07
  5. Good book on lens design for photographers
    By Edie in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 25-Aug-1999, 18:46

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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