Hyperfocal: not all it's cracked up to be?

[Darin Cozine]

I understand circles of confusion, diffraction, and depth-of-field/focus.
But if you use the hyperfocal distance for the optimal aperture of a lens (I think Schneider used f22), wont distant objects be >slightly< less-sharp than if you focussed on them normally?

[CP Goerz]

Yes.

CP Goerz

[Glenn Kroeger]

Yes, they will be at the very limit of what you consider acceptable, as expressed by your chosen COC.

One approach is to choose an aperture that balances diffraction and DOF. Here is one reference,


http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/focus.htm (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/focus.htm)

but you should really get the article from the March-April 1986 issue of Phototechniques.

Another approach, a bit cruder, is to use twice the hyperfocal distance with corresponding loss on the near end

[Bruce Watson]

Yes.

There's a difference between sharp focus and acceptable focus. In this case, you define acceptable focus by choosing your COC size.

[Alan Davenport]

Yes, objects at infinity will seem to be in focus on a print because their CoC on the film will be small enough to fall within the depth of field. In fact, that is a way to define the hyperfocal distance; it's the focusing distance at which, objects at infinity will be at the limit of the acceptable circle of confusion.

Since you posted this in the large format forum, I assume you are using a camera that has at least some movements? Although it's possible to calculate the hyperfocal point for a tilted lens, it is more complex than for an untilted lens, and it hardly seems worth it when you have the groundglass right there to see.

OTOH, if you are using a press camera and want to shoot handheld, live action, ala 1940's news fotogs, then hyperfocal focusing is the way to go: f/8 and be there!

[Paul Fitzgerald]

Hi there,

Yes and NO. There are 2 hyper-focal distances: the formula derived distance supplied by the manufacturer OR the hyper focal point for the scene YOU are shooting.

Critically focus on the nearest point you want in focus and mark it then focus on the farthest point you want and mark that. Now set the focus exactly between these marks, that is the hyper focal point for that scene. Now stop down until the near point is as sharp as you want, the far point will also be as sharp. This will allow you to use the widest aperture that will handle the scene which would be the sharpest and fastest. This is also a quick way to see if your tilts and swings are optimal, the spread with be smallest when optimal.

Most, if not ALL, wide-angle design lenses are engineered to be used at the hyper-focal distance to begin with, not inf. It is a bit of a fudge factor, the extra extention gives a bigger image circle and helps a bit with light fall-off in the corners

When in doubt, CHECK THE GROUND GLASS.

Happy holidays.

[David A. Goldfarb]

Yes, but you can experiment with the way you use the tables/calculations/scales to meet your own demands.

I find that the hyperfocal distance for two stops wider than the shooting aperture works for me. So if I'm shooting at f:22 and I want to use the hyperfocal distance, I'll focus at the hyperfocal distance for f:11, and if that's not enough, I'll stop down to f:32 and focus at the hyperfocal distance for f:16, etc.

If you're calculating it, you could do the same thing by plugging in a smaller value than the standard value for acceptable CoC.

[John Hennessy]

It is true what everyone has said that using H as a focus point puts the far end of acceptable focus on the ragged but it ALSO puts the near end of acceptable focus on an equally ragged edge and usually more conspicuously so.

[Leonard Evens]

John,

If it is ragged, it means you are using the wrong circle of confusion to calculate the hyperfocal distance. Choose a smaller value for that, and everything should look fine.