Rule of thumb; prints become shaper when viewed from further away.
Lenses don't have circles of confusion. People have circles of confusion. The C-O-C is a personal choice -- but most people just choose to ignore it.
It's basically what you accept as in focus or not in focus. That's why it's related to depth-of-field.
Just as you choose the depth-of-field, by selecting the f-stop, you can choose a circle-of-confusion -- what you accept as "in focus" at any f-stop. At a given f-stop, as YOUR PERSONALLY CHOSEN C-O-C increases the D-O-F will increase -- and vice-versa. On the other hand, a narrow D-O-F means a smaller C-O-C -- there's less in focus.
DOFMASTER lets you create your own D-O-F scales for each of your lenses -- BUT you have to tell it what C-O-C you want to use in order for it to compute the D-O-F of each lens at each f-stop. It has a default setting, of course, but it's completely up to you to decide how much you consider to be in focus. The smaller you set the C-O-C, the narrower the D-O-F will be -- so less will be in focus. It's all a matter of preference.
Here's the link:
https://www.dofmaster.com/custom.html
Flickr Home Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/albums
If you're asking about the lenses' depth-of-field scales, the diameter in the circle of confusion used in calculating the scales is an unpublished arbitrary number, usually larger than a picky photographer would select.
In other words, if you have a question about Nikon's practice, ask Nikon.
Perceived sharpness is a combination of resolution and contrast. Without one there is no other.
In other words, don't worry about it. Do the best you can and it's fine. Many a great photograph created with less than optimum sharpness.
The circle of confusion began once people dove into it. Try to find a way out.
Yes indeed...when a previously finely focussed point becomes visibly softer and visibly "enlarged," we see this as "confusion," and this in increasing increments as this "circle" gets larger.
I guess where this terminology fails for me is in the use of the word "circle."
True a circle can be used to define the outer visible "diameter" of an AREA of "visible confusion," but there is no actual visible circle, excepting perhaps for certain optics like mirror-based lenses, or in certain instances where certain types of light sources (in concert with optics) can begin to acquire a circular affect as they become less focussed in an image.
But I cannot right now think of another term which so handily refers to this optical principle. ("area of confusion,?" "zone of unsharpness,?"). Hmmm...maybe when the morning coffee kicks in I'll have an epiphany!
Flickr Home Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/albums
Exactly. Whether the DOF scale is on a Nikon, Minolta, or Yashica/Tomioka lens, it's just the manufacturer's personal decision. If you want less "blur", just use the next-smaller-f-number scale. For example, after focusing, instead of using the scale for f8, use the scale for f5.6 -- but keep the aperture at f8.
Bookmarks