.png "live word cloud generator")
No lens can have everything in sharp focus. I think theres a slight misunderstanding. this is also a problem for exposure bracketing / HDR. The problem with stacking photos in landscapes is that things move - trees, branches, animals, people, water, clouds. Focus stacking, what you mentioned in OP, is also a good idea, but is usually mainly used for macro work.
Those "pro landscape photos" that you see? They were worked on for quite some time, with different sharpening techniques and programs to get the photos to look so good, to make the look better than real life.
And then also post process the photo, adding sharpness if you need to.
#Live word cloud generator free#
(unfortunately, focus peaking is kind of useless with UWA lenses, but it helps me a lot with infinity focus with my 58mm f2.0 lens) Feel free to take more than one photo with different focus. use a nice tripod, lens hood, polarizer (but not on ultra-wides), 2 sec timer and remote release, focus your lens manually, use DoF preview, use focus peaking and any other tool you need to get the photo you want. I think some photographers do this, they take photos and then mark their personal "hyperfocal" for a certain aperture on the lens focus ring. Zone focusing is just not as reliable as it used to be - unless you figure out your own distances per aperture, for your specific camera and lens. Even things like handshake blur now pose a bigger problem. This means that lenses need to be sharper than ever, but it also means that "critical focus" is becoming more difficult. Finally, modern cameras have a very high pixel density/resolution. On modern crop sensor cameras, people prefer to stay under f14, around f8 if possible. Everything will be "in focus", but it will also be fuzzy. Then there is the problem of diffraction - you can go to f22 on your lens, but the image quality will suffer. Some people use one stop lower aperture when using zone focusing with crop sensor cameras (so Av mode at f8, but you zone focus as if you have f5.6). Film had different properties from modern digital sensors, and what is "acceptably sharp" is also debatable. Secondly, hyperfocal (and zone focusing itself) was created back in the film days, to give you "acceptably sharp" photos. First of all, most lenses don't have DoF scales anymore and some have miscalibrated distance scales. Does that log in front of you have to be in focus, or the mountains at the horizon? Will the log be distracting if its out of focus? Will people notice if the mountains are not perfectly sharp? Will the atmospheric interference prevent perfectly sharp photos of those mountains anyway?Īlso, keep in mind that hyperfocal might no longer be useful. It also depends on the scene, what you want to achieve. If you use a 100mm for landscape, then you will be focusing around infinity anyway. A good 14mm lens will have a large DoF, so you waste it by focusing on inf. Depends on what you want to achieve and what lens you have.
0 kommentar(er)
