For next time, I really want both the outside and the cockpit in focus. I tried balancing them both, but my auto focus only wanted one or the other, and I didn't wanna risk it with manual, as this is one of those once in a lifetime chances. I decided to get the outside in focus. It didn't turn out bad, but it could be better.
This is mainly directed at those photographers who have experience with this type of shot, but any advice would be appreciated. How can I get everything in focus? Right now I'm shooting with a Cannon EOS Rebel 2000.
Staffan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (10 years 4 months 1 hour ago) and read 3042 times:
I'd say it's impossible to get both the interior and the runway in front perfectly focused. The ground is quite distant and the cockpit panels are simply too close to be able to get a dof deep enough to get the both in. You can close the aperture down a bit, but approaches can be rather bumpy and the shutterspeed might not be enough. Using a short lens will also help.
Jan Mogren From Sweden, joined Dec 2000, 2043 posts, RR: 52 Reply 6, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2977 times:
The only catch, if any, is that with a 28mm at say f11 or f16 you will as you know have a lot of dof beyond the point of focus but not so much in front of it. Therefore focusing on the cockpit should render the runway fairly sharp as well.
If the outside scene is of tremendous value (like a Caravelle holding short or something.. ) then of course I would focus on that!
The YS-11 shot is a slide. I haven't uploaded any digital cockpitshots yet.
AeroPresentation - Airline DVD's filmed in High Definition
Photopilot From Cuba, joined Jul 2002, 2439 posts, RR: 20 Reply 7, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2988 times:
Wow.... Photography 101 but here goes.
First off you need to set the camera to the Hyperfocal distance. Oh my god.... what is that you might ask. Well here goes.
You MUST use manual focus to do this.
First, focus on the closest thing you want in focus. This would be the instrument panel or pedestal quadrant. Note exactly where this distance falls on your focus ring.
Second. Decide what aperature you want to use. Lets say f:8 for example.
Look by your aperature ring / centre focus mark and you will see the markings that denote what your depth of field is at any given aperature. Set your closest focus distance at one of the f:8 markings. Look to see where the infinity mark on the focus ring is. It must be inside the other f:8 mark. What you need to do is to find the aperature that keeps the infinity mark and your close focus distance within the depth of field. If you can't fit both distances in the depth of field, then you must stop down the lens more. But this method means that you will not have to stop down MORE than is necessary. You can know exactly what you need to do. No guessing required.
Note that you are not actuallly focusing at either infinity or the close focus mark. You are focusing at what is called the hyperfocal distance, which is the point that allows both your focus distances to be within the depth of field. For those technically inclined, you will note that approximately 1/3 of the distance is towards the infinity point, and 2/3 of the distance is towards the close focus point. It is not in the middle as you might have suspected. Just the way optics work.
Hope this makes sense in my explanation, but trust me it does work. Now all that is left to do is to balance the inside exposure to the outside exposure.
Oh, and those lovely brochure type photos that you want to try to emulate. Well, we cheat. On the ground photos we cover the OUTSIDE of the aircraft windows with a neutral density film to bring down the outside exposure to match the inside cockpit exposure. Or if we really need to, we cover the outside with black felt (no reflections) then shoot the interior, then Photoshop in the outside details we want. Tricks of the trade.
But it can be done legitimately, but it is more difficult and takes more time, which unfortunately is money.
Jan Mogren From Sweden, joined Dec 2000, 2043 posts, RR: 52 Reply 8, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2977 times:
That's the classic way, but lots of modern lenses have no dof scale.
And dof is actually 2/3 beyond point of focus and 1/3 between camera and focus point. Maybe I misread your text but it seemed to me you got it backwards.
AeroPresentation - Airline DVD's filmed in High Definition
Staffan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2983 times:
After reading Steve's post I took out my old pentax 50mm lens that has a dof scale and thought I'd try it out.
The infinity mark is at the very left of the focus ring, so if I got you right I focused on something that happened to be 8 feet away, then closed the aperture down to f/16, turned the focus ring so that 8 feet is on the right hand f/16 mark on the dof scale, then the inifinity mark is just inside the left hand f/16 mark. The focus point now is just over 15 feet. The focus distance scale goes to 30 ft before infinity. Is this correct or am I all wrong?
Staffan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2960 times:
Great thanks! Now another question regarding my Minolta 28-85. Beside the focusing scale (which has infinity to the right), there is a line that points on the focusing distance, however to the right of the line there are lines for 85, 50, and 28 (from left to right). Do these correspond to the hyperfocal distance, for example by setting the infinity mark just to the left of 28, I get 12,5 feet on the focus scale. If this is correct, what aperture does it correspond to?
Photopilot From Cuba, joined Jul 2002, 2439 posts, RR: 20 Reply 12, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2956 times:
Yes Jan you are correct in the 1/3 and 2/3. It's been so long since I had to think it all through and explain it. I just do it automatically without thinking about it. Thanks for paying attention and correcting me.
And Staffan you are indeed doing it correctly. With a Pentax at that.
I simply can't believe that some "modern" lenses no longer have depth-of-field markings on them. While technology may be making great strides forward, I sometimes wonder if we leave knowledge and technique behind. Is point and shoot now the norm and we should expect no better. Seems a shame. Unsharp Mask cannot fix the detail that is not there to start with. It just makes it look that way. Oh well.
So call me a classic type of guy..... just don't call me classy.
Maybe some day when all the wunder-kids brought up on electronic cameras are stuck, then the market for us relics from a classic past will have value again.
Photopilot From Cuba, joined Jul 2002, 2439 posts, RR: 20 Reply 13, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2951 times:
Without seeing the lens I don't know for sure, but remember that with zoom lenses the wider it is set, the greater the depth-of-field. So it sounds like there is some sort of indicator to show this increase in depth dependent on focal length selected.
Staffan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2938 times:
There is no aperture ring, all the settings are on the LCD or in the viewfinder. However, I tried setting the infinity mark just over the red "28" marking, the focusing point now was just over 10 feet. I then found an online dof calculator here and entered 28 mm and f/8 and it gives me 10,71 feet. Calculated the same for 35 mm, f/8 and it corresponded to what the lens showed.
Haven't got a manual for the lens, so I can't check if it's correct, will browse the web to see if I can find any info.
NonRevKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (10 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2880 times:
I really appreciate all the advice from some of you. I know how to operate a manual camera. I'm not trying to "emulate" anything. I just take photos for myself. So save the extra unnecessary social commentary.
I took about a half hour tooling around with my Cannon, but I don't think it has the DOF meter unfortunately. I have a fixed 28mm for my Minolta X-700 which does however, and I'll try the technique next time!