It could start by defining the word, but as I want to be direct, clear and concise, say it is without going into details: A distance that you have to focus. ¿Simple Truth?.
Now, How do I know how far is this? Easy, there are plenty of tables on the Internet with the same or similar values. A priori, anything works for me.
That distance is the result of combining two variables: focal length and aperture, namely, when varying one of these variables to the hyperfocal distance you have to focus varies.
Suppose we have a Nikon d90. If we consult the table below you can see, you will see that for a f5.6 aperture and a focal length of 18mm, hyperfocal distance is 2.86 m we get
And what does that mean? So to say that if your camera focuses on one object at 2.86m away, have focused from half the distance to infinity. We divide, ¿verdad? Half of 2.86 m is 1.43 m. Because you know they have approached from 1.43 m to infinity.
Valley, great. And why do it for me this? For night photography is essential in. Imagine you go out one night in low light and want to make a landscape photo. A priori thinking of closing the aperture to f8, f11 or more to have much depth of field and have everything well clear. Also want to shoot at low ISO to obtain traces of stars….
Now, Have you thought about how long to display in a night without light, with apertures and low ISO to get your desired picture? Well, maybe you go to an hour and have no more than a dark, with some light and loud.
However, You can take pictures of landscapes at maximum aperture f2.8 or f4 as for instance and have all crisp if desired.
If we consult the table above you'll see that f4 and 12mm focal length is the hyperfocal distance of 1.81 m. Well, repeat the above operation. If you focus at this distance, have in focus from just under a meter, 0,90m (half the hyperfocal) to infinity.
Result: I'll have a night photography landscape yet it perfectly clear in a reasonable exposure time shooting at f2.8 or f4 large openings as I said before, because if I make my landscape f16, probably end up keeping your camera with the sun. Shame, ¿verdad?
Here is an example of a nocturnal landscape f2.8. As you can see everything is sharp and the exposure time was reasonable. (7-8 minutes)
Eye, is important to know that each camera, due to the size of its sensor and the circle of confusion (I now want to know what those things) have their own distance.
Valley, Nikon have not and how it mine? Well look, below you can download your hyperfocal table for the most used and also see a link to a website where you can get all you want hyperfocal.
The following links will take you to download the main pack hyperfocal in size you can print directly to your table and save.
From now you just have to practice and enjoy.
Design your own table of hyperfocal and Dofmaster
Download the table for full-format cameras: Nikon D3x, D3s, D3, D700, Canon EOS 5D MARK II, Canon EOS 1DS MARK III, Sony A-850,A-900 etc.
Download the table for Nikon: Nikon D40, D40X,D50, D70, D70s,d80, d90, d300, D300S,d500, d3000, D3100, d5000, D7000
Download the table for Canon: EOS 1000, EOS 450D, EOS 500D, EOS 550, EOS 40D,etc.
Download the table to Sony: A-450, A-500, A-560, A-580, A-500L, etc.
Download the table for Olympus: E-5, E-3, E-20, E-620, E-529, E-450
Then, Should we focus –a subject with a flashlight to set the manual focus– the hyperfocal distance or half? I mean: if the table gives the hyperfocal is 2,86 (as in the example), we have to put the subject to measure 2,86 or focus on 1,43 will suffice?
We must focus at the hyperfocal distance, in this case, to 2.86 m and will have in focus from the half of it to infinity. You do it in autofocus and once the camera focus confirmation gives you spend a manual.
If we focus to 1.43 m and would not have everything in focus. Remember, focuses on the hyper and have sharp from half that distance to infinity.
Hello Mario, thank you very much for your explanation. In this case you put the focus at 1.43 m what would happen, what the depth of field, that vary the sharpness of our photo?
Hello Alberto, if using a Nikon D90 at f5.6 and 18mm focal length focuses 1.43 m would have a focus distance of only 1.87 m from 0.96 m to go from the camera up to 2.83 m. For this reason, is best to stick to the table for maximum depth of field.
If you still are interested in focusing at that distance and have the whole scene in focus you have two options:
1.- Close more diaphragm so that the exposure is too much time if you're on a night photography or
2. Use a double or triple approach.
Regards.
First my congratulations, for your work in general.
I have a Nikon D 700, and I like to have the table of hyperfocal, to
the 70-200.
Thanks and best regards
Hello Baltasar. In this focal range is not usually used the hyperfocal because you have to approach hundreds of meters and it correctly is not easy. That's why we can not find it here.
Anyway, you can design your own table to decide on the focal dofmaster.com
If you are using an Apple device with this application proof:
http://www.fotografonocturno.com/articulos/hiperfocal
Regards.
THANK YOU
Hey mario I've been trying to make a table dofmaster.com for my canon 7D 15-85 but I do not hear anything or is that what I'm doing wrong….is that as you explain what it does no…a greeting and I love your photographs….
Hello Mario, Here is one that is very stubborn…. comments:
We turn to manual, for example to measure the light or to ????
Apologies, I meant this comment
We must focus at the hyperfocal distance, in this case, to 2.86 m and will have in focus from the half of it to infinity. You do it in autofocus and once the camera focus confirmation gives you spend a manual.
Exactly Fermín. His hand goes to when you start the final shot photography and autofocus not try to refocus and I would not get by the absence of light.
Congratulations on your website. Interesting your articles / comments excellent your pictures.
Do you know where to download an application for the Hyperfocal distance calculation system for mobile symbian?
A greeting
Paco Test here:
http://www.thephoneclub.net/aplicaciones-5-edicion/46159-dof-calculator-calcula-distancia-hiperfocal.html
Regards
Thanks, Mario.
In principle, the link works. Touch download and test
A greeting
Hello Mario,
first, thanks for your tutorials and returns articles, I'm learning a lot from them, but I still have more…
My question is to know how to calculate the distance. I know it's silly… but as to whether we are focusing 2.86 moa 2.50moa 3 m… is done “eye”?
thanks and lose if it is a very simple question
salvation
If you want precision, to worsen can take a subway and try at home to see what works.
Once you lame mechanics focused on timely eye distance and easy and accurate.
Cristina seems contrary to one of the most important questions that could be made, I estimated such steps but the aorte with yours with mario pregunat and the tutorials are great.
Mario, I am overwhelmed by your generosity.
Thank you very much for your patience and good work.
As you can see that the group education. Your kids must be thrilled.
Thank you Ruben. I'm glad that will be useful.
Thanks Mario!! prove
Hello Mario, I have a problem when applying the hyperfocal. I have a D3100 with a Tamron 17-50 2.8, using a 17mm focal length f / 3.2 for example, assume that I have to hyperfocal 4,57 meters. Saco meter, I put the mark on the sensor and send my friend at that distance. I lit the lantern single meter and focus,step manual focus and shot the photo.. Result: Completely out of focus picture, throw us doing several tests even in tokina 12-24 and all out of focus'. Which may be due? Thanks and best regards.
According to accounts you do everything correctly. Try this test day and also to focus a little beyond the hyperfocal for, at least, ensure infinity in focus.
Another thing to consider is that when it approaches and passes the autofocus to manual, shoot before you turn 1 2mm or less to one side or the other of which was the manual focus ring (if any in order to use) disparate. Perhaps they will find the exact point of focus.
Please note that Internet host of circulating tables, web, apps, etc. hyperfocal distances that give you different so you have to find the exact point of focus on your goal for the parameters you choose.
Do not give up and rock that you'll hit it soon.
Regards.
Thanks Mario. Seguiré ya take the proband 2.8 is an advantage. I'll tell you if I can get the hang point.
Regards
Hello Mario, know that in a class that you gave and saw the internet, in part explained that one could focus on an object and shoot and then could move the focus to infinity, if you can do that is very difficult or? say this because I try to do it to 30 seconds in one night and the stars came out I moved, as true a picture that showed hehe.
The picture showed an exposure of 16m was turning the focus ring every two minutes. Before you must have focus to make sure you have infinity in focus but the eye, That does not mean putting the brand manual focus ring anywhere in the infinity symbol as you go to get.
Know where this place and you can use the hyperfocal explained in this article.
The photograph showed the last of this gallery:
http://www.fotografonocturno.com/galeria?album=1&gallery=28
Regards.
I'm from the south also existe.felicitaciones and thanks that transmits and enseñas.Llevo 40 years shooting photos for a living and thanks to you I managed to understand that blessed country hiperfoca q l.Desde Uruguay Nano Serrat worships a big hug and back gracias.Te sigo.Visca Barza
Well I'm glad I had the fault that you understand.
The hyperfocal is a concept that, a rule, difficult to understand and assimilate, but once it is done, very practical.
Thank you very much Mario for tables and for links!
some time I have been following your work and learn with all materials that offer.
They are all very good and the picture show night as the result of hard work and sleepless nights, but really worth!
Thank you very much again!
Glad Vladimir. As has been said to work.
Regards.
Hello Mario!, e would like to know how is the technique of double or triple approach? Thank you very much.
As is to focus on an object near the camera and is not in the clear of the hyperfocal (although it could be but would not make sense) and illuminate. Then turn the manual focus ring forward where it would be another part of the picture in focus and lights up again and finally the party, again to turn the manual focus ring and leave the exhibition to continue the time to have your correct histogram.
This is used when individuals want to be very very close to the camera perfectly focused while you have infinity in focus.
It is a very interesting exercise to determine the hyperfocal, Minimum focusing distance of your lens and light exercise in.
Greetings and currar.
Thank you very much Mario, I really learned a lot about you, finally more or less how the process, based on that I wanted to ask if they have at least one specific exposure time?, wonder why, because one night attempt this process without having much idea, but the decision was 30 sec with ISO 3200 and as the stars were moved. Now seeing what you wrote, I get the impression that I should take a picture with a 10 my. or something to that way, the longer dark as to move the focus ring moves are not the stars.
Hello Javier:
I think what you're confused.
If the stars and 30s perceive as strokes, 10m the stroke will be much larger.
If you move the manual focus ring Durate not get the exposure that the star appears static but get the view as images in this album:
http://www.fotografonocturno.com/galeria?album=1&gallery=28
Find out how long to take the stars exhibit static, see this link:
http://www.fotografonocturno.com/articulos/fotografiar-estrellas
Greetings and work.
Mario is, I knew that I have to divide 500 between millimeters to be used at that time and that will give me maximum exposure time for stars I do not blur, but the decision was 30 s and early approaches to the subject, you pass the flashlight and then moved the focus ring to infinity and so the stars are as blurred mmm, as a clear halo around but the biggest stars, in small not noticeable. Is what I did wrong?, there was trying to do the technique of dual approach. Well I would play again to try to see that such.
Thanks Mario.
What happens is that ISO 3200 the sensor will immediately collect the stars and for that I appear blurry, because from the first second of exposure were already covered by your camera. The operation you have to make a low ISO and long exposure to light the foreground when, not yet gathered the stars in your camera.
Another thing that you could fail is when you say “then put it to infinity”. The infinity symbol is great on your goal and being the focus mark the beginning of the symbol or the end you may find that the photo is in focus or not. For this reason, before passing the ring to infinity, make a test with your hyperfocal focusing autofocus for the parameters you use. See where the mark is then to focus the foreground and illuminate, Turning the ring where the test was.
Regards.
Hello Mario. It seems incredible that I ask you this, but….with my D700, and 14mm, f2, 8, enfoco a 2.31m. Well, as (bip, bip) enfoco focus to 2.31mcarry one meter, I measure and focus? Is it something that the distance guidance?. I do not know. As I am always at your disposal.
You can use a meter if. Once you know where the brand is focusing on your goal and do not need more.
To ensure forever if you see that 2.31 m is not the result you expected try to focus a little further.
This can help a laser, flashlight or even leave the phone on to this distance.
Regards.
Hello Mario ! Thanks for sharing your knowledge on the subject,I have done much all the questions and answers on the subject,Best regards.
Hello Mario!
aaaah the hyperfocal having the data in a note the estimate at a glance (I mean without meters) jejeje, I hope to do many more good photos, Thanks Mario and much success in all your work!
Here I put one of the first night shots I've done jejeje thanks to all that I learned from you: http://www.flickr.com/photos/46066480@N03/5826810303/ seize the day she was gone and electricity moonlight, Flashlight in hand and the help of my girlfriend made the decision
Not bad, Javier!
Now try to do longer exposures in total absence of light.
Regards.
Hello Mario. Since I've known your web videos and I parendido much about night photography.
Usually I use a Nikon 16-35 f / 4 but I have many difficulties to find because the window hyperfocal distances from infinity 0.5 no mark. Is there a trick?
A priori focus with autofocus to hyperfocal you get when you look up and do not listen to the figures of the manual focus ring because the numbers confuse you but if you focus where you have everything in focus because.
Regards.
Hello, Mario
incordiarte back to a silly question, but following your example, if the hyperfocal is 2,86 my focus to 3 can 3,5 m, which would be the result? The image would focus to infinity if the distance was reduced from this point to focus the camera?
Something else: to decide the frame by moving the zoom until you see what is included and what is not in the picture, that the goal can be opened at a point difficult to define, for example between 18 and 24 mm and can not know exactly where we are… In these cases I imagine you have to do a “I should be more or less by 20 mm”.
What I know is how they affect the hyperfocal these approaches that I have raised in the two cases. If the hyperfocal debrería be 2,86 m… is mathematical? which convey that the more I move away from the more accuracy will affect the final desefoque. But so is to measure exactly 2,86 m must go crazy before each photo!
Thanks in advance
Regarding your first question yourself have said the right answer.
Regarding when the exact focal know you can not make a shot and see the camera exif. So you know that you used and use the focal correct hyperfocal.
Regards.
as always, grateful for your attention
Mario, good afternoon, first of all thank you for sharing your experiences and knowledge with us all. To me this honor and how your person. You wont my doubt, imagine that we are a full moon in the countryside and find a balanced histogram 1600 iso/30 the. To reduce noise in our decision and get more exposure we do the framing of these values 200 Big / 240 s going to get the same histogram ok? . So far so good but to get a expocion of such 420seg iso with the same decision we did not burn??? We have to pull No. f to close the diaphragm??? Here I get lost. Well I hope to get me out of a thousand questions and as always thanks for everything Mario
The calculation is perfect but if you include the moon in the frame you will get a splotches of white light.
You have to expose without the moon. If you want to include in the frame, then the expo to be much shorter and I suggest you to crash and closure diaphragm and almost certainly avoid unwanted flares.
Another thing is take a photo of the moon. There is not calculated but the expo is a measurement point to it and have the moon in detail and the rest completely black. The expo will be less than one second.
In landscape photography, ALWAYS burning moon.
Regards.
Mario, sorry but I have not understood my question. Surely I did not get the good silver. You wont my doubt, imagine you are in the field and find a balanced histogram 1600 iso/30 the. To reduce noise in our decision and get more exposure we do the framing of these values 200 Big / 240 s going to get the same histogram ok? . So far so good but to get a expocion of such 420seg iso with the same decision we did not burn??? We have to pull No. f to close the diaphragm??? Here I get lost. Well I hope to get me out of a thousand questions and as always thanks for everything Mario
Clear. According to the law of reciprocity would get twice the light and burst histogram unless, as you say, close the aperture a full step more to expose the double.
The other answer is that it was for another user.
Sorry my mistake.
Regards.
Thanks Mario, this simple concept of yours hyperfocal. Truly extraordinary, I've tried it and it's great, I'm hallucinating. But to see if I understand. a 18 mm. with f4, focusing on automatic and 4.5 m I get a speed of 60. To put it in manual focus 4,5 I ignore my speed to 125 and f4. And I get a sharp bestial depth of field from 2 meters to infinity.
My question is I have done well by focusing on automatic and then manual? or was the result of chance? and why this result hyperfocal?. Thanks.
Hello Francisco.
The key is to focus on your hyperfocal autofocus, then switch to manual focus and shoot.
Have in focus from half the hyperfocal, namely, where to focus, to infnito.
If you do the day in broad daylight, not necessary as you will pass a manual shutter speed that allows you to do freehand. However, night and long exposure, if you use a tripod and, therefore pass to manual when you go to shoot.
Regards.
Hello Mario,say they have not said how much we help and advise,you as the guru of photography nocturna.Bueno happened to my silly question,to focus once I can not reframe HF? thanks and greetings from Alicante.
Sure you can reframe. Have in focus from half the hyperfocal to infinity frames to where frames.
Regards.
Hello Mario, I would like to ask you a question related to the double / triple focus and hyperfocal. In particular I wonder if it would have the same effect as a double or triple approach, the foreground focus manually (to where there is no hyperfocal) and go straight to the hyperfocal manually (I guess through a brand you can do on the target or eye) and get the same results (I mean all clear). Thanks.
Exactly Manuel, so. The complication of double-pronged approach is more in the lighting of the foreground or background that got to have the entire scene in focus.
Regards.
Thanks Mario, I had not thought from the standpoint of lighting only the sharpness, thanks again and best regards.
Hello Mario, first thanks for your great help we provide these.
I wanted to ask you a question that surely is what most junior, but that to me is a mess
Discusses how to calculate the hyperfocal distance, because I'm confused, a ver!, I explain, on my phone or the web “Dofmaster”, for example, I calculate the hyperfocal distance of my f/2.2 35mm lens, so far so good, but on the web and in the application makes me “Subjet distance” in which I can put any value I (that is what confuses me). What value should I put here? Does the distance of the object to focus, or is this value?. I'd be very grateful, if you could explain a little better, how to calculate or rather, use, this magnificent tool online, to which I am not getting all the benefits that can be, This confuses me as I explain.
As I said earlier, is a rookie question, but sure once I start practicing understand butt and I'll tell you. Thanks in advance colleague. I wish you all the best in this life to have this tremendous heart full of goodness.
Subjetct Distance refers to the distance that you put the subject you want to do or if it is clear. For example some daisies in the foreground are 3m from your camera. If this box on your app or web, put a higher value than the hyperfocal, you will see that nothing happens or whatever variation is minimal.
However, if you put a lower value than your hyperfocal, results that offers the program and change as you get out of range and not have to focus to infinity although the foreground. The depth of field is very small then.
It looks messy but it is significant that data… Think it comes to where you want to photograph and is important in your photo being close to you and not at infinity.
Regards.
Hello Mario, I just read me all the questions and I really was amazed at the ability and patience you have to answer each question. I'm new to night photography and you will go, also, sending my doubts or my successes. Greetings from Bolivia. Ah! I would like some advice for how I can deal with this first experiment. Thanks in advance.
Thanks Jorge.
You can start by calculating exposure.
Regards.
Many thanks for all the information you have provided me, and I am learning much the way facilitais… a big abrazote Peace
Thanks Maria Paz. Inspire and learning.
Regards.
Hello Mario. Beforehand, thank you very much for your work and effort to resolve all the questions you pose.
I do not understand is why not make the targets more precise focus rings, I mean if the rings do approach a larger scale and more numbers would be easier to correct distance enforcar. Nor do the 0 10cm to infinity falls, because it is impossible, but some lenses denotes 0,2 0,3 0,4m and then finally infinite 1m. I think the price they are many lenses, Curran could it a little more would not?
I agree with you friend Ibai.
In fact, makes targets of 10 years old, for instance, if there was a hyperfocal scale and focus on them did not involve any complications. Today, with the current objectives, it is not difficult if you know how, but I agree with you that this scale can not hurt.
Thanks for stopping.
Regards.
Mario, I have a Nikon D90 and a Signa 10-20. The problem is that this kid has the only footage scale to 1 mt and then goes to infinity. If I want to focus at 10mm and f4 I have no scale on the lens. I do? Thanks for your answer. Regards.
OR IF not make the distance scale that comes with the objective. Focuses on the hyperfocal and stay the focus mark in manual ring wherever.
Regards.
Fantastic, but as I'm focusing on how far. I say, if 10 mm and I have to focus at f4 1,25 mm. How is that I am at that distance? Again thank you very much for your answer.