I have just read David Notons latest posting on his website (www.davidnoton.com). It has put me in a right state, I can tell you.
He has a chat about focusing and in particular, using the hyperfocal distance.
Basically, and simply put, if you focus your lens a certain distance away from you at a given aperture and focal lenght then everything from half that distance from you to infinity will be in sharp focus - very handy for landscapers.
It all gets a bit tricky as you need to know the hyperfocal distance for your lens at a given focal length and aperture to use it - meaning you need a wad of tables with all the info on or, as used to be the case on prime lenses, a hyperfocal scale on the lens itself. Modern zoom lenses don't have these scales, nor do Canon primes (although I think Nikon primes stoll do).
Now, as a basic rule of thumb, I set my landscape lens to f16 for good depth of field and focus a third of the way into the scene and this roughly equates to the hyperfocal distance. However, I know that my wide angle lens is actually sharper at f11 than f16, but I use f16 just to give me a greater margin for error. If I could tell for certain where the hyperfocal distance was at f11 easily in the field, I could get perfect depth of field and greater sharpness by using f11. (I shy away from f22 because the lens gets even softer at that end of the aperture scale.
Now, Mr. Noton, knows a lot more about the hyperfocal distance of his lenses than I do and in the image he was talking about he knew it for the focal length (28mm from memory) at f11 on his lens and it met his needs - it kept a foreground fallen tree trunk in sharp focus right up to infinity (the mountains in Canada he was shooting. So he got the nest of both worlds - perfect depth of field and the extra sharpness of using f11 over f16.
Then came the bombshell (you wondered when I was going to get to it, didn't you?).
He says he zoomed in to the scene to a branch on the tree trunk at the hyperfocal distance (just under two meters from him) and manually focused on it...... then...... wait for it........ zoomed back out to frame the shot without touching the focus wheel and took the shot.
Freeze. No body move.
He zoomed in and focused, then zoomed out and didn't re-focus - he just took the shot.
This is something I have never heard of before... and trust me I have read thousands of magazine articles, dozens of books and heaps of blogs by superb photographers and no one has even hinted at this technique.
Here I am, stuck indoors working and how am I supposed to concentrate?
So does anyone know, does this work? Am I the only photographer who doesn't know about it? Is it such a basic thing to all of you out there that writers don't even bother to mention it when writing about technique? Is everyone laughing at me as I stand behnd my tripod as they use this technique and giggle away because I am the only one on the planet who doesn't know about it?
I have always assumed that if you focus, then adjust the framing of the shot by zooming in or out that you have to then re-focus? I have read Davids words carefully and he certainly seems to be saying this isn't the case. That if you zoom in on an object at the hyperfocal distance from the camera at your aperture so you can see it large in your zoom lens and focus on it carefully, you can then zoom out to frame the shot as you want it and take it without re-focusing and the focus will be correct. Much the same as someone with live view on a camera can zoom in on their rear screen to check focus - buut in this case actually zooming the lens.
I await any views/intelligence/information you have on the subject because if it is right, I need to start doing it right now!
Okay, so where did I put those hyperfocal distance tables.....