Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="blackstar" data-source="post: 804929" data-attributes="member: 47518">In response/appreciation to Paliswe's post, give my thoughts on 2c:First, my bad if wrong I think for z cameras' settings of focus shifting, &quot;focus step width&quot; is related to the &quot;depth of field&quot; of the system. And the &quot;DoF&quot; is set by focal length, aperture, and subject distance. The &quot;step width&quot; is then set to be a fraction of the &quot;DoF&quot; (e.g., step width=4= 4x1/10xDoF=4/10 DoF, the number &quot;10&quot; is just my guess because it is the max number you can set for step width)Second, I think the number of steps is the number of shots. The complicated thing here is, say, the first shot is taken at the subject distance determined by the photographer (the nearest point), and then the camera moves FP to 4/10 of the first DoF (example), takes the second shot, then moves FP to 4/10 of the SECOND DoF (because the subject distance changes, so does DoF), continues...Third, if my above second thought is valid, for my project it seems to be too much work needed to know the exact number of shots for reaching the infinity point (beyond the farest-away subject).p.s., For Macro or close-up (like Paliswe's experiment), it will need much less work to figure all this out (I think or maybe not?).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="blackstar, post: 804929, member: 47518"] In response/appreciation to Paliswe's post, give my thoughts on 2c: First, my bad if wrong I think for z cameras' settings of focus shifting, "focus step width" is related to the "depth of field" of the system. And the "DoF" is set by focal length, aperture, and subject distance. The "step width" is then set to be a fraction of the "DoF" (e.g., step width=4= 4x1/10xDoF=4/10 DoF, the number "10" is just my guess because it is the max number you can set for step width) Second, I think the number of steps is the number of shots. The complicated thing here is, say, the first shot is taken at the subject distance determined by the photographer (the nearest point), and then the camera moves FP to 4/10 of the first DoF (example), takes the second shot, then moves FP to 4/10 of the SECOND DoF (because the subject distance changes, so does DoF), continues... Third, if my above second thought is valid, for my project it seems to be too much work needed to know the exact number of shots for reaching the infinity point (beyond the farest-away subject). p.s., For Macro or close-up (like Paliswe's experiment), it will need much less work to figure all this out (I think or maybe not?). [/QUOTE]

Verification