I have an Olympus D-450 digital camera. it takes great pics. what is the best way to get the most depth of field?
Depth of field has nothing to do with the type of camera used (digital or conventional). Depth of field is just related to the aperture of the lens (the smaller the aperture, the greater the depth of field), the focusing distance (the closer, the smaller depth of field) and the focal distance of your lens. I don't know if your camera has manual control. If yes, the best way is to use the smallest possible aperture and also try not to focus too closely. For more infos, please have a look at the "model photo" subject on the traiN'ternet web site listed below. Jean-Louis Simonet visit traiN'ternet: http://www.trainternet.org/ [ 17 February 2001: Message edited by: JLS ]
Anothe point on depth of field, the "in focus" portion of the photo is 1/3 in front of the point of actual focus and 2/3 behind it. With this in mind, you can get a little more depth by focusing slightly behind the first point you want in focus.
I'm sorry guys, I should have not been so brief on my question. I know all about depth of field and how it works, I was wondering if anybody knew a secret to "fooling" my automatic camera into giving me a smaller aperture or what ever a digital camera uses. I gave the name of it for anyone familiar with my Olympus. Thanks all
Sorry Espee... I'm not familiar with the Olympus at all. What I have found with my Nikon, in auto, the brighter the area being photographed the 'lower' the f-stop. The aperture setting appears to be balanced with the available light to provide a reasonable shutter speed. I would suggest you check out the Yahoo!Clubs directory (or any other you may be a member, or know, of) for a specific forum for the Olympus digitals. I am certain you will have your questions in a far more comprehensive way by Olympus users. Let us know how you get on with your query. Gary.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by espee2: I'm sorry guys, I should have not been so brief on my question. I know all about depth of field and how it works, I was wondering if anybody knew a secret to "fooling" my automatic camera into giving me a smaller aperture or what ever a digital camera uses. I gave the name of it for anyone familiar with my Olympus. Thanks all<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hmmm! The problem with automatic camera is that they decide for you. This does not seem to be the best camera for model photo. Unless you have a few kW's of light to let your camera think it's full sunshine... In which case, there is a chance that it will go to minimum aperture (maybe!). Jean-Louis Simonet visit traiN'ternet: http://www.trainternet.org/
Espee2, Have you had any luck getting your Digital Camera to take better photo's? I'm in the same boat, My Sony Mavica is a sweet little number, but lacks the quality I had with my Pentax. I sorta wish I hadn't sold all my equipment! Rich
The Sony Cybershot (DSC-S70) allows manual override and control of the aperture down to f-8.0 which gives a reasonable(?) depth of field. I found this info in an obscure back page of the manual. Maybe other manufacturers have done something similar. Hank
I may have stumbled upon a solution to photo quality using Digital cameras. I have clamped to my workbench a florescent ring with a magnafier glass in the center. The glass is about a 6 inch circle and the bulb circles around it on the outside. After trying everything for a crisp photo and some DOF, I tried shooting through this magnifier. Lo an behold, the image is very clear and background isn't bad either! If you own a Digital, try shooting through a magnifier...You may like it. Rich [ 16 March 2001: Message edited by: RPMorgan ]
Has anyone tried placing a pin-hole in front of (or behind) the lens to increase depth of field? I think I read something about this years ago, but have no idea where. If I remember correctly, the technique involved drilling a pin-hole in a piece of light metal or cardboard, then fitting that into the front lens ring. (I think cardboard would be better, to avoid scratching the lens) Hank
Hank, I think you have to eliminate the original lens. I helped my daughter build a pin hole camera. there was no lens! the pin hole acts as the lens. Great depth of field though. We used a cardboard box, inside painted flat black. a hole cut in the bottom for a 4X5 film holder and a pin hole drilled in a piece of sheet metal duct taped over the open end of the box. took us about 20 pictures to get a good exposure, had no idea of lens opening or exposure time. used 'seconds' to judge how long to keep the slide free of the film. It does give great shots of small objects, really makes them look life size.
There are pin hole cameras that can be built out of card board boxes. The original purpose was to show that photos don't need great equipment, but great creativity instead. Hence you would show excellent photo's taken with these cheap disposables. Then there are pin hole adapters that you can build and add to a lens. Finally there are pin hole lens, advertised for a long time in Walther's. It may still be in the most recent catalogue; I haven't looked.
Hank, Have a look at the "Model Photo" section on the traiN'ternet site listed below. There is the description of how I made a pinhole attachment for my lens which I use for all my model photos. Jean-Louis Simonet visit traiN'ternet: http://www.trainternet.org/ [ 25 March 2001: Message edited by: JLS ]
Jean-Louis, merci. Your lens looks like a practical solution to our problem. Although it will be a challange when I try to mount it to my digital camera. Hank
Took this shot with an Olympus C990 zoom, thought it looked good so posted it here. Any comments? [ 26 March 2001: Message edited by: Colonel ]
Why would you want maximum depth of field? Isn't the idea of model railroad photography to try to get realistic looking photos? If so, imagine you were a little person on your layout taking pictures with your little camera. The resulting photos would not have everything from 1 inch to infinity in focus. Things near and far would be out of focus. To me the most realistic photos are the ones with depth (not depth of field). To get depth things need to be out of focus - near and far. Paul's photo looks great! [ 27 March 2001: Message edited by: sajay ]
I thought the goal was to get a photo that makes the model look like the real thing. When a real locomotive is photographed, the camera is normally at least 20 feet away. With most film and digital cameras, normally everything is in focus from about 10 feet to infinity with a 50mm lens, even at f2.8. Hank
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Colonel: Took this shot with an Olympus C990 zoom, thought it looked good so posted it here. Any comments? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hmm... judging from the depth of field and the colour, I'd say that was taken with a D490. Gary.
Okay Colonel, But I have a rule of thumb in life that I tell all my friends: never ask a question of me you don't want the answer too. This stemmed from the many women I dated who would come out with a new dress on in a clothing store and ask me how they looked. Of course, what they were really saying was: "I want you to say I look great." Unfortunately for me, I always told them what I thought, with angry words sometimes ensuing in my direction. So Colonel, the photo is too out of focus both near and far, what is in focus looks great. My eye tends to gravitate to the out of focus areas. A newbie to the photo hobby may not notice it as much, but once you have been kicking around for a while, you can't help think, in the case of this photo: "it would look much better with everything in focus." I can't remember who said it is "prototypical" for parts of the engine to be out of focus. My response is: "what lens are you using." I have a vivitar 19-35 that I highly recommend in the Series One. The price is very reasonable for a lens such as this and I find it takes great pics. No. If I used that lens, the photo would be all in focus which is one of the great features of a very wide angle (great depth of field). I shoots lots in the 19 mil range.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by sajay: Why would you want maximum depth of field? Isn't the idea of model railroad photography to try to get realistic looking photos? If so, imagine you were a little person on your layout taking pictures with your little camera. The resulting photos would not have everything from 1 inch to infinity in focus. Things near and far would be out of focus. B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes, Why would you like to get a photo in focus...? In real word (unless you are a really bad photographer), the whole scene would be in focus. So I imagine that it's what we are shooting for in model word, when we want to render the scene like reality. There are techniques for that. But it's up to you to like out of focus photos. Now, 1 inch in N scale world has nothing to do with 1 inch in the real world (well, I assume there is a 1:160th factor), but the camera is the same (no scaled down camera, especially for depth of field), so you have to use some tricks so that your N scale inch looks like a real inch... Jean-Louis Simonet visit traiN'ternet: http://www.trainternet.org/
