• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Last Word / Depth of field and the web

Depth of field and the web

July 1, 2016 JimK 1 Comment

This is a continuation of a report on new ways to look at depth of field. The series starts here:

A new way to look at depth of field

Many of us use our fancy cameras occasionally to produce low-resolution images for the web. We should have tons of DOF in that case, right? And lens quality shouldn’t matter? And how does that object-field stuff work in that case?

I’ve got answers.

I set up the lens sharpness modeler for a 55mm f/1.4 lens  with the Nikon aberrations focused at infinity, and a sensor pixel pitch of 50um, which gives us a 720×480 pixel image from our modeled full frame camera.

Here’s what we get, in first the image plane and then the object field:

Image Plane
Image Plane
Object Field
Object Field

What’s different from the full-res images?

First off, the resolution, as measured in the image plane as MTF50 cycles per picture height, and in the object field as MTF50 cycles per meter, is much lower. No surprise there.

Next, diffraction and lens aberrations make little difference; in the image plane, everything is just about as sharp at infinity, so we can stop down as much as we’d like with impunity.

Also, as predicted, there’s  ton more DOF, with hyperfocal distances for narrow f-stops dropping to below ten meters. Oh, you expected even more? To be frank, so did I.

But the behavior in the image field that we observed before, where the sharpness starts to fall well before the image plane measures have gotten to the good part, still happens.

With the Otus lens model:

Image Plane
Image Plane
Object Field
Object Field

Pretty much the same thing; you don’t need an expensive lens for the web.

No surprises here, except maybe the way the object field behaves.

If we focus at 10 meters:

 

Image plane
Image plane

The DOf at narrow f-stops is so great that we get hardly any falloff in sharpness at infinity, and improved near-object image plane sharpness.

In the object field:

 

 

Object field
Object field

At f/8, f/11, and f/16, we actually get closer to the flat-with-distance object field sharpness that was predicted by Merkinger than we did with the lens focused at infinity.

 

The Last Word

← Some thoughts on object-field DOF management Aliasing visibility and PS downsampling →

Comments

  1. Dominik says

    July 4, 2016 at 2:27 am

    Jim,

    Could also you make a chart for ‘macro’ , say 0.1m, to see how much depth of focus is gained in this case by reducing the size? Thank you

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.