Aperture question

[Buckster]

Pray tell... how do you know you're focused at 64 feet on that lens? It's somewhere between the marks for 15 feet and infinity. But let the rest of us cretins know how to do so without somehow focusing at 135 feet or 32.338 feet or 1,732¼ feet.

Same way you focus on the tree or anything else. What's the mystery?

Laser measure to something 64 ft away, focus on it, then recompose without refocusing.

 

[timor]

How ? With no markings on the lens beyond 30 feet and tiny focusing screen. Plus aperture of 3.5 is too dark for much of precision. But solution would be to hire you I guess.

 

[Buckster]

Good gravy!

Stand 64 ft from something. Car, tree, anything you can focus on. You can tell when you're 64 ft away because you have a LASER measuring rangefinder.

Focus on it.

Then go back to the shooting spot, compose the scene, and shoot.

You guys really have to have that explained to you?

 

[480sparky]

Same way you focus on the tree or anything else. What's the mystery?

Laser measure to something 64 ft away, focus on it, then recompose without refocusing.

This is silly. Why drag along a laser rangefinder, measure 64 feet to the tree, then just turn the focus ring until the tree is in focus?

Why not just turn the focus ring and focus on the tree? 64 feet is as meaningless to this discussion as much as whether it was a pine trees or an oak tree.

What purpose does the rangefinder serve? What good is knowing the distance of 64 feet do me?

 

[Buckster]

It's not 64 ft to the tree that's measured.

"Dragging along" a little handheld rangefinder isn't the chores your wording suggests.

Read my first post in this thread to understand the 64 ft. It's about answering the OP's questions.

 

[photoguy99]

I think you can also focus on the tree, and then look at your lens closely as you refocus, moving the center point over to the far-limit mark for the aperture you're using.

In this context that will be an extremely small movement but I think the method is generally useful.

 

[Dave442]

My first thought is that the final result with blurred mountains is not going to make the shot that much better. But if it needs to be done then I like Buck's solution. Not having a laser rangefinder I find something that looks to be the 65 feet away and focus on that and then recompose. Would probably also hit the DOF preview, but probably would not show much change at the wide aperture. The other option is to zoom in and then make a pano shot and stitch in post, that should give a smaller depth of field.

 

[Rollei12]

So here is the picture. If anyone is still wondering what process I did, I believe I zoomed in on the tree, focused on the tree (opened at 3.5) and took the shot. I didn't mean to cause any arguments...

 

[480sparky]

Me, I'd forget the rangefinder and just do a bit of focus bracketing.

 

[Buckster]

Me, I'd forget the rangefinder and just do a bit of focus bracketing.

That's a lot more fun with digital. Not so much when burning film

Rangefinders are very handy tools for lots of things, not very expensive, and take up very little room.

 

[photoguy99]

If you've got an older MF camera like the OP it has a built in dof calculator so you can ditch the rangefinder and separate dof calculator.

Plus you'll see the futility of it in this particular case.

 

[Buckster]

If you've got an older MF camera like the OP it has a built in dof calculator so you can ditch the rangefinder and separate dof calculator.

Plus you'll see the futility of it in this particular case.

When did a Nikon FM2 become a medium format camera? Mine uses 35mm film. Did I get ripped off?

Eta... Oh you mean manual focus. Lol.

 

[christopher walrath]

I am sorry. But going back through the last 20 posts or so and the breakneck give and take, this thread is kind of really funny.

 

[480sparky]

That's a lot more fun with digital. Not so much when burning film........

Experience keeps one from using an entire roll of 36x. Given the information I've garnered from this thread, 3 frames should do it.

]When did a Nikon FM2 become a medium format camera? Mine uses 35mm film. Did I get ripped off?

Eta... Oh you mean manual focus. Lol.

No, FM stands for Format, Medium.

 

[timor]

So here is the picture. If anyone is still wondering what process I did, I believe I zoomed in on the tree, focused on the tree (opened at 3.5) and took the shot. I didn't mean to cause any arguments...

looks like everything is blurry. But I would attribute it to shake of the hand.

Good gravy!

Stand 64 ft from something. Car, tree, anything you can focus on. You can tell when you're 64 ft away because you have a LASER measuring rangefinder.

Focus on it.

Then go back to the shooting spot, compose the scene, and shoot.

You guys really have to have that explained to you?

the sharpness of something at 64 feet in the focusing screen will be the same like sharpness of something at 80 feet away. On the barrel of the lens there is no markings for that, so setting the lens would be only a guess. Laser rangefinder is pointless IMO. But , do you carry a real spotmeter ? That might be more beneficial. If someone wants tree at 64 feet sharp, but mountains in the backdround 2000 feet away blurry I recommend 8x10 view camera with at least 12 inch lens. That should do the trick.