Somewhat incorrect def. of DOF. Correct or incorrect focus makes for better or worse pictures. Focus does not create 3D.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

I fully embrace the use of that specific term, which very much applies to the situation at hand, but no correction is required.

Thanks Baja!

Since last I participated in this thread, I have certainly been having mis-adventures in focus
Where once I could move the wheelbarrow, for example, or, clean up distracting debris, and move myself around to find the angle and frame the shot, months of immobility have really cramped my style...
I had been used to a 100mm lens, which I found quite limiting when I broke my foot and couldn't walk any more. I did play around some with a zoom lens (70-300mm), though, with mixed results. Those two photos were taken with that. It really did help with virtual access...good exercise, I suppose, to take as many shots as you can from the few places you can get to, or something like that Still stifling to say the least!

It may very well be that this thread is really (technically and pedantically) about 'Adventures in DOF' rather than strictly just focus...

Asa says: I think that depth of field and depth of focus as well as focus were the intent of the thread - i.e. what do you focus on, what do you put out of focus intentionally, how/whether you stack the shot, how/why/when to play with bokeh, etc. It all falls, in my opinion, within the purpose of this thread. Heck, throw in some composition thoughts, too. But thinking about focus (and not-focus) when setting up and assessing a shot seems to be what's been discussed - and what Baja was thinking about initially when starting the thread.

Works for me

Thank you for explaining how you took the pictures. Virtual access indeed!

Truly an adventure in focus here. Shot wide open (f/2.8) intentionally. I just wanted to see (that adventure, you know...). Some will argue (probably rightly) that it was a dumb shot to imagine and take...but it's very illustrative of what you can get out of a DSLR that a phone, tablet, or point and shoot cannot give you. I think, for me, knowing what's possible allows me to imagine more. Increases my range. Broadens potential. Anyway...



(in case it's not clear, what's interesting about this shot is the razor-thin thin thin cut of focus. That plane right on her eye - with the rest in front and behind obviously out. The exercise was about that razor-line.)

An informative post, Asa.

Laser focus.

Baja_Costero said:Laser focus.

The dirty secret there, handheld and with a constantly moving subject (and in lowish light) is that I hit well on only one shot out of maybe twenty. The flip side is I knew enough to fire twenty to get the shot.

For me, especially that close with bees, I find I must roll the dice enough times to hit that focus. Maybe.

I've called shooting bees and birds, "photography with an opponent".

Great shot Asa. Again, correct focus is a must, as Asa did, but it is shallow DOF that blurs the background, forces the viewer's attention onto the subject and creates a 3D look. Yes, DSLR can do it best with the right lenses. Here are a few of my lenses that have serious potential for this. Sigma 18-35/1.8 art, Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2, Sigma 85/1.4 art, Sigma 135/1.8 art, Leica R 180/2 APO, Canon 600/4 L IS III. Yes, insects, birds, any wild animal are tough subjects. Here are a few shots from yesterday morning of my semi-wild cats taken with the Sigma 135/1.8 at f/1.8.

6th shot. Isn't it fun to have the cat melt into the background.

I like the one with the tiny tongue peeking out

Shot after that has the whole tongue out.

Great pictures of adorable kitties (I have one in my lap as I'm typing! ). Is Runt among them? The first one looks like him but they have grown so much I can't tell.

Yes, first one is Runt. Did you see the pix I posted of R2, Runt's runt in Chow time? It has 2 different colored eyes.

I don't follow that thread but just went and found it...I guess Runt is a she then! R2 is so cute and looks just like her mommy! I've seen 2 eye colors in dogs many times but never in cats!