I see that more advanced cameras have more focus points and I was wondering what they are all for? I find myself always using centre point to ensure that the subject is focused correctly, what advantage does having so many focus points have?
Why all the focus points?
- Thread starter Energize
- Start date
that depends on the type of shot.
My D700 has 51 if I remember correctly. Now, doing portrait's you can just leave it on the center, focus on the eyes then compose the shot. However, when shooting at f/1.8 composing the shot after focusing with screw the focus up.
Instead, compose, move the focus point over they eye, focus, shoot.
Mine also has some cool 3D focusing system that I've not really used but it will track a bird for instance from focus point to focus point.
My D60 had 5 i think and really limited what I could. 51 on the D700 is great
My D700 has 51 if I remember correctly. Now, doing portrait's you can just leave it on the center, focus on the eyes then compose the shot. However, when shooting at f/1.8 composing the shot after focusing with screw the focus up.
Instead, compose, move the focus point over they eye, focus, shoot.
Mine also has some cool 3D focusing system that I've not really used but it will track a bird for instance from focus point to focus point.
My D60 had 5 i think and really limited what I could. 51 on the D700 is great
It is really not a good idea to focus with the centre point and recompose unless you have sufficient depth of focus. Many wide aperture lenses suffer from field curvature and the focal plane is not a flat plane at allbut a curved manifold. When shot at wide apertures if you recompose your subject will be out of focus.
Always compose your scene and choose the focus point closest to your subject of focus, do any minor reposition to acquire focus if need be, and shoot. For static scenes with narrow depth of focus it can be worth while using live view to mitigate calibration issues, and bracket the focussing in manual focus mode to guarantee optimal focus. Some lenses Are especially prone to focus shifts into the corners .
Speaking of focusing, For landscapes when you want everything in focus you should really learn to use hyperfocal focusing to gain near infinite depth of focus without stopping down too far. Stopping down below about f/13 will rob you of resolution due to diffraction, f/8 to f/11 are noticibly sharper. The higher the pixel density of the lens the more important it is to maximise aparture to reduce Visible diffraction. Look to focus about 1/3rd into the scene at f/13 for a quick estimate. This is because the depth f focUs extends about 2/3rds behind the focal 'plane' while only 1/3rd is in front, if you focus at infinity only 1/3rd of the DoF willbe in the scene you care about.
Also for landscapes don't always worry about getting infinity in focus. The human perceptual system won't properly focus at infinity and our brain interprets slight softness in the distant elements simply as objects at great distance, which is kind of logical and is actually what we want the viewer to understand. More important the foreground is pin sharp with a slight softness to the very distant mountains. Getting perfect sharpness on distant elements is also often impossible due to atmospheric effects like haze, dust, thermal distortions, don't waste the depth of focus on elements at infinity and beyond.
Last edited:
So I am a complete notice when it comes to action photographybut I doknow that the cameras have a lot of advanced features and settings that you need to play with. I would do some good reading on the. After and playing with settings so you really become well accustomed to the intricacies.
What you will want to do is you conti uous focus with 3-D tracking, this is when having many focus points really helps to track the subject.
As with all the new features on a dslr they are nice to have but not essential for taking good/great photos, if you've never had them you probably won't miss them.
One of the downsides of this being a techy forum is that people get hung up on specs and benchmarks which are definitely not the be all and end all of photography where the equipment is nothing like as important as technique and talent. The way some people talk on this forum you'd think it was impossible to take a picture without a d800e (yes the e is mega important the non e version is obviously rubish) yet I seem to remember some of the best photos ever seen on this forum being taken by the likes of Messiah Khan with d40x's and the like.
A good camera helps but it won't make bad pictures good and a decent tog will produce great results with any dslr ever made.
One of the downsides of this being a techy forum is that people get hung up on specs and benchmarks which are definitely not the be all and end all of photography where the equipment is nothing like as important as technique and talent. The way some people talk on this forum you'd think it was impossible to take a picture without a d800e (yes the e is mega important the non e version is obviously rubish) yet I seem to remember some of the best photos ever seen on this forum being taken by the likes of Messiah Khan with d40x's and the like.
A good camera helps but it won't make bad pictures good and a decent tog will produce great results with any dslr ever made.
