Is there a Depth of Field calculator?? Maybe?

A forum to ask questions, post setups, and generally discuss anything having to do with photomacrography and photomicroscopy.

Moderators: Pau, rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S.

shaypivac
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2018 5:44 pm
Location: Australia

Is there a Depth of Field calculator?? Maybe?

Sorry I tried searching, but to no avail.

But is there a general rule of thumb to what Um to shoot at? Like maybe 40Um for a 5mm specimen? Maybe like a depth of field kind of thing?

I'm shooting up to 5X at this stage with a Sony a6300 + Laowa 25mm 2.5-5X. (Sweet spot is f/4 as I've found)

For example I've tested on a fly, with just the face. And don't see much difference between 15Um and 40Um.

I'm not the most technically advanced photographer, but I have been shooting around 7years, so I do know a bit, just never bothered with the technical stuff lol

But the majority had been landscape and architecture where you just play with f-stop and maybe max 3 focus stacked images.

Any links regarding this?

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 5266
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain
Take a look at this recent thread on the subject:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 647#238647
Pau

shaypivac
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2018 5:44 pm
Location: Australia
sorry, no idea what any of that means :/

I wouldn't even know what * stands for? :/

But thanks for trying

Chris S.
Site Admin
Posts: 3576
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:55 pm
Location: Ohio, USA
Shay,

In answer to your specific question, the asterisk sign (“*”) is used, in this instance, as the math symbol for "multiplied by". For example, “A = B * C” is shorthand for “A equals B times C”. However, you can safely ignore all formulas and get the information you need without using mathematics, by simply looking at a chart.

Take a look at Table 2A in Rik Littlefield's DOF Estimates For Macro/Micro. While this is a portion of the supporting documentation for Rik's Zerene Stacker software, it is applicable to any macro shooting with the sort of lens you're talking about. Also read the couple of paragraphs above table 2A, which explain how to use it.

Your Sony a6300 has an APS-C sensor, so as those paragraphs explain, you want to look at the stacking increments near the center of the boldfaced values. At nominal f/4 and 2x, this means 0.079 mm (79 microns). At nominal f/2.8 and 5x, this means 0.025 mm (25 microns).

Be aware that there is room for using either larger or smaller stepping increments than these specific numbers. The values in table 2A are good, safe ones to start with. As you gain experience, and if you care to do additional testing, you may find reason to choose different values. For example, with excellent equipment and technique, for big prints, you might find that increments about half the suggested size give you a bit more contrast in fine detail. If you have a rapidly wilting specimen or will be downsizing for Web use, you might choose a larger increment to save time. But Table 2A is a great place to start.

--Chris S.

shaypivac
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2018 5:44 pm
Location: Australia
Chris S. wrote:Shay,

In answer to your specific question, the asterisk sign (“*”) is used, in this instance, as the math symbol for "multiplied by". For example, “A = B * C” is shorthand for “A equals B times C”. However, you can safely ignore all formulas and get the information you need without using mathematics, by simply looking at a chart.

Take a look at Table 2A in Rik Littlefield's DOF Estimates For Macro/Micro. While this is a portion of the supporting documentation for Rik's Zerene Stacker software, it is applicable to any macro shooting with the sort of lens you're talking about. Also read the couple of paragraphs above table 2A, which explain how to use it.

Your Sony a6300 has an APS-C sensor, so as those paragraphs explain, you want to look at the stacking increments near the center of the boldfaced values. At nominal f/4 and 2x, this means 0.079 mm (79 microns). At nominal f/2.8 and 5x, this means 0.025 mm (25 microns).

Be aware that there is room for using either larger or smaller stepping increments than these specific numbers. The values in table 2A are good, safe ones to start with. As you gain experience, and if you care to do additional testing, you may find reason to choose different values. For example, with excellent equipment and technique, for big prints, you might find that increments about half the suggested size give you a bit more contrast in fine detail. If you have a rapidly wilting specimen or will be downsizing for Web use, you might choose a larger increment to save time. But Table 2A is a great place to start.

--Chris S.
Thank you. That's very understandable lol I only just passed my maths at college so that could be the issue :/

johan
Posts: 1005
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 7:39 am
Contact:
Hi, some other calculators here

http://extreme-macro.co.uk/calculators/

also cambridge in colour forum had one last time I looked
My extreme-macro.co.uk site, a learning site. Your comments and input there would be gratefully appreciated.

ploum
Posts: 172
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 6:35 am
Mine is here.... In french
http://www.alpinismeetmineraux.fr/miner ... ro/pdc.ods

Open document
I work with a manfrotto 454 but uncommon system. No limitation, no motorisation, good precision.
Objective : rodagon 135 mm, BW APO 2x, Compon S 80 mm, nikon CFI 4x, APO componon 40 mm, componon 28 mm, APO plan 10x, Mitutoyo APO 10x, BW APO SLWD 20x. Nikon CF EPI 10x, APO SEIWA 20x, MACRO ZUIKO 35 mm, nikon MPLAN ELWD 0.5 40x, NIKON CFI PF 10x.

Yawns
Posts: 399
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2015 9:18 am
Location: Benavente, Portugal
ploum wrote:Mine is here.... In french
http://www.alpinismeetmineraux.fr/miner ... ro/pdc.ods

Open document
you'r is password protected ...
YAWNS _ (Y)et (A)nother (W)onderful (N)ewbie (S)hooting

ChrisR
Site Admin
Posts: 8574
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 3:58 am
Location: Near London, UK
It opens in LibreOffice
Chris R

clarnibass
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 11:33 pm
I mostly use the calculators in johan's link and IME they are accurate. I use the step size and extension ones the most.

I think you are asking about step size, right? This is directly to that calculator: http://extreme-macro.co.uk/focus-stacking/#calculator

You enter the F number, magnification and type of sensor and it gives you the step size. I'm guessing the sensor size is only relevant because they assume you e.g. print the same size at the end i.e. you actually magnify higher with the smaller sensor.

For your example, with the Sony A6300, f/4 and x5 magnification, it says minimum step is 0.033mm (33um). So 15um probably gave redundant steps, and maybe 40um was just close enough to barely notice a difference, if at all.

All the parameters could be slightly different that it's actually not x5 at f/4 on the camera (just as a random example, sensor size might be slightly different, lens, aperture, etc.).

Also AFAIK those calculators also assume some kind of result size. I mean, take a huge blurry photo, make it tiny, it looks sharp. If you view at a smaller size then an even larger step might look similar.

Ulrik Tønnesen
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2018 7:35 am
Location: Denmark
I came around an android app called Macro Tools, it got the following features:
- Focus Stacking Step Size
- NA to Fstop
- Infinite Objective Focal Length
- Extension Tubes Magnification
- Bellows Magnification
- Reverse Lens
- Raynox Adapter
- Closeup Lens
- Stacked Lens Magnification

It's free but contains ads, which can be removed by getting the PRO version, it's 2 bucks or whatever.

I suggest you give it a look
https://play.google.com/store/apps/deta ... ulator.pro