tdekany Loc: Oregon

With stacking your shutter speed is pretty fast, since you would be using the optimal F stop, so I'd say it is a superior way of getting a deep DOF. No more difficult than bracketing for HDR - btw, the camera I use can do focus stacking/bracketing automatically. With stacking, it will take up to 999 shots.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

I think you are correct - but it might be backwards - the diffraction amount is the same, but a 12mp sensor will show less of it compared to a 36mp one. The 36mp sensor will show more of everything.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Hmm - I do a ton of landscape - and I rarely go to anything wider than 45mm - my go to focal length on a 36 mp full frame camera. I do have several 24mm lengths to choose from - 24-70, 14-24, and a 24 PC-E - but I consider them special purpose lenses, and I use them generally in close quarters, like when I am a deeply forested area and I come across a nice little waterfall, and there is no room to pull back on the shot. I do not care for the exaggerated "extension" of perspective that is characteristic of short lenses. And I use PC-E lenses to get that nose-to-infinity depth of field - even at F2.8 or F4. I am not a fan of what images taken at F22, or even F16 with my camera. I'd rather do a focus stack.

If I need a wider field of view - I will do a stitched pano - very easy to do, even hand-held, but the best results are with a tripod. The key is perspective - a wide or ultra-wide lens creates a false sense of depth. Longer lengths do not. Go to a fine art museum and try to find any landscape painting with a "wide angle" perspective - you won't find any. They were painted using eyes that generally see the world as a 43mm lens would. For a wider field of view, the artist merely turned his head from side to side to get it all in. My 45mm and 85mm PC-E lenses are the ones I use most for landscapes, though I have used a 100-300, and as SS suggested, even a 600mm F4.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gene_lugo/

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

And that is a really important point, at least on leaves and plants moving around - I don't mind water movement - I often will take a pond or a waterfall at 1 - .5 sec, and do it as a stack. Results are pretty good, as long as nothing else is moving.

joseph premanandan

relying on hyperfocal distance does not help either if there are moving plants or moving water.in that case you have do HDR with the deghosting option that is available in photomatix and other HDR softwares.you can do focus stacking and HDR at the same time,joseph

Wanderer2 Loc: Colorado Rocky Mountains

I'm an old time landscape shooter still trying to understand many of the wonders of post processing (I'm using the word wonders seriously, not sarcastically). If a photo shows the result of diffraction can it be eliminated or reduced in PS or PSE? Thanks.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Not really. Post processing software cannot produce detail that was not originally captured by the camera. Loss of contrast and resolution resulting from diffraction falls into that category.

Wanderer2 Loc: Colorado Rocky Mountains

That's what I suspected, but had hoped otherwise. Thanks for the reply.

Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

You may be correct. It just seems to me that I see diffraction shows up on sooner on my 7100, than on my 810. I thought the larger photo sites (pixel size) was why.....Airy disk or some such having an effect? As you can see, I am in no way a technical person . Now I am going to have to do more research

The calculator shows diffraction limited at f16 on a 1.5 crop sensor and does become limited until f32 on a FF. I need to read more about how pixel size comes into play but, I need to go to work in a minute.

Here's on place I'm looking http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

I owned several D700s and one D3S - 12 mp full frame. Diffraction was barely noticeable at F11, but not an issue until I used an aperture smaller than F16. I now own D800 - and diffraction is already seen at F8, ok to F11, and problematic at F16, which I avoid at all costs. Hope that helps.