BenSanford Loc: Falls Church, VA

Last year I tried taking some landscape photos where there were cherry blossoms on trees in relatively close to the lens and then the Jefferson Memorial in the background, and then using the Photoshop focus stacking software to merge the images. It seemed that the lens I was using was shifting the lens focal length a bit as I changed the focus from near to distant, and that created problems when stacking the images.

Perhaps all lenses do it to some extent. I can't find any information concerning a particular lens may or may not behave in this manner. Is this less of a problem with prime lenses than with zooms? I have a Nikon 18-35, and also a much older 28mm AI lens that I could use.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

You might want to ask gene51 in PM.

martinfisherphoto Loc: Lake Placid Florida

It would help if you posted the first and last photo along with the finished stack photo. If your setting your focal length first, then using the focus ring to focus either front to back, or back to front in order there should be no problem. That said, you can't have something blocking your view and hope to focus through it and not get some kind of ghosting affect. Sort of like focusing through a fence. No mention of past experience, how much your over lapping each photo, your other success stacking ect... As far as I know about any lens can be used if used properly.

Hangingon Loc: NW North Dakota

I watched a “Fro” video on YouTube comparing the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 G2 with a similar Nikon and he found slight focus breathing with the Tamron.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

I could see this being a problem if the breathing is strong, luckily I had so far no problems like that with any of the lenses I used!

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Sigma lenses, at least the current ART offerings, are rock solid.

TheDman Loc: USA

Just scale the images up or down slightly so they match.

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

Impossible to tell without an example. It could be that the stacking software could not cope with a great difference in sizing. It would also help to have the first and the last in the series

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

Agree ...

BlackRipleyDog

Try using a prime. If I am not mistaken, isn"t focus-breathing an issue of zooms? Plus as you take your series of shots, it is not unheard of for the zoom to creep as you manipulate the focus ring. That is why I went to primes for all my landscape and interior work.

spraguead Loc: Boston, MA

If you're using the newer version of Photoshop (cc), there is a feature that will align and resize layers to match for stacking. Use the "auto align layers" command within the Edit menu. It's worked well about 90% of the time for me, on those fails I had to manually adjust a layer by making the opacity 50% to align it, then changing back to 100%

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

Many lenses with internal focusing (the lens does not change its physical length), will show the effects of breathing at the closest focusing distance. The quick and dirty solution that does not involve new gear is to shoot a looser composition and allow the software to do it's best to merge the stack. At the edges of the image you will see stuff that doesn't make any sense, usually out of focus - and larger. This I believe corresponds to the larger images that are recorded with the focus points further away from the sensor, where the focal length will likely be truer to the stated focal length. I have a few lenses that I often use for macro - a Sigma 150 F2.8 Macro and a Tamron 180 F3.5 Macro. The Sigma breathes more than the Tamron. I also use a Nikkor 85mm F2.8 PC-E lens which gets me to 1:2 and is often close enough for flowers and large bugs and such. It is a simple design, gets longer as you focus closer has no perceptible breathing, loses a bit of illumination at the closest focusing distance as a result, but in general is easier to deal with in post processing when I stack.

Some lenses are really heavy breathers, like the Nikkor 70-200 F2.8 VR II and the Nikkor 28-300 F4-5.6. When zoomed to their max, both lenses are barely recording an image similar in field of view to a 135mm lens. These are two lenses I would never buy, for this and a host of other reasons.

The "better" solution involves getting a rail with a rack and pinion movement or worm gear, like one of these:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&O=&Q=&ap=y&c3api=1876%2C%7Bcreative%7D%2C%7Bkeyword%7D&gclid=Cj0KCQiAkNfSBRCSARIsAL-u3X_N_nt8dkvYBac8f1LqmT1FnsZyz4TgryrWTP3RTCOu8fhEIyjrSicaAqHIEALw_wcB&is=REG&m=Y&sku=1244390

You can get less costly ones, but you give up stability, possibly the Arca-Swiss standard clamp, or range of adjustment. Or all three if you go into the sub-$100 range.

joel.photography

I have one. You made me say Wha? with that comment.

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

No lie - well documented:

http://www.bythom.com/nikkor-70-200-VR-II-lens.htm

https://petapixel.com/2016/11/22/nikon-70-200mm-f2-8e-review-worth-money-youre-pro/

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/focus_breathing_focal_length_changes.html

The 28-300 is worse.

BebuLamar

Hi Gene!
I often use the bellow for close up and using bellow is when focus stacking is most needed. With the bellow I can change the plane of focus in 3 ways or combination of the 3. Moving the lens, moving the body, moving the body and lens away or toward the subject. So according to your post the best way is to move both camera and lens by the same amount? Of course using the bellow doesn't have the problem of focus breathing but still it is still best to move both?