Single vs. Multi-point Focus: I'm sure there's an obvious answer to this question. Most of us have cameras whose manufacturers feature as having an ever-expanding number of focus...

loosecanon Loc: Central Texas

I'm sure there's an obvious answer to this question. Most of us have cameras whose manufacturers feature as having an ever-expanding number of focus points in newer models. I shoot mainly landscapes and scenic city photos, and I almost always focus upon only the center point, lock focus, recompose, and shoot. So do all those other dozens of focus points mean anything? Are they somehow advantageous?

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

loosecanon wrote:

I'm sure there's an obvious answer to this question. Most of us have cameras whose manufacturers feature as having an ever-expanding number of focus points in newer models. I shoot mainly landscapes and scenic city photos, and I almost always focus upon only the center point, lock focus, recompose, and shoot. So do all those other dozens of focus points mean anything? Are they somehow advantageous?

For what you are using them for, more focus points would not benefit your photography.

JPL

loosecanon wrote:

I'm sure there's an obvious answer to this question. Most of us have cameras whose manufacturers feature as having an ever-expanding number of focus points in newer models. I shoot mainly landscapes and scenic city photos, and I almost always focus upon only the center point, lock focus, recompose, and shoot. So do all those other dozens of focus points mean anything? Are they somehow advantageous?

They are very useful for photographers chasing subjects like in sports and wildlife photography or when photographing their kids and pets or when photographing people when focusing on the persons eye is critical to name some situations where many focus points come in handy.

spaceylb Loc: Long Beach, N.Y.

Birds in flight and whistles and bells...

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

If focus is critical to your work, particularly at shallow depths of field, (a) focusing with a center point and recomposing or (b) cropping a composition from the center are two less than optimal approaches. Both Nikon and Canon are working to expand the geography of the frame covered by AF points that can be manually selected by the photographer.

Black-chinned Hummingbird
http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4672/38837649195_14d88c0431_b.jpg

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

loosecanon wrote:

I'm sure there's an obvious answer to this question. Most of us have cameras whose manufacturers feature as having an ever-expanding number of focus points in newer models. I shoot mainly landscapes and scenic city photos, and I almost always focus upon only the center point, lock focus, recompose, and shoot. So do all those other dozens of focus points mean anything? Are they somehow advantageous?

I almost always focus using only the center point, lock focus, recompose, and shoot is what I do too. I also usually leave my cameras on spot metering as well. I know it is kinda old school but then I started with no automation using film cameras back in 1977.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

lamiaceae wrote:

I almost always focus using only the center point, lock focus, recompose, and shoot is what I do too. I also usually leave my cameras on spot metering as well. I know it is kinda old school but then I started with no automation using film cameras back in 1977.

I often use single point, but instead of focusing and recomposing, I move the focus point to where I want it, so I can shoot multiple shots without having to recompose each shot.

loosecanon Loc: Central Texas

Wow! Thanks so much, folks, for the fast and helpful responses.

crazydaddio Loc: Toronto Ontario Canada

lamiaceae wrote:

I almost always focus using only the center point, lock focus, recompose, and shoot is what I do too. I also usually leave my cameras on spot metering as well. I know it is kinda old school but then I started with no automation using film cameras back in 1977.

90% of time this is fine.
Focus and recompose will not give good results with my 50 or 85mm 1.4 primes at 1.4

The DOF is razer thin and the "recompose" usually means both a slight wavering of my hand position as well as the sensor in the camera will rotate relative to the subject as you move the camera body and change the focus distance.

It means the difference between sharp vs soft eyes in portraits...

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

loosecanon wrote:

I'm sure there's an obvious answer to this question. Most of us have cameras whose manufacturers feature as having an ever-expanding number of focus points in newer models. I shoot mainly landscapes and scenic city photos, and I almost always focus upon only the center point, lock focus, recompose, and shoot. So do all those other dozens of focus points mean anything? Are they somehow advantageous?

If you are having to recompose then you definately should learn to use the proper focus points.
Depending on your DoF you might be losing some sharpness of your subject. If you are recomposing, it tells me you suspect that your subject is not on the same plane as the rest of your image so you are having to compensate.
Learn to use your camera to do that for you so you can be SURE what’s important is in focus.
Shooting sports I can move my points around VERY quickly between shots, so for landscape it would be a piece of cake.
I did an experiment here doing recompose on a single plane using shallow DoF and a small amount of recompose softened the subject.
That post is in my history. In a bit I’ll look for it and post it here.
SS

loosecanon Loc: Central Texas

I've noticed and wondered about that focus shift resulting from simply twisting the camera. My challenge has always been that moving that focus point with clicks or a joystick takes too long. Guess I'll use live view touch screen or a Nikon that allows live screen touch while using the optical viewfinder.

By the way, I do appreciate and use multpoint focus for moving subjects.

Again, thank you all for the help and expertise.

Tom

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

SharpShooter wrote:

If you are having to recompose then you definately... (show quote)

Focus first then compose, or compose first then focus... in most situations, it doesn't really matter how one does it.
Most, not all.

The Villages Loc: The Villages, Florida

Depending on circumstances, the use of Back Button Focus could also assist with focus.

AndyT Loc: Hampstead, New Hampshire

JohnSwanda wrote:

I often use single point, but instead of focusing and recomposing, I move the focus point to where I want it, so I can shoot multiple shots without having to recompose each shot.

John I do the same. Fast and easy with the joystick on the X-T2, quicker than the 4 way pad

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

Most of the time you should use one focus point. Learn to move it around in your viewfinder so that you don't always have to keep the subject in the center of the frame. Using multiple focus points is rarely used but as some others have pointed out if you need to focus on a subject that is moving you may want to use multiple points. When using multiple focus points, stop down so that you don't have a shallow depth of field or only the closest focus point will grab focus and everything beyond that will be soft.