Tag Archives: dof

IQ, Optics, Sharpness, Spatial Resolution

What is Resolution?

5 Comments

In photography Resolution refers to the ability of an imaging system to capture fine detail from the scene, making it a key determinant of Image Quality.  For instance, with high resolution equipment we might be able to count the number of tiny leaves on a distant tree, while we might not with a lower-res one.  Or the leaves might look sharp with the former and unacceptably mushy with the latter.

We quantify resolution by measuring detail contrast after it has been inevitably smeared by the imaging process.  As detail becomes smaller and closer together in the image, the blurred darker and lighter parts start mixing together until the relative contrast decreases to the point that it disappears, a limit referred to as  diffraction extinction, beyond which all detail is lost and no additional spatial information can be captured from the scene.

Sinusoidal target of increasing frequency to diffraction limit extinction
Increasingly small detail smeared by the imaging process, highly magnified.

The units of resolution are spatial frequencies, the inverse of the size and distance of the detail in question.  Of course at diffraction extinction no visual information is captured, therefore in most cases the criteria for usability are set by larger detail than that – or equivalently at lower frequencies.  Thresholds tend to be application specific and arbitrary.

The type of resolution being measured must also be specified since the term can be applied to different physical quantities: sensor, spatial, temporal, spectral, type of light, medium etc.  In photography we are normally interested in Spatial Resolution from incoherent light traveling in air so that will be the focus here.

Continue reading What is Resolution? →

DOF, Optics, Sensors, Sharpening, Sharpness, Spatial Resolution

Diffracted DOF Aperture Guides: 24-35mm

12 Comments

As a landscape shooter I often wonder whether old rules for DOF still apply to current small pixels and sharp lenses. I therefore roughly measured  the spatial resolution performance of my Z7 with 24-70mm/4 S in the center to see whether ‘f/8 and be there’ still made sense today.  The journey and the diffraction-simple-aberration aware model were described in the last few posts.  The results are summarized in the Landscape Aperture-Distance charts presented here for the 24, 28 and 35mm focal lengths.

I also present the data in the form of a simplified plot to aid making the right compromises when the focusing distance is flexible.  This information is valid for the Z7 and kit in the center only.  It probably just as easily applies to cameras with similarly spec’d pixels and lenses. Continue reading Diffracted DOF Aperture Guides: 24-35mm →

DOF, IQ, Perceptual, Sharpness, Spatial Resolution

DOF and Diffraction: 24mm Guidelines

2 Comments

After an exhausting two and a half hour hike you are finally resting, sitting on a rock at the foot of your destination, a tiny alpine lake, breathing in the thin air and absorbing the majestic scenery.  A cool light breeze suddenly rips the surface of the water, morphing what has until now been a perfect reflection into an impressionistic interpretation of the impervious mountains in the distance.

The beautiful flowers in the foreground are so close you can touch them, the reflection in the water 10-20m away, the imposing mountains in the background a few hundred meters further out.  You realize you are hungry.  As you search the backpack for the two panini you prepared this morning you begin to ponder how best to capture the scene: subject,  composition, Exposure, Depth of Field.

Figure 1. A typical landscape situation: a foreground a few meters away, a mid-ground a few tens and a background a few hundred meters further out.  Three orders of magnitude.  The focus point was on the running dog, f/16, 1/100s.  Was this a good choice?

Depth of Field.  Where to focus and at what f/stop?  You tip your hat and just as you look up at the bluest of blue skies the number 16 starts enveloping your mind, like rays from the warm noon sun. You dial it in and as you squeeze the trigger that familiar nagging question bubbles up, as it always does in such conditions.  If this were a one shot deal, was that really the best choice?

In this article we attempt to provide information to make explicit some of the trade-offs necessary in the choice of Aperture for 24mm landscapes.  The result of the process is a set of guidelines.  The answers are based on the previously introduced diffraction-aware model for sharpness in the center along the depth of the field – and a tripod-mounted Nikon Z7 + Nikkor 24-70mm/4 S kit lens at 24mm.
Continue reading DOF and Diffraction: 24mm Guidelines →

IQ, Optics, Perceptual, Sharpness, Spatial Resolution

DOF and Diffraction: Setup

1 Comment

The two-thin-lens model for precision Depth Of Field estimates described in the last two articles is almost ready to be deployed.  In this one we will describe the setup that will be used to develop the scenarios that will be outlined in the next one.

The beauty of the hybrid geometrical-Fourier optics approach is that, with an estimate of the field produced at the exit pupil by an on-axis point source, we can generate the image of the resulting Point Spread Function and related Modulation Transfer Function.

Pretend that you are a photon from such a source in front of a f/2.8 lens focused at 10m with about 0.60 microns of third order spherical aberration – and you are about to smash yourself onto the ‘best focus’ observation plane of your camera.  Depending on whether you leave exactly from the in-focus distance of 10 meters or slightly before/after that, the impression you would leave on the sensing plane would look as follows:

Figure 1. PSF of a lens with about 0.6um of third order spherical aberration focused on 10m.

The width of the square above is 30 microns (um), which corresponds to the diameter of the Circle of Confusion used for old-fashioned geometrical DOF calculations with full frame cameras.  The first ring of the in-focus PSF at 10.0m has a diameter of about 2.44\lambda \frac{f}{D} = 3.65 microns.   That’s about the size of the estimated effective square pixel aperture of the Nikon Z7 camera that we are using in these tests.
Continue reading DOF and Diffraction: Setup →

Optics, Perceptual, Sharpness, Spatial Resolution

DOF and Diffraction: Image Side

Leave a comment

This investigation of the effect of diffraction on Depth of Field is based on a two-thin-lens model, as suggested by Alan Robinson[1].  We chose this model because it allows us to associate geometrical optics with one lens and Fourier optics with the other, thus simplifying the underlying math and our understanding.

In the last article we discussed how the front element of the model could present at the rear element the wavefront resulting from an on-axis source as a function of distance from the lens.  We accomplished this by using simple geometry in complex notation.  In this one we will take the relative wavefront present at the exit pupil and project it onto the sensing plane, taking diffraction into account numerically.  We already know how to do it since we dealt with this subject in the recent past.

Figure 1. Where is the plane with the Circle of Least Confusion?  Through Focus Line Spread Function Image of a lens at f/2.8 with the indicated third order spherical aberration coefficient, and relative measures of ‘sharpness’ MTF50 and Acutance curves.  Acutance is scaled to the same peak as MTF50 for ease of comparison and refers to my typical pixel peeping conditions: 100% zoom, 16″ away from my 24″ monitor.

Continue reading DOF and Diffraction: Image Side →

Optics, Perceptual, Sharpness

DOF and Diffraction: Object Side

1 Comment

In this and the following articles we shall explore the effects of diffraction on Depth of Field through a two-lens model that separates geometrical and Fourier optics in a way that keeps the math simple, though via complex notation.  In the process we will gain a better understanding of how lenses work.

The results of the model are consistent with what can be obtained via classic DOF calculators online but should be more precise in critical situations, like macro photography.  I am not a macro photographer so I would be interested in validation of the results of the explained method by someone who is.

Figure 1. Simple two-thin-lens model for DOF calculations in complex notation.  Adapted under licence.

Continue reading DOF and Diffraction: Object Side →

Equivalence, Formats, Sensors

Equivalence in Pictures: Focal Length, f-number, diffraction, DOF

Leave a comment

Equivalence – as we’ve discussed one of the fairest ways to compare the performance of two cameras of different physical formats, characteristics and specifications – essentially boils down to two simple realizations for digital photographers:

  1. metrics need to be expressed in units of picture height (or diagonal where the aspect ratio is significantly different) in order to easily compare performance with images displayed at the same size; and
  2. focal length changes proportionally to sensor size in order to capture identical scene content on a given sensor, all other things being equal.

The first realization should be intuitive (see next post).  The second one is the subject of this post: I will deal with it through a couple of geometrical diagrams.

Continue reading Equivalence in Pictures: Focal Length, f-number, diffraction, DOF →

Equivalence, Exposure, IQ, Sensors

Equivalence and Equivalent Image Quality: Signal

1 Comment

One of the fairest ways to compare the performance of two cameras of different physical characteristics and specifications is to ask a simple question: which photograph would look better if the cameras were set up side by side, captured identical scene content and their output were then displayed and viewed at the same size?

Achieving this set up and answering the question is anything but intuitive because many of the variables involved, like depth of field and sensor size, are not those we are used to dealing with when taking photographs.  In this post I would like to attack this problem by first estimating the output signal of different cameras when set up to capture Equivalent images.

It’s a bit long so I will give you the punch line first:  digital cameras of the same generation set up equivalently will typically generate more or less the same signal in e^- independently of format.  Ignoring noise, lenses and aspect ratio for a moment and assuming the same camera gain and number of pixels, they will produce identical raw files. Continue reading Equivalence and Equivalent Image Quality: Signal →