Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
PhotoKB Home
Discussion Groups
Digital Photography
Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot Cameras
Film Photography
35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther Equipment
Photo Technique
Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique General
General Photo Topics
General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK Photography
DirectoryPhoto Clubs

Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / May 2008

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Focus past infinity?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Roy Smith - 25 May 2008 19:29 GMT
I'm reading a review of a lens (http://www.bythom.com/24120ens.htm) which
says, "As with all ED lenses, the lens often focuses past infinity under
normal temperature conditions."  What does it mean to focus past infinity?  
Is this a good thing or a bad thing?
Bruce - 25 May 2008 19:51 GMT
>I'm reading a review of a lens (http://www.bythom.com/24120ens.htm) which
>says, "As with all ED lenses, the lens often focuses past infinity under
>normal temperature conditions."  What does it mean to focus past infinity?  
>Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

What Thom Hogan means is that the focusing ring will turn just a
little past the infinity point.  He implies the reason why in the
words "under normal temperature conditions".

If the lens barrel expands or contracts due to extreme temperatures,
it is sometimes necessary to allow the focusing ring to operate
outside the normal range of indicated distance to obtain correct focus
in those conditions.  If this allowance was not made, you might not be
able to obtain correct focus on a distant object, so that makes it a
good thing rather than a bad thing.  However, it can be a little
confusing until you realise what's going on.

I think it applies to more AF Nikkors than just the ED lenses.
Alan Browne - 25 May 2008 22:21 GMT
> I'm reading a review of a lens (http://www.bythom.com/24120ens.htm) which
> says, "As with all ED lenses, the lens often focuses past infinity under
> normal temperature conditions."  What does it mean to focus past infinity?  
> Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

Hysteresis is left to account for shooting across temperature variations
(mechanical expansion/contraction with temp).  So, when focusing at
infinity with longer focal lengths and at large apertures (low f/
numbers) it is important to focus precisely and not simply turn to the
limit.

At smaller apertures and shorter focal lengths (say less than 85mm) this
is less critical.

But always a good habit.

Cheers,
Alan.

Signature

-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
--        r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
--      [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
--                   e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

David Ruether - 26 May 2008 14:19 GMT
> I'm reading a review of a lens (http://www.bythom.com/24120ens.htm) which
> says, "As with all ED lenses, the lens often focuses past infinity under
> normal temperature conditions."  What does it mean to focus past infinity?
> Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

Lenses with ED elements can change focal length slightly
with temperature changes, requiring focusing mounts that
can accommodate these changes at infinity focus. This is
neither a good thing nor a bad thing - it just is, and for
correct focus, mechanical allowances must be made in the
focus mount...
Signature

David Ruether
d_ruether@hotmail.com
www.donferrario.com/ruether

David Ruether - 26 May 2008 21:13 GMT
>> I'm reading a review of a lens (http://www.bythom.com/24120ens.htm) which
>> says, "As with all ED lenses, the lens often focuses past infinity under
>> normal temperature conditions."  What does it mean to focus past infinity?
>> Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

> Lenses with ED elements can change focal length slightly
> with temperature changes, requiring focusing mounts that
> can accommodate these changes at infinity focus. This is
> neither a good thing nor a bad thing - it just is, and for
> correct focus, mechanical allowances must be made in the
> focus mount...

'Course, there is always the philosophical question of what
it means to be able to focus (see...;-) beyond infinity...8^)
Signature

David Ruether
d_ruether@hotmail.com
www.donferrario.com/ruether

ASAAR - 28 May 2008 19:12 GMT
> 'Course, there is always the philosophical question of what
> it means to be able to focus (see...;-) beyond infinity...8^)

'tis the simplest way to look forward and still see what's in back
of you if you can't afford a super fisheye lens.  :)
Blinky the Shark - 28 May 2008 20:03 GMT
>> 'Course, there is always the philosophical question of what
>> it means to be able to focus (see...;-) beyond infinity...8^)
>
>  'tis the simplest way to look forward and still see what's in back
> of you if you can't afford a super fisheye lens.  :)

That comes under one of Einstein's relativity theories, eh?  :)

Signature

Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project -->  http://improve-usenet.org
Found 5/08: a free GG-blocking news *feed* -->  http://usenet4all.se

Paul Furman - 29 May 2008 00:40 GMT
>>> 'Course, there is always the philosophical question of what
>>> it means to be able to focus (see...;-) beyond infinity...8^)
>>  'tis the simplest way to look forward and still see what's in back
>> of you if you can't afford a super fisheye lens.  :)
>
> That comes under one of Einstein's relativity theories, eh?  :)

'slow glass' (sci fi reference)

Signature

Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

David Ruether - 29 May 2008 15:27 GMT
>>>> 'Course, there is always the philosophical question of what
>>>> it means to be able to focus (see...;-) beyond infinity...8^)
>>>  'tis the simplest way to look forward and still see what's in back
>>> of you if you can't afford a super fisheye lens.  :)

>> That comes under one of Einstein's relativity theories, eh?  :)

> 'slow glass' (sci fi reference) --
> Paul Furman

Ah, yes - I remember reading that neat story long ago...! 8^)
--DR
Wolfgang Weisselberg - 26 May 2008 17:17 GMT
> I'm reading a review of a lens (http://www.bythom.com/24120ens.htm) which
> says, "As with all ED lenses, the lens often focuses past infinity under
> normal temperature conditions."

> What does it mean to focus past infinity?  

       * = object

       -- / \  = light rays
         /   \

       |
       | = lens
       |

If you focus                               well
 very close:    at infinity:         past infinity

      |          --------|             --__    |
     /|                  |                 --__|
    / |          --------|                     |
   *--|                  |             --------|
    \ |          --------|                   __|
     \|                  |               __--  |
      |          --------|             --      |
 
            the object is so         Rays come from 'past'
            far away that light      parallel.
            arrives as parallel
            rays

> Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

Mixed blessings, but 99% good.

If you want to focus to infinity (or whatever reasonable distance
happens to be negible to the infinity focus for your focal length
and wide-open aperture) by simply twisting the focus ring till
you reach the hard stop, you loose something.

If you use an AF, it doesn't hurt you.

If your lens changes length due to e.g. temperature (or your hard
stop is off, or the distance to the sensor is off a tiny bit),
what "should be" infinity isn't --- and if you have bad luck, you
cannot focus to infinity, because it is past the had stop.  D'oh.
This is especially troublesome with long lenses that differenciate
between 20m, 100m, (or even 500m) and infinity ...

So there you have your brand new Canon 600mm f/4 lens for USD
$7,600.00 (B+H), and you cannot focus to infinity because of
the temperature?  Guess who'd be crying bloody murder!  And
that's why it can focus past infinity.

-Wolfgang
Frankster - 26 May 2008 21:44 GMT
> And that's why it can focus past infinity.

So, lessee... it'd be something like 1.01 x infinity? Wonder how far that
is...LOL.

-Frank
Wolfgang Weisselberg - 26 May 2008 22:42 GMT
>> And that's why it can focus past infinity.

> So, lessee... it'd be something like 1.01 x infinity? Wonder how far that
> is...LOL.

Well, it's obviously what happens when you use a corrective
glass for being myopic.

-Wolfgang
Frankster - 27 May 2008 01:28 GMT
>>> And that's why it can focus past infinity.
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> -Wolfgang

Hey... I can do without the sexual innuendos. :)

-Frank
ASAAR - 28 May 2008 19:21 GMT
>> -Wolfgang
>
> Hey... I can do without the sexual innuendos. :)

 Not to worry.  You were only Weisselberged, not Pucked.
ASAAR - 28 May 2008 19:18 GMT
> So, lessee... it'd be something like 1.01 x infinity? Wonder how far that
> is...LOL.

 All of my lenses are marked for infinity, 1.1*infinity,
1.2*infinity, etc., up to 2.81828* infinity.  The only problem is
that they appear to be superimposed at the same point on the lens
barrel, making it really hard to select the one that's needed . . .
Wolfgang Weisselberg - 30 May 2008 16:14 GMT
>> So, lessee... it'd be something like 1.01 x infinity? Wonder how far that
>> is...LOL.

>   All of my lenses are marked for infinity, 1.1*infinity,
> 1.2*infinity, etc., up to 2.81828* infinity.  The only problem is
> that they appear to be superimposed at the same point on the lens
> barrel, making it really hard to select the one that's needed . . .

That happens because you don't understand the difference between
infinite but countable and infinite uncountable ...

-Wolfgang
ASAAR - 30 May 2008 19:02 GMT
On Fri, 30 May 2008 17:14:13 +0200, Count Wolfgang "Georg" von
Weisselberg wrote:

>>   All of my lenses are marked for infinity, 1.1*infinity,
>> 1.2*infinity, etc., up to 2.81828* infinity.  The only problem is
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> That happens because you don't understand the difference between
> infinite but countable and infinite uncountable ...

 Wolfie, is that really you?  If not for the fact that the reply
had an atypical touch of civility, I'd have sworn it was really
forged and posted by Floyd.  Mos Definitely.  But you say that there
exists a set of infinite, uncountable numbers.  Really?  That's
unreal!  But it's all starting to make sense to me now, for example
why you and the infinitely annoying Rita don't get along.  It's not
a matter of she being a he, it's that she appears to be transfinite,
or as ZZ might say, "she's nationwide".  Be more tolerant.  Trannies
are people too!

:)
Neil Harrington - 27 May 2008 19:28 GMT
> I'm reading a review of a lens (http://www.bythom.com/24120ens.htm) which
> says, "As with all ED lenses, the lens often focuses past infinity under
> normal temperature conditions."  What does it mean to focus past infinity?

It really just means to focus past the infinity *mark* -- you can't actually
focus beyond infinity.

> Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

It's just a necessary thing with certain kinds of lenses that have small
dimensional changes due to temperature changes. With such lenses, the
infinity mark on the lens (as well as other distance markings) can only be
an approximation since the actual infinity position changes slightly with
temperature.

Neil
Norm Dresner - 30 May 2008 14:11 GMT
| I'm reading a review of a lens (http://www.bythom.com/24120ens.htm) which
| says, "As with all ED lenses, the lens often focuses past infinity under
| normal temperature conditions."  What does it mean to focus past infinity?
| Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

For most lenses, the exact position of the plane of focus depends on the
"color" of the light.  Technically this is covered by what is called
"chromatic aberration".  But there's another situation in which the plane of
focus shifts from that with visible light and that's with IR (infra-red).
IIRC the historical purpose of the focus-past-infinity was to allow focusing
with IR film.  That there are additional physical reasons related to AF and
thermal expansion are only an additional requirement for the feature.

   Norm
David Ruether - 30 May 2008 14:47 GMT
> | I'm reading a review of a lens (http://www.bythom.com/24120ens.htm) which
> | says, "As with all ED lenses, the lens often focuses past infinity under
> | normal temperature conditions."  What does it mean to focus past infinity?
> | Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

> For most lenses, the exact position of the plane of focus depends on the
> "color" of the light.  Technically this is covered by what is called
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
>    Norm

Actually, IR focus at infinity does not require focus mount
movement of the optics "beyond infinity", but is well satisfied
by standard mount designs with non-ED glass elements
(which do require extra movement of the optics with differing
temperatures due to their changing focal lengths). BTW,
inexact marked infinity focus with non-ED lenses arose with
shifting FLs in newer zoom lenses due to their more complex
designs that would require very tight tolerances in their designs
and manufacturing for them to hold a marked focus throughout
their zoom ranges - and most people (using AF, and not scale
focusing) wouldn't care about this. Take a look at a manual
focus lens with an IR focus shift indicator on the focus ring
and see where it is relative to the infinity mark...
Signature

David Ruether
d_ruether@hotmail.com
www.donferrario.com/ruether

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.