cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

EOS 90D Focus bracketing help for macro and landscape shots

manfred9
Contributor

I am trying to do some focus bracketing with my 90D. What I came up with so far is that it works in principal. But ...

Here is my understanding so far:
For focus bracketing to work you need Live View. In Live View the maximum focus points is with Zone AF - which is roughly a third of the view. As the number of pictures the camera take depends on the focus points activated while shooting this limits the result drastically. The object needs to be in the center of the frame which is manageable but not perfect for macro shots. But doesn't work for landscape photography.

I would be happy to wrong about this and I only need to change a setting, but I haven't found one yet.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.

23 REPLIES 23

Sorry John_Q but that Automatic Selection AF option is not available when using the required Live View mode for focus bracketing with the EOS 90D.  


Brian
EOS specialist trainer, photographer and author
-- Note: my spell checker is set for EN-GB, not EN-US --

ebiggs1
Legend
Legend

Although I have DPP 4 I am not a big supporter or user but I don’t think it supports focus stacking. Its strong attribute is lens correction.  And I do try other programs when time allows I always come back to the best IMHO and industry standard Photoshop.

EB
EOS 1D, EOS 1D MK IIn, EOS 1D MK III, EOS 1Ds MK III, EOS 1D MK IV and EOS 1DX and many lenses.


@ebiggs1 wrote:

Although I have DPP 4 I am not a big supporter or user but I don’t think it supports focus stacking. Its strong attribute is lens correction.  And I do try other programs when time allows I always come back to the best IMHO and industry standard Photoshop.


EB, DPP 4 has supported focus stacking for quite a while, since Canon included Focus Bracketing in its cameras, and does a good job. They call it "Depth Compositing" and can be found in the DPP Tools menu. In fact, it's quite a bit simpler than PS where you have to d/l a plugin, merge and align layers, etc. I've tried (bought) the best dedicated stacking programs on the market and DPP is as good at it as any of them in IQ and post touchup tools, albeit way slower, but it is free and I have time if nothing else 🙂 I like to start my stacks with Raw and DPP is the only one that does that. Sure, you can load your Raw files into other stacking programs, but they are converted to DNG or TIFF or whatever, usually with Adobe DNG Converter, but they do not allow you to edit Raw and stack the actual Raw files like DPP does.

TBH, I let my PS and LR subscriptions expire when I realized that I was doing all I needed to do in DPP and PSP, the later mainly for framing and cropping. Granted, I don't do weddings and portraiture any more which I feel is where PS shines. Your clients want to see art. I do nature photography, now that I have retired, so all I need is a little sharpening, saturation of various colors to make them "pop" a bit, and some odds and ends that DPP provides adjustments for. My approach is to get the shot right in the first place so very little is needed in post.

Newton

I am trying the stacking with DPP4 on a 1 year old mac at the moment and it is still running after 1.5hours for a 15 image stack.

One of the first things DPP is doing is converting the raw files into .bin files. So, I don't think there is a difference to other software converting to dng or tiff. But they are way faster. I get results after 2 minutes.

Manfred


@manfred9 wrote:

I am trying the stacking with DPP4 on a 1 year old mac at the moment and it is still running after 1.5hours for a 15 image stack.

One of the first things DPP is doing is converting the raw files into .bin files. So, I don't think there is a difference to other software converting to dng or tiff. But they are way faster. I get results after 2 minutes.

Manfred


Hello, Manfred!

I'm using a 3 y/o Dell XPS 17 running Windows 10 Pro with just 16GB of RAM and it only takes 10-15 minutes to stack 20 shots from my 45mp R5, depending on if I used lens correction, NR, or other adjustments. The longest it's ever taken me to run a stack was 1.53 hours, and that was a 100 shot stack from my R5. Small stacks (20) like this from my 5D mark IV, R6, or R6 mark II are much faster.

As for making or converting Raw to a BIN file, I've never noticed that behavior in Windows.

Newton

manfred9
Contributor

Here is my test result.

DPP needed 1hour and 45 minutes - delivered the sharpest result (with one caveat) for a stack of 19 images. The images where shot at 6400 iso. An no noticeable noise. The one caveat is that it left out a few images for the longest focal range.

Second place in my test is Helicon. Some noticeable noise but covered to whole focus range and it was in under two minutes.

Third place is Zerene. More noise in PMax as expected. But DMax had more noise than the Helicon run. Time is comparable to Helicon.

I need to figure out why DPP left out the longer focal range and then it is a great solution if you have the time to wait. I think I will play around with DPP and Helicon to see if I can improve the results.

Manfred

Hi Newton, it seems very long. I am running another test. Since it took so long, I had the time what was happening in the folder of my images. I saw a subfolder created containing for each of my images a .bin image. So I assume this is the raw conversion done before the stacking operation.

Hey there, Manfred!

If you want, post your stack on a sharing site and I will d/l and look to see why some of your shots weren't included, and run the stack myself to see what's going on with the time to render. That is just way to long in my experience. I will be happy to do that.

Newton

Raw, of course 🙂

Have done four more runs with DPP. Same images as before. Time is now between 5 and 6 minutes, which is acceptable to me. Changed some of the parameters around in DPP but can't get the longer focal range as sharp as in Helicon or Zerene. I can paint it in with the tools but since my originals are at 6400 iso there is some noise there. Maybe I am a bit to obsessed with the details in the background.

But I have to say that I am totally impressed for 95% of the image, super sharp and no noise.

Of course could get the result into PS, use denoise software for the last two or three frames and stack them again.

Announcements