When to Use Which Depth of Field in Landscape Photography
Thursday 18 September 2025, 15:30 by Nando Harmsen | 2,950 views | 5 commentsThis article was translated from Dutch with the help of AI. Read the original.
You can also choose a shallow depth of field in landscape photography. It doesn't always have to be large, or even as large as possible. When do you choose which depth of field? I'll give you a guide.
A shallow depth of field can be very useful. It gives you the opportunity to create a 3D effect. That allows you to direct attention in a photo. You do need to make the right choice about how shallow the depth of field should be.
You need to know how depth of field works, of course. The amount of depth of field is determined by the aperture, focal length, distance to the subject, and distance from the subject to the background.
In general, you can assume that a small aperture number produces a shallow depth of field. A large aperture number produces a large depth of field. So, f/4 gives you less depth of field than f/8, and so on.
You should also remember that a short focal length produces more depth of field than a longer focal length. As long as you keep the aperture the same, of course.
The relationship between the distance to the subject and the distance from the subject to the background is also decisive. If you are closer to the subject than the subject is to the background, the background will become blurred more quickly.
Finally, there is the most difficult factor of all: image size and viewing distance. But I'll leave that aside for the sake of simplicity, because otherwise it becomes far too complex.
With these basics behind us, I can give you a guide. Remember that you are free to deviate from it. Nothing is required, anything goes.
If you use a wide-angle lens, choose a large depth of field. You will often be fairly close to the foreground, while the background will be relatively further away. Only with a short focal length is it possible to get both in focus.
If you use a telephoto lens, the choice is less straightforward. You then have to base your choice on the distances between the subject and background, in relation to your distance from the subject.
If the subject is very far away, just like the background, everything will be in focus regardless of the aperture. Choose an aperture close to f/8, where almost every lens performs at its best.
If your subject isn't very far away from you, choose a shallow depth of field. Even if the background isn't much further away, even the smallest aperture will not be enough to get everything in focus.
You can of course also use a shallow depth of field with a wide-angle lens. But remember that this only works well if your subject is almost at the minimum focusing distance. Only then will there be enough blur in the background.
Avoid having a background that is just not sharp. Make sure you have real blur, or real sharpness. If it falls somewhere in between, it becomes distracting. Image size and viewing distance will also become very important then.
What do you prefer to use? Do you prefer photos with a large depth of field, or a shallow one? Let us know in a comment below this post.
About the author
Nando Harmsen has been photographing for more than 40 years. He specialises in wedding photography and landscape photography. Nando also gives talks, workshops, masterclasses and photo trips, and regularly reviews new and interesting equipment.
You might also like
-
A shallow depth of field for landscapesby Nando Harmsen
-
Tilt-shift lens for extreme depth of fieldby Nando Harmsen
-
Difference in depth of field when cropping or using a teleconverterby Nando Harmsen
-
Composition tip: Choose the right focal lengthby Elja Trum
5 comments
-
Donald Willemsen wrote on Thursday 18 September 2025 at 16:55 | replyNando, de 4e foto vind ik erg mooi en je schrijft erbij dat je die met een groothoek hebt gemaakt. Nu zou ik een soortgelijke foto, dus met een onderwerp op de voorgrond en een hele interessante achtgrond graag eens maken met een brandpunt in het telebereik en een lage diafragmawaarde in verband met het licht. Ik denk hierbij aan een focusstack ( de Canon Eos R7 maakt die automatisch) om de foto van voor tot achter scherp te krijgen. Er moet dus een grote afstand overbrugd worden.
This comment was written in another language and has not been translated yet.
Is er een methode om te bepalen hoeveel foto's je dan moet maken en hoe groot te tussenruimte mag zijn om geen onscherpe delen in de foto te krijgen? Kan photopills daarbij behulpzaam zijn? -
Nando
wrote on Tuesday 23 September 2025 at 09:11
| reply
De vierde foto? Met de veenpluis?
This comment was written in another language and has not been translated yet.
Dat kan op deze manier niet met tele. Een lage diafragmawaarde (grote lensopening) voor het licht is nergens voor nodig. Ook met veel licht kan een je grote lensopening gebruiken.
Het is trial and error. Hoe kleiner je scherptediepte is, hoe meer foto's nodig zijn. Je camera regelt dat zelf; jij hoeft niet te kiezen voor het aantal foto's. Op Photofacts Academy vind je een instructie over focusstacking-instellingen op een Canon-camera. -
Paul eos wrote on Tuesday 23 September 2025 at 16:30 | replyDag Nando, ik weet niet of een Canon eos R7 op dezelfde manier moet ingesteld worden om een stack te maken als met mijn eos R5 mk II, maar ik moet in ieder geval zelf het aantal foto's instellen alsook de afstand tussen de foto's, die proefondervindelijk moet ingesteld worden afhankelijk van soort lens, diafragma en onderwerp.
This comment was written in another language and has not been translated yet. -
Donald Willemsen wrote on Tuesday 23 September 2025 at 17:05 | replyPaul, op de R7 moet de stack op dezelfde manier ingesteld worden als bij de R5 II. Je stelt de camera in op het maximaal aantal foto's wat je denkt nodig te hebben en ook de afstand tussen de foto's. De camera bepaalt dan zelf hoeveel van de maximaal ingestelde foto's nodig zijn voor de stack. Stel dat je 30 opnames hebt ingesteld en de camera heeft er slechts 20 nodig, dan wordt de stack uitgevoerd met 20 foto's.
This comment was written in another language and has not been translated yet. -
Paul eos wrote on Wednesday 24 September 2025 at 08:00 | reply
Dank je wel Donald, dat was mij nog niet opgevallen dat mijn camera het aantal foto's beperkte. Dat weet ik ook weer.
This comment was written in another language and has not been translated yet.
Have your say
Please note: Articles older than a week can only be commented on by signed-in visitors.Would you still like to comment? sign in or create a free account.
Elja Trum
Photofacts; everything to do with photography!
Would you like to take better photos and keep up with what is happening in photography? Photofacts publishes articles that teach you something about photography — from a product announcement to a practical shooting tip or a look at a website. Photofacts covers photography every day and is a hobby project of Elja Trum's that got out of hand. The articles are written by a team of volunteer authors. If you would enjoy writing one or more articles for Photofacts, do get in touch.More about PhotofactsPhotofacts is made possible in part by
