This is a perennial topic for me, so feel free to ignore this post, measuring the value of single-shot photos against the merits (and lack of merit) in focus-stacking. As I have written many times, this became much more complicated for me with the advent of the Zeiss Otus series because I am tempted to take just one shot instead of a long focus-stack and all the retouching involved.
In focus stacking, the perfect-storm (negatively or worst-case speaking) is something like the Queen Anne’s Lace, where there are layer on layer of fine bristles. Stacking software is really not designed for this kind of challenge, and is much happier with simple un-layered objects.
After buying and trying all of the stacking software I am aware of, I settled on Zerene Stacker for a number of reasons, the retouching aspects being better IMO than the competition, plus they have what I understand is a unique method of handling bristles and similar hairy and spiny matter called PMax.
Any stacking software is challenged by fine filigree-like bristling stuff as well as by any spherical or rounded materials. In this case I am addressing the bristle-aspect and the Queen Anne’s Lace. Few plants are as naturally photogenic and offer so many interesting aspects as the various lacy plants, but how to approach capturing them?
This ever-present dilemma pits a one-shot photo (with perhaps not enough depth-of-field) against a carefully stacked imaged where the levels of layers produce overlaps that are (for-the-most –part) not retouch able. I give several examples here, all of which were shot with the Nikon D810 and the Zeiss Otus 85mm f/1.4 APO lens with 8mm of added extension (Nikon K1 ring) at ISO 64 against a dark background. No attempt to pretty this up was made (or concern with color), as the focus here is on actual or apparent depth-of-field.
The first example is just a single shot taken at f/16. As you can see, even though f/16 gives us a lot of depth-of-field, the lower branches still suffer from not being in focus. Yet, it has none of the artifacts we find in stacked images.
The second example is a stacked imaged (46 layers) taken at f/1.4 carefully in an environment with no wind, etc. Because it is stacked, the interior of the plant has the sharp clarity of focus we find in focus stacking. However, if we look at the lower branches, there are all kinds of artifacts, most of which cannot be easily retouched. In a similar way, the outline of the top of the plant also shows artifacts.
The third example, something I have been playing with more, is an image taken at f/16 using three shots or layers and stacked. Each of these three layers focuses on a particular area of the flower. This avoids most of the artifacts in the stacked image, but preserves the interior area pretty well. Further, although I ran these three layers through Zerene Stacker, since they are separate areas, I can just overwrite each area of the image with the retouching brush entirely if I wish, knowing that that area is in focus.
So, what have I learned? Mostly I have relearned for the umpteenth time that there is no free lunch. I like the 3-layer stacked photo best, EXCEPT (if we could see it) there is no bokeh, of course. I like bokeh, and of course stacking at f/1.4 gives me that, except for the nasty artifacts it produces.
Anyway, I have relearned the obvious. If anything, I might use the Zeiss Otus 85mm (or the Zeiss 135 APO) lens with single shots because they are telephotos and probably will give me something like bokeh for a background if I am careful.
