A question about DOF in Landscape photography

I am trying to improve my landscape photography. I understand photography and how a small aperture relates to a large DOF. What I am not clear on is where to focus. I read Peterson's Understanding Exposure and he gave suggestions but the way I implemented them I got poor results. He mostly makes reference to prime lenses and using DOF marks on the lens to focus. He goes on to speak of using a zoom by measuring 1/3 of the way into the image with an f/22 or smaller aperture and even though it is out of focus in the view finder it should be in focus when exposed. I must be misinterpreting 1/3 into the image because I get an out of focus image. Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated.

You just need a Hyperfocal chart.
http://www.dofmaster.c​om/charts.html

This will give you a better idea.

Have you tried using the depth of field preview feature?

Woolburr wrote in post #4691463
You just need a Hyperfocal chart.
http://www.dofmaster.c​om/charts.html

This will give you a better idea.

Nice, thanks.

doidinho wrote in post #4691492
Have you tried using the depth of field preview feature?

Yes but stopped down that much it is honesty a bit hard to tell with my eyes. I now have a full frame with a bigger viewfinder so it may be more useful.

If you really do hyperfocal, you don't need the viewfinder other than to aim the camera. The theory is that you take the value from the chart that comes from the intersection of your focal length and your f/stop. Slip the lens in manual focus and set that number on the distance scale. Everything from 1/2 that distance to infinity should now be in focus in the final print.

Woolburr wrote in post #4691938
If you really do hyperfocal, you don't need the viewfinder other than to aim the camera. The theory is that you take the value from the chart that comes from the intersection of your focal length and your f/stop. Slip the lens in manual focus and set that number on the distance scale. Everything from 1/2 that distance to infinity should now be in focus in the final print.

Which is exactly what I was trying to accomplish. I will give it a try, thanks.

Stick with f/16 or less for now...stopping down further can open up a whole new can of worms....Diffraction..​..don't want your head to explode...but here is a brief explanation of it.
http://en.wikipedia.or​g/wiki/Diffraction

Woolburr wrote in post #4692071
....don't want your head to explode...but here is a brief explanation of it.
http://en.wikipedia.or​g/wiki/Diffraction

BOOM

Warned ya!

short5 wrote in post #4692095
BOOM

You were warned not to look

Shouldn't be as much of a problem with full frame though should it?

kevin_c wrote in post #4692539
Shouldn't be as much of a problem with full frame though should it?

About the same, since you would be using a less wideangle lens (in mm) on FF, so you'd need to stop down further for the same DoF.

For landscapes, I'd focus on the farthest bit I'd want in focus, since that probabely contains the finest details.

Discussion here

(Another "your head might explode" warning )

A lot of people (myself) just set the largest aperature we can and focus a third of the way into the view.

Woolburr wrote in post #4691463
You just need a Hyperfocal chart.
http://www.dofmaster.c​om/charts.html

This will give you a better idea.

Installed the program, set the CoC, 24-105mm, f/4-22, printed 4"x6", laminated, and it's in my bag.

irishman wrote in post #4694311
A lot of people (myself) just set the largest aperature we can and focus a third of the way into the view.

I assume you mean smallest (largest number )

Oops! Good catch Kevin.