Focus Stacking Software
Published: 16th Jan 2009
Updated: 13th Dec 2009
Which of the several available software packages should I use?
The software packages currently available include:
- Zerene stacker
- Tufuse (Command-line only) [Free]
- Tufuse Pro, Enhanced GUI for above [Commercial]
- CombineZP [Free]
- CombineZM (Older version, now superseded by CZP above) [Free]
- Helicon Focus [Commercial]
- Picolay [free]
There are others but as far as I know they are not affordable to the general hobbyist, being intended for professional microscope work. If you know of any others I haven't mentioned here please let me know and I'll add them to the list!!
I'm going to treat Tufuse and Tufuse pro as one product, as that is the way I use it - The Tufuse pro GUI does add extra functionality to the command line product. I'm also only going to consider Combine ZP as I understand from Alan Hadley that this supersedes CombineZM including all of it's functionality plus the new pyramid algorithm similar to that used by Tufuse.
Some time ago I was lucky enough to be a private beta tester for Zerene stacker, and since day one I've been very impressed with it. It's output definitely has the edge over Tufuse and CZP, though I cannot comment on comparisons to Helicon as I do not have the full version yet. I also have not yet got round to trying Picolay so I'm not going to comment any further on that here, but it appears to be free so give it a go!
So the four products we're going to consider here are:
- Zerene stacker
- Tufuse + Tufuse Pro
- CombineZP
- Helicon Focus
Zerene stacker
Advantages
- Ease of use
- Good retouching features
- Quality of output
- Available for Mac and Linux as well as Windows
- Stereo output available from single Z-stack
Disadvantages
- If you want to sell your stacked images then it's one of the more expensive packages, however if you are only interested in personal use then that license is pretty cheap considering the overall quality of the output.
Tufuse + Tufuse pro
Advantages
- Relatively easy of use
- Output quality is good
- Reasonably cheap
Disadvantages
- No alignment functionality
- No built in retouching facilities
Combine ZP
Advantages
- Completely free
- Output quality is good
- Reasonably easy to use
Disadvantages
- Quality of output definitely not quite as good as Zerene
- Interface a bit quirky
- No built in retouching facilities
Helicon focus
Advantages
- Very polished interface
- Has some funky extra features like 3d surface map generation
- Easy to use
- Fast
Disadvantages
- One of the more expensive stacking packages, especially if you want the Pro version for the built in retouching functions.
- Personally I was never totally happy with the output from Helicon, although I have to confess I've only played with the trial version for a couple of weeks. I know some people can get good output from it so the best thing to do would be try the trial version and see what you think!
I have the paid shareware version of Tufuse pro, the freeware CombineZP and the paid professional version of Zerene. However I have only trialled Helicon for a month, and that was a long time ago.
To be honest the only reason I can think not to recommend you immediately buy Zerene stacker is if you definitely want to sell your focus stacked images and you can't afford the professional license. The output is best in class. The user interface is good, not quite perfect yet but close. The retouching facilities are the best I've come across.
Having said that, I would definitely recommend you download and try CombineZP as it is totally free. It's output is very good and there's probably no reason why you need more than this software offers.
Considering there are free trials of both Helicon and Tufuse pro, I would also suggest you download these and give them a go, your tastes in software may well be different to mine.
Full disclosure note - Zerene stacker is written by Rik Littlefield, who is the editor/administrator of Photomacrography.net, where I am also an administrator. I consider Rik a friend. This does not mean I have recommended Zerene because Rik is my friend, or because I would get any benefit from you purchasing it. I just honestly consider it the best software available currently for this task.
Pages: <Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next>
5 Comments so far. Post a comment
Post a comment
Article menu
- Introduction
- What is Focus Stacking?
- Focus Stacking Equipment
- Focus Stacking Rig
- Lenses for Focus Stacking
- Common problems
- Advanced Focus Stacking Tricks
- Focus Stacking Software
- Focus Stack processing example
- Other Focus Stacking Resources
Related Sites
My iStock portfolio
- Photomacrography Forum
- Krebs Micro
- Amateur Entymological Society
- BugGuide
- What's that Bug
- Zerene Stacker
- CombineZP
- Tufuse Pro
- Helicon Focus


Scale Model Photography
I'm not into macro photography, but I do take lots of pictures for various blogs on building scale models. I just downloaded Combine ZP as a way to increase the DOF when photographing small parts or entire models to make the scene look full-size. I'm looking forward to trying it out and will let you all know with examples how it works models and model railroad images. AND I don't care if it's cheating. I'm not about to invest in a photo studio, view camera and elaborate lighting to enable very small aperture shots. This way suits my Canon Rebel much better.
Myles at 12:37 on 12th Sep 2011
Focus stacking is cheating!
My name is Kenn Wingle and I can do the exact same thing you guys do with this so called stacking software. But this is nothing more than a cheap shot. Anyone with this software can do it. What talent and innovation is required. I have a special lens I use that does the same thing and some other techniques that require no special software. Lets see what you guys can do without the software. Some of my photos are over at Microbus website.
Kenn at 13:28 on 1st Apr 2011
Focus stacking is cheating
Ken,
You are of course welcome to your opinion. I'll even link over to your website and let readers decide.
One questions - How has your special lens got around the problem of diffraction?
Or does it not in fact do that, does it just have a very small aperture?
Laurie at 16:43 on 1st Apr 2011
cheating ?
Who cares ? I notice that the higher magnification your images get, Kenn, the more cheating you need, rofl.
If the aim is to get the largest portion of the specimen in focus with the minimum required effort, then you use whatever works regardless of the baseless opinions of the 'elite'. If you work at high magnification then focus stacking is required for more than minimal DOF no matter how expensive your equipment and polished your technique may be.
In fact, focus stacking is the poor man's entrance into the world of high quality macro-photography. My $47 2 MP ocular camera and CombineZP generate results comparable to those generated by much more expensive equipment and software.
BTW, Laurie, your images are lush and beautiful !
BioBob at 04:50 on 2nd Apr 2011
This one is not for stacking but for taking multiple photos with different focus
http://www.milosparipovic.com/dslr-bracketeer.html
It can be used with one of free stackers.
David at 16:30 on 5th Jul 2010