Hyperfocal distance calculation question

OK, so I know this is silly, but I have to ask anyway. I'm trying to understand hyperfocal distance, or rather, believe it. I "get" what it is, but I want to make sure I'm applying it correctly.

If I'm shooting landscapes on my 30D with a 19mm lens at f/16 (for example), my hyperfocal distance is 3.96 feet (according to dofmaster.com/dofjs.html). I see the little "4 ft" mark on my lens, but is that really focusing at 4 ft? In other words, can I just set my focus manually at that spot at my lens and shoot away, confident that my shots will be in razor sharp focus from 1.98 feet to infinity? Obviously, I'm being facetious--I would be checking my shots, histograms, etc, but you get what I'm asking.

I know this is a bonehead question--thanks for humoring me...

Yes, that is how it works

Of course whether or not infinity and 1.98 ft is sharp enough (razor sharp to you) depends on the choice of your circle of confusion in the calculation. Also, f/16 is never optimal for resolution due to diffraction.

OK...I'll bite. What would be an optimal f-stop and if you were calculating it, what circle of confusion would you choose?

Not trying to sound snarky--just learning. Thanks for the input...

E.J. Peiker wrote:Yes, that is how it works

Of course whether or not infinity and 1.98 ft is sharp enough (razor sharp to you) depends on the choice of your circle of confusion in the calculation. Also, f/16 is never optimal for resolution due to diffraction.

I tried all the Hyperfocal techniques and honestly didn't get any better results than just focusing about 1/3rd into the frame. I find the optimal f/stop for my EF 17-40mm and EF-S 10-22mm lens to be between f/8 ~ f/13. But if need be it I will use f/22 without a thought for scenes where blurring water motion.

Visit my Pbase gallery, in the Glacier National Park section for several photos related to this type of subject and the EXIF data is with each photo.

Here is a good tutorial on DOF and hyperfocal distance:
http://www.dofmaster.com/hyperfocal.html

Razor sharp will be at the focused distance. No legitimate text on hyperfocal settings claims razor sharp from near to far. It may fall off to "pretty good to acceptable" at the near and far distances of the hyperfocal scale, depending on the physics and your subjectivity. What is pretty good to one person may be unaccepatable to another. By placing a prominent foreground object at the focused distance the image will appear sharper.
The standard formula for hyperfocal distance assumes printing to an output size of 8"x10" viewed from a respectable distance (I don't recall the formula) not from as close as you can get. So if you are making a 13"x19" or larger print you must change the distances or the aperture or use a different circle of confusion in the formula. Sharpness in photography is an illusion. A lower resolution image with high contrast and acutance may appear sharper than a high resolution image with lower contrast and acutance. So sharpness depends on various characteristics of your equipment. It also depends on how fast the leaves are blowing. What this all comes down to is you must do your own trial and error tests on an actual subject, not just a test chart. I do not know of a test chart for use at infinity.
If hyperfocal distance is not good enough, we now have focus stacking.