DMC-FX7
ƒ/2.8
5.8 mm
1/320
80
the end of our chasing games
7 responses to “freedom”
-
Enh, CA fringing or motion fringing, I still like the shot, pretty cool.
But, could it be motion fringes? Let’s examine that a sec.. I think the posibility of motion fringing exhibiting itself as in this picture due to insect movement depends on the frequency of the wing beats. If you look at fringes on indivual elements, they’re pretty symetric on both sides of the detail. For instance, the almost horizontal legs. For that to be motion, it would have to beat its wings faster than 1000 times a second, or 60,000 times a minute, and you caught the action right in the middle of a wingbeat.
It’s possible, but it doesn’t seem that likely to me. The fact that the fringe is about the same width as you go forward on the body also seems suspicious, since I’d expect some body flex as the wings alternatingly slipped through the air and bit the air.
This seems to rule out vibration of the crane body on that frequency scale:
http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/course/ent425/compendium/diptera.htmlsays:
Flies have the highest wing-beat frequency of any animal. In some tiny midges, it may be as high as 1000 beats per second. Male mosquitoes are attracted by the wing-beat frequency of a virgin female.Seeming to imply that other flies, especially crane flies with larger wings, beat more slowly.
(edit) A thought just occurred to me. Maybe it is the IS error factor. The amount of distance the object can move before it kicks in. I wonder what feature IS picks to stablize the frame. Would there have been any ‘larger’ detail for IS to key off of in the frame, since this is a crop?
The best way to test IS is to favor small aperture to get the shutter speed down. 1/320 is well within the range of hand holding, 1/60 for this guy at 110 mm (equiv) lens should ordinarily show just a touch of quiver of the hand unless you use specific techniques to stop it. 1/30 would definitely show jitter just casually hand holding a shot, even for still subjects.
Oop, sorry, a bit long, but it shows my thought processes, instead of just a conclusion so you can chose assumptions to shoot down.
-
It seems more like a blur. Since the overall wing oscillates through some mid-point of its motion, the middle area is denser due the amount of time some part of the wing is at the middle to be photographed, even as a blur.
IS looks at the entire image for a consistent shift of pattern across all the pixels, then reduces that shift to its originating image. It wouldn’t work on part of an image differently than others, and some parts of this photo are in focus and others are not.
Cool Shot!
Leave a Reply