Wildlife with E-M5
July 17, 2012 at 18:34 Finland has a long winter which can be quite beautiful - maybe for a few weeks in Southern Finland. Mostly half a year is grey, wet and dirty. For me the season for photography in Finland starts early May and ends by late September. Maybe that´s why I became a studio photographer.
Yes, summer is the time to shoot here. During the last two weeks I did a trip round the southern half of Finland. I worked on a few of my projects and visited also my friend, nature photographer Lassi Rautiainen´s hides to try shooting wildlife with Olympus E-M5. Last year I did the same with Olympus E-5. Here are some of my images with E-5.
Back to Manual Focus
This time, as lenses I had Zuiko D. 150mm f/2.0 and Zuiko D. 90-250mm f/2.8 with me. 250mm is mostly not long enough, so I had also 1.4X and 2X tele extenders. Using these FT lenses is a must because all native mFT lenses so far are useless for this purpose. They are neither long, fast nor good enough. All the shooting is done during the darkest hours, mostly between 10pm and 4am. Only wolverines break those limits regularly. E-M5 focuses accurately with both of these lenses with or without extenders (and does it even when many more expensive DSLRs give up because of darkness) but it happens way too slowly. Manual focusing is the only way to catch any moving wildlife with these lenses and E-M5. Because subjects are moving it is not practical to use viewfinder magnification. Birds in flight are out of reach for E-M5 but I found it quite possible to capture bears and wolves with this equipment.
An afternoon shot showing E-M5 attached to Zuiko D. 90-250mm f/2.8 and 1.4X tele extender. Grip is attached to give better handling and longer battery life.
Images
Below some of my images taken during two nights in hides.
A raven against the end of rainbow. (90-250mm w. 1.4X, @ 243mm, f/5.0, ISO 200)
A raven sitting for profile portrait. (90-250mm w. 1.4X, @ 354mm, f/5.0, ISO 800. Image cropped)
A young wolf passing over swamp during pouring rain. I chose to make these images lighter than the real situation was. Because of heavy rain and clouds it was so dark (at 10.30 pm) that seeing was easiest through E-M5´s EVF. There was no real backlight, the rain cloud just was not as dark behind the wolf. Lucky me. (150mm f/2.0 w. 2X, @ 300mm, f/4.0, ISO 8000 first image and ISO 6400 others. Images cropped.)
This brown bear made a surprise visit by coming at 6.30am. (90-250mm w. 1.4X, @ 166mm, f/5.0, ISO 800. Image cropped)
100% crop from previous picture.
He looked around for a while, said hello and... (90-250mm w. 1.4X, @ 166mm, f/5.0, ISO 800. Image cropped)
... ran away. (150mm f/2.0, @ 150mm, f/2.8, ISO 1600. Image cropped. I had all the time 2 cameras ready pointing at different directions because one camera can not be turned to cover much wider than a 90 degrees sector.)
-p-
Reader Comments (7)
It is somehow funny, that almost every bear and wolf photo taken in Finland has the same background. A pond and swamp in Eastern Finland. Even international TV-serie "Wild Russia" filmed it´s bears in Finland, just in Kuhmo and from Lassi Rautiainen´s hide place. I immediately recognized, where bear scenes had filmed, when I saw the serie.
Explanation is very simple. It is almost impossible to see a bear or a wolf in the wilderness, if they are not temped to come using a carrion. So it is surprising, that a famous and well respected Finnish photographer could not resist the temptation to use stuffed wolf in his photo some years ago. The exposure was naturally most embarrassing.
By the way. Pekka´s photos are excellent. Nature photography amateurs will lead the pros to starve . If I could start from the empty table now, my only camera would be Olympus E-M5. I am confused.
I usually don't comment tech posts, but here I have to say, that one should use the best tools available for each situation. The image quality just ain't there with the camera used here for this kind of photography. It's a camera that sells due to its size and capabilities. Why slap it behind a bazooka in a static hide and try to mimic what can be done with a "hammer"?
Antti: Edmund Hillary was asked why he wanted to conquer Mount Everest. The answer was: because it's there. Another answer could be: because I can. I am no nature photographer, I don't need to shoot this kind of images for any reason. These images are pretty much worthless. Images like this (and most of nature shooting done in Finland) are childishly easy like you said, all you need is to have the best bodies and lenses ie. MONEY. If you are a decent camera operator, you will get perfect pictures. I could have loaned their best cameras and lenses from Canon or Nikon, but why?
I went to see Lassi because of other reasons. While being there I wanted to see what I can achieve with this camera when I already know I have no AF. I used to have Nikon D3X and have used the best Canon DSLRs. It was so dark when shooting those wolf images that eg. D3X would have been a useless block of metal. You simply couldn't have seen, metered or focused through OVF. Last year I was in the same hides with Lassi and it turned out that we stopped shooting at about the same time when the light diminished. Lassi was at quadruple ISOs with his Nikons than me with Olympus E-5. I had more speed in lenses. That was another reality test I did.
Now, IF E-M5 had a usable AF with FT lenses, they could rival Nikon or Canon (body plus lenses) image quality. So it is not about image quality but lack of AF capabilities with high quality lenses.
-p-
I didn't say nature photography is childlishy easy. And I am not going to. That is a common misunderstanding and so old school.
As is the common belief that with the best and MOST EXPENSIVE tools you are set to snap some amazing wildlife images. I have never owned anything more than a 12Mpix sensor camera and a 200mm lens with 1.7 or a rarely used 2.0 multiplier, but I get my wildlife job done. It takes only dedication and preparation just like in any profession. Hit "google" and you will find out.
“If your photos aren’t good enough, then you’re not close enough” – Robert Capa
This post is of great interest to me because I will not afford large auto focus glass in the near future. I did just purchase a Tamron SP 300mm f2.8 manual focus lens which I am learning to use and am having a blast with. It's a great challenge. I hope to add a Nikkor 400mm f3.5 and a moderately priced gimbal head someday. Since I'm going to have to be good at MF to use these optics, it doesn't matter so much the speed of the camera I choose next. My E-3 currently is fine, but I'd like to use higher ISO to keep the shutter speeds up. From that perspective, the use of large lenses on the E-M5 is a very interesting topic for me. Thanks for posting, especially about the ability of the EVF to help get shots in low light with manual focus.
Whilst not as good as the SHG glass, I would not call the Panasonic 100-300 a useless lens for wildlife. It gives a very similar range to the 250mm with 1.4x and is only one stop slower. It is much lighter and can be hand held. It also offers better AF and has smooth bokeh. I actually have been very pleased with IQ - but you must avoid using any lens filters in my experience. I think you were operating in very extreme low light where 1 stop really matters, but for most uses it is useful (not useless!). This is a good example of its capabilities:
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/olympus-om-d-e-m5-1-month-user-review-19505
Thanks for the articles.
Some discussion on this article also on:
http://forum.fourthirdsphoto.com/f2/wildlife-e-m5-72956.html