50-200 mm f2.8 on the bear land.

Lauri Mantere · Sep 25, 2025

Hi there

I photographed in last three days with a small and big white bears and wolves in the Kainuu wilderness near the Russian border. Unfortunately, half of the time it heavily, but there were still some images on the memory cards.
Regards Lauri

Jappie52 · Sep 25, 2025

Well at least your copy of the 50-200mm appears to be working very well, although I suspect this is also due to the photographer knowing how to handle it.

Also, I saw you shot the bear in the second image @150mm. Were you that close?!

Lauri Mantere · Sep 25, 2025

Jappie52 said:
Well at least your copy of the 50-200mm appears to be working very well, although I suspect this is also due to the photographer knowing how to handle it.

Also, I saw you shot the bear in the second image @150mm. Were you that close?!

Maybe I was even closer.

Lauri Mantere · Sep 25, 2025

And here's all the splendor connected to OM-1 Mark II.

Doxa750 · Sep 25, 2025

Looking good and many thanks for sharing!

mfinley · Sep 25, 2025

As I look at these enlarged I don't see any sharp eyes. As most of us are evaluating this lens and interested in the results is this a result of the lens or where your focus was directed?

Marko_Finland · Sep 25, 2025

Wow, those bears are gorgeous. Very, ahem, huggable looking as well

Super shots of course.

Marko

Lauri Mantere · Sep 25, 2025

mfinley said:
As I look at these enlarged I don't see any sharp eyes. As most of us are evaluating this lens and interested in the results is this a result of the lens or where your focus was directed?

What is the problem with Your eyes?

Vahur Krouverk · Sep 25, 2025

Lauri Mantere said:
Unfortunately, half of the time it heavily, but there were still some images on the memory cards.

It did what half of the time? Rained? That’s what OM System is made for

Great shots, lens seems to be perfect for such situations.

DaveLBlack · Sep 25, 2025

Judging sharpness on photos posted on DPReview is not the best way of judging sharpness. Just too much compression.

Inkentshane · Sep 25, 2025

Beautiful captures as always, thank you for sharing!

And I added Kainuu to my growing wish list

SeeingSomeThingsMissingMany · Sep 25, 2025

Lauri Mantere said:
Hi there

I photographed in last three days with a small and big white bears and wolves in the Kainuu wilderness near the Russian border. Unfortunately, half of the time it heavily, but there were still some images on the memory cards.
Regards Lauri

Bear is like oh maaaaan I wish there was a sweet shop.

️ Lauri for sharing.

Reckon 50-200/2.8 ideal for larger things : wildlife, vehicles moving, people doing stuff; also for lowish light.

--
Photography after all is interplay of light alongside perspective.

Woody Meristem · Sep 25, 2025

Absolutely beautiful photographs. As I'd expect from those two lenses even though I don't have either and don't expect to get either one.

searun · Sep 25, 2025

[No message]

Danielvr · Sep 25, 2025

DaveLBlack said:
Judging sharpness on photos posted on DPReview is not the best way of judging sharpness. Just too much compression.

Not true if you look at the 'original size' images.

mfinley · Sep 25, 2025

Danielvr said:
Danielvr said:

Judging sharpness on photos posted on DPReview is not the best way of judging sharpness. Just too much compression.

Click to expand...

Not true if you look at the 'original size' images.

That should be true.
I'm questioning this based on what I see for results with the 300/4 which does yield a sharper eye, of course that is with focus set on the eyes.

And I just want to add, the photos are great, and what an amazing experience, don't read the question as a criticism, just very interested at seeing some results and what this lens is capable of as I'm considering purchasing

Phocal · Sep 25, 2025

mfinley said:
Danielvr said:

mfinley said:

Judging sharpness on photos posted on DPReview is not the best way of judging sharpness. Just too much compression.

Click to expand...

Not true if you look at the 'original size' images.

Click to expand...

That should be true.
I'm questioning this based on what I see for results with the 300/4 which does yield a sharper eye, of course that is with focus set on the eyes.

And I just want to add, the photos are great, and what an amazing experience, don't read the question as a criticism, just very interested at seeing some results and what this lens is capable of as I'm considering purchasing

I agree with you about the eye. In the wolf photo, the eye looks good (maybe a touch soft, hard to tell). In the 4th photo, as well as the lone one he posted to show how close he was, the eye is soft. I think it has to do with the bear's color. With both his eyes and hair being brown, the camera probably struggled to achieve sharp focus on his eyes.

Satyaa · Sep 25, 2025

I know they are wild animals and can be vicious when disturbed, but they are adorable in those photos. You captured them well.

This is a good demonstration of what this lens can do. Thanks.

Edit: Based on these photos, the big white wins by a small margin. Its natural advantage is to be able to fill the frame with the subject at that distance.

--
See my profile (About me) for gear and my posting policy. My profile picture is of the first film camera I used in the early 80s, photo credit the internet.

drj3 · Sep 25, 2025

mfinley said:
Danielvr said:

mfinley said:

Judging sharpness on photos posted on DPReview is not the best way of judging sharpness. Just too much compression.

Click to expand...

Not true if you look at the 'original size' images.

Click to expand...

That should be true.
I'm questioning this based on what I see for results with the 300/4 which does yield a sharper eye, of course that is with focus set on the eyes.

And I just want to add, the photos are great, and what an amazing experience, don't read the question as a criticism, just very interested at seeing some results and what this lens is capable of as I'm considering purchasing

If you click and image to go to the gallery, then click the word jpeg for that image in the gallery it should open the image in a new window. Now click that image, you should get 100% of the uploaded image.

If you click the image in the gallery window instead of the word jpeg you get an upsized image where the upsizing depends on your browser, its size settings and your computer and its scaling and at least for my system, gives a very bad upsizing.

--
drj3

MNE · Sep 25, 2025

mfinley said:
As I look at these enlarged I don't see any sharp eyes. As most of us are evaluating this lens and interested in the results is this a result of the lens or where your focus was directed?

How much do you have to enlarge the images to see those tiny little eyes?

Seem sharp enough to me.

50-200 mm f2.8 on the bear land.

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Well-known member

Active member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts