Which lens for wildlife photography?

Wildlife photography is a demanding discipline that requires preparation (like other fields), but also gear that’s often more expensive and bulky. Even though in theory, for “amateur” wildlife photography, you can get by with relatively simple equipment, as soon as you want to step up and dig into the subject a bit more, choices quickly become complicated and the investment can add up fast. Between bodies with fast Autofocus (AF) and long-focal-length lenses that don’t offer apertures as large as more standard focal lengths, it’s not that simple. As we’ll see below, slow lenses considerably reduce your options as soon as light conditions get tricky. Not to mention various accessories like camouflage, hides, and others to blend into the environment so as not to frighten animals.

This article will therefore focus above all on camera gear and especially on choosing your wildlife lens. For those who want more advice, particularly on which settings to use and how to prepare a wildlife photo session, I’ll soon write a complementary article. No need to fly across the world on safari to shoot wildlife. It can be at the park next to your place, in your garden, etc. In this article, I discuss lenses suited to this practice, for DSLRs as well as mirrorless, and of course the bodies that may be appropriate. At the end of the article I also mention some accessories to round out your backpack so you can head out in search of our animal friends and bring back your best shots. For gear-minded readers, I invite you to read the article on lenses for landscape photography.

All the products mentioned in the article are summarized in recap tables in the relevant sections. To meet our readers’ requests, we now offer three online retailers where you can get information, study the specs, and compare prices. Everything is in the tables, which you can sort by clicking on the header column. It’s the best way to buy from whoever you want at the best price!

First I wanted to talk to you in a few paragraphs about camera bodies, which can prove crucial for wildlife photography. Indeed, a camera with a large sensor obviously offers better low-light performance, being able to push ISO sensitivity more easily before digital noise (an artifact characterized by colored speckles) degrades the image. It will therefore deliver better images when you have to shorten the shutter speed to keep a correct exposure and avoid ending up with completely dark frames. If you’re new to photography, remember that the exposure parameters (ISO, shutter speed, and aperture) are linked. If your shutter speed isn’t fast enough when shooting, you can always double the ISO to double your speed. For wildlife photography, you’re often in situations where you need very short shutter speeds to freeze the movement of animals moving quickly. Good high-ISO capability and better handling of it via a large sensor will thus be valuable.

However, that means a higher price, weight, and bulk. Many wildlife photographers stick with APS-C because, besides the fact of “extending the focal length” (APS-C bodies have a sensor area about 1.5× smaller than full-frame sensors), the bodies with the best AF are generally the most high-end, and these are cheaper in APS-C. Nevertheless, most advanced lenses for this discipline are more often designed for full-frame, which slightly reduces the appeal of APS-C since these lenses are fairly bulky and will make your bag end up just as big and heavy whether you have an APS-C or full-frame body. To go further in your learning, I invite you to read the article on how to choose the best DSLR for you!

But APS-C still has the advantage of offering bodies that get very capable AF quickly without having to spend several thousand euros. Thus, for example, you’ll find bodies from Nikon and Canon like the Canon R100, R10, R7, R50 or Nikon Z50 II, Nikon Zfc, Z30, with performance close to full-frame sports bodies costing around 5000 €, with high burst rates and buffers whose capacity will let you shoot successive frames over a longer period.

Today, many mirrorless cameras have interesting performance for wildlife photography, the latest Fuji X-T and Sony’s A6700 for example, or the OM SYSTEM OM-5 Mark II / OM SYSTEM OM-3 and Panasonic GH7 from Panasonic and OM System in Micro Four Thirds format. Sony has even released a full-frame sports body meant to compete with 5,000 € single-grip models. But don’t worry, if full-frame interests you, the latest Sony A7 are also more capable and relatively competent. However, mirrorless systems are also (still a bit) limited in lens selection, though things are much better now. Moreover, very long focal lengths are often less in demand. Manufacturers first focused on standard optics, and in most brands offering mirrorless, this type of lens is only just starting to be developed.

Most DSLRs in this range are also often more robust, with weather-sealed construction, whereas on a mirrorless camera that won’t always be the case, particularly at Sony. In this field where you’ll be going out in morning damp, hiding in the brush, and scrambling all over, a solid build is often preferable. Having a long-lasting battery so you don’t have to swap it regularly is also a big plus, which still gives DSLRs an edge.

Below is a recap table of a few bodies we have no hesitation recommending for wildlife photography.

Now let’s get to the heart of the matter. It’s obvious but, in most cases, animals won’t be easy to approach, which should lead you to favor long focal lengths. This will let you stay far enough away so as not to disturb them and still get frames tight enough to feel like you were right next to them (and at the same time, when I was photographing a group of lions on the savannah in the Serengeti, Tanzania, I was glad to have my 300 mm and not a wide-angle, right!).

For choosing lenses for wildlife photography, we’ll therefore tend to recommend focal lengths starting at 300 mm and beyond, though it’s possible to get close enough to some animals or use certain techniques to make do with shorter focal lengths. Unfortunately, the longer the focal length, the more expensive, heavier, and larger the lens will be. Using cameras with “small” sensors reduces the disadvantages of weight and bulk, but very little the price, and in these formats the selection of this type of lens is fairly limited anyway. Also remember that a 300 mm on a Micro Four Thirds sensor is not the same as a 300 mm on APS-C or full-frame. Be careful not to mix everything up when comparing focal lengths across different sensor sizes (it’s the same for aperture and ISO, ya know…).

These long focal lengths also have another drawback: their maximum aperture. Indeed, it’s difficult to have a large aperture with such long focal lengths without increasing the lens’s size and weight. The longer the focal length, the more that’s the case. Beyond certain focal lengths, you won’t find lenses faster than f/2.8, then f/4 (at 800 mm you won’t even find lenses faster than f/5.6 at Nikon and Canon). We’re already talking about lenses measuring 45 cm long and weighing nearly 5 kg… at prices that defy all competition, obviously! Some manufacturers therefore offer zooms covering very long focal lengths, like Panasonic’s 100–400 mm (200–800 mm full-frame equivalent) or Sigma and Tamron’s 150–600 mm, which are even more limited in aperture since they rarely offer better than f/6.3 at the longest end.

The AF of these lenses will also need to be responsive enough. Indeed, getting the animal in the frame is one thing; being able to track its movements is another, especially since the more you zoom in on it, the faster it leaves the frame. Manufacturers are aware of this and pay special attention to it, integrating the best AF systems and adding focus limiters that let you speed things up a bit more by preventing the lens from focusing at distances where you know the animal won’t be. Of course, the camera body, as mentioned above, also has a role to play since its autofocus module largely determines responsiveness, speed, and tracking.

Finally, most of these lenses are stabilized—and it’s easy to see why. Stabilization isn’t just meant to reduce camera-shake blur in the image due to your movements. In absolute terms that’s not a problem with very fast-moving animals that will force you to use such short shutter speeds anyway (Ex: 1/1000 or 1/2000) that stabilization won’t be necessary; but it also serves to stabilize the view, because the longer your focal length, the more your movements will impact your framing in the viewfinder. Concretely, what does that mean? Well, for example, with a 600 mm, as soon as you move the slightest bit, you’ll no longer see the animal in your viewfinder (your angle of view is really very narrow with this type of focal length). With mirrorless cameras whose sensor is stabilized, you’ll benefit from this comfort even if the lens isn’t; with a DSLR and your eye to the optical viewfinder, only the lens can provide that comfort.

To conclude on lenses, it will essentially all depend, I’d say, on your budget (yeah!), the type of body (mFT/APS-C/full-frame), and your use. You’re not going to buy a 600 mm at 5000 € to photograph a bird in your garden twice a year, are you?!

As with the DSLR lenses mentioned below, you’ll find a recap table below with links to the 3 online retailers (comparing is always better, right!).

In mirrorless, the choice is a bit more complicated because there are more brands. In addition, there are three sensor sizes (mFT, APS-C, and Full Frame), but paradoxically the selection remains more limited.

So we’ll start with Micro Four Thirds bodies from Panasonic and Olympus, which have the advantage of sharing the same mount and can therefore use lenses from both brands.

I’ve put together a selection of telephotos that I consider interesting with this mount. For small budgets, I recommend –>

With a more comfortable budget, you now have choices in Micro Four Thirds for wildlife –>

Even if Canon arrived well after Sony in the mirrorless world, they’ve caught up on their “delay” and today you have a decent choice for wildlife, although the selection in the Canon RF(S) mount (APS-C) is still more than limited.

Here are the lenses we particularly recommend for wildlife

As you can see, the choice is still quite broad and interesting. It will all depend on your budget and needs.

As with Canon, the selection for Nikon Z DX APS-C is more than limited, and you’ll quickly need to turn to lenses dedicated to Full Frame to shoot wildlife on Nikon. Here are a few lenses worth a closer look.

The advantage with Nikon is that third-party brands like Tamron offer superb lenses at a lower price.

For the L-mount (Panasonic or Sigma full-frame bodies), the selection is again very interesting, with many quality lenses from Sigma.

At Fujifilm, the selection is more limited but still interesting, especially with Sigma’s arrival. Here are a few ideas:

Sony is the brand with by far the most choice for wildlife. I’m not going to list every option because there are too many, but here are already some great references.

For Sony APS-C bodies, the choice is very limited this time:

On the other hand, for full-frame bodies, you’ve got plenty to enjoy –>

For small budgets, I particularly recommend the Tamron 70–300 mm f/4.5–6.3 Di III RXD.

For larger budgets:

Unfortunately, at the time of updating this article, many DSLR references are no longer available at all, as a large majority of people have switched to more recent mirrorless cameras.

For APS-C DSLRs at Nikon and Canon, to start out you can look at entry-level 70–300 mm f/4–5.6 lenses that will give you 105–450 mm equivalents and remain very affordable (between 400 and 500 €). Sigma and Tamron offer cheaper lenses of this type for these DSLRs (from 150–200 €). However, be sure to choose the mount corresponding to your camera’s brand (it’d be dumb to buy a Sigma in Canon mount for your Nikon, right!). These 70–300 mm lenses also exist in full-frame versions, which are compatible with APS-C bodies and have the benefit of being fully reusable if you move to full-frame later. Still for full-frame but compatible with APS-C bodies, you’ll find the 100–400 mm f/4.5–6.3 from Sigma and Tamron (around 800 €), better quality than the 70–300 mm, but also more expensive and larger. One step up in price, Canon offers a very nice 100–400 mm version II. Finally, among zooms, you have the 150–600 mm f/5–6.3 that go even farther and have proven themselves (from Sigma and Tamron), but again with slightly higher prices (close to 1000 €) and larger dimensions. Nikon also offers a very nice 200–500 mm f/5.6, priced close to the 150–600 mm and of very good quality. I personally own the Canon 70–300 mm L-series (pro then), but with a price matching that range (around 1000 € again).

For primes, the selection is not so much more limited as more complicated to finance. Basically, it’ll quickly cost an arm and a leg—or both—which will make things tough when you have to handle your camera! There are still 300 mm f/4 (Canon / Nikon) that are “relatively affordable” (between 1000/1200 €), but unless you turn to the used market, you’ll struggle to find 300 mm f/2.8, 400 mm, or 500 mm f/4 in your budget. I won’t go into detail on the 600 mm and 800 mm, which are priced out of reach for most mortals. Finally, in the very expensive category too, there are fast-aperture zooms like the 120–300 mm f/2.8 (Sigma) or 200–400 mm f/4, and even Sigma’s completely crazy 200–500 mm f/2.8, at about 20,000 € (yes, that’s the price, not counting the sherpa or donkey rental to carry its 15 kg…).

Instead of putting a recap table in which many lenses are no longer available, I’d rather invite you to check out our lens-choice photo quiz.

All this gear will end up weighing a lot; a tripod or monopod will therefore be a good ally. Especially since, if you use hide techniques, you’ll have to stay a long time in the same place holding your camera at the ready and ideally aimed at where the animal(s) will appear. A monopod will let you follow the animals’ movements more easily, although it obviously won’t stabilize your camera as well, but it will give you more flexibility. Some tripods even have an integrated monopod, meaning you can remove the center column. Don’t hesitate to invest a minimum in this gear; tripods and monopods that seem affordable are often not very stable and rarely go the distance. You’ll find good references at Manfrotto, Sirui, Benro, Gitzo…

Sometimes you won’t have the budget to get lenses whose focal lengths reach a certain length, or you’ll simply already have a 70–200 mm f/2.8 and won’t want to add another big zoom to your kit. In that case, you can look at teleconverters, which are adapters that extend the focal length. There are three main types in particular.

• TC14s let you “multiply” your focal length by 1.4. Your 70–200 mm therefore becomes roughly a 100–300 mm. Be careful, though, because you’ll lose one stop of light, which simply means you’ll no longer be able to open at f/2.8 but at f/4, which can matter depending on the situation;
• TC17s, as you’ll have guessed, multiply your focal length by 1.7, but you’ll lose 1.5 stops, turning your f/2.8 into an f/4.8;
• Finally, TC20s, more commonly called doublers, will consequently “double” the focal length and turn your 70–200 into a 140–400 mm. However, you lose 2 stops this time, i.e., an aperture of f/5.6 instead of f/2.8.

If you do the math, you’ll understand that the smaller your lens’s maximum aperture, the more a teleconverter will limit what you can do, up to the point of losing Autofocus. For example, Nikon’s 200–500 mm f/5.6 will become a 400–1000 mm f/11, but AF needs a lens that opens to at least f/8 to work… Moreover, they reduce image quality. Thus, they’re better suited to high-end lenses opening to at least f/4. In fact, this quality loss is why TC17s don’t have a great reputation; TC14s and TC20s are often less destructive. Camera brands offer TCs, but you’ll find good TCs from Sigma and Kenko, among others.

Other accessories are useful for wildlife photography, especially for hides. You’ll find blinds that let you hide from animals to be more discreet and make it easier to approach them; some animals will also come closer on their own. You also have camouflage accessories for your camera; some lenses are even sold with a camouflage covering on purpose. You can also buy these covers designed for specific lenses, like the one sold by Easycover for Sigma’s 150–600 mm Contemporary.

For mirrorless users, the limited number of such lenses in some brands will require using a mount adapter to put DSLR lenses on your body. But be careful: these can also make you lose functions like AF or cause compatibility issues. You’ll therefore need to research their limitations carefully before buying.

There you go—this article on lenses for wildlife photography comes to an end. Don’t forget that even if gear is important, technique and preparation are at least as important. So don’t hesitate to read the (very soon) associated article with my shooting tips and to ask me your questions in the comments. In the meantime, if you’re interested in landscape photography, you can take a look at choosing your wide-angle lens.

See you soon

Written by Sylvain PONS

I've been passionate about photography since 2010, learning as I went along. Today, I dedicate myself to guiding others in their choice of camera gear and sharing a variety of tips to improve their photography skills.

Despite our care, a mistake may have slipped into this article. If you find any, please don't hesitate to let us know so we can correct it as soon as possible and keep our information up-to-date!