What’s the BEST Lens for Wildlife Photography? If I had a nickel for every time I was asked this question, I could retire. It’s a very common and extremely valid question to ask. And to cut right to the chase, there is no one or right answer to this question. And that’s for many reasons from you, the photographer to the subject and most importantly, to the story you want to tell with your photograph. But there is a focal length that gets used over and over again and I feel is the best one to start with.
400mm, you simply can’t go wrong with this focal length however you get to it. It’s the focal length I started with and depended on for the first years of my career. It’s the lessons I learned from that lens and some of the images it created that got me to this point. You can get to this focal length in many ways, 300mm f/4 with a converter, 80-400mm, 200-400mm or a 400mm prime. No matter how you get there or which lens you have, you have the same angle of view and that’s key.
Angle of view, how much of the world you see around your subject, that’s how I think of it. Wildlife photography is very much about storytelling. What’s the subject doing, why did you take it’s photo, how does it survive, a humorous moment and so much more can be conveyed in just one click depending on what other elements you incorporate with the subject in the frame. That’s where angle of view comes into play.
The key component of the 400mm is its MFD. Minimum Focusing Distance often plays a huge role in the storytelling. Many think of it in regards to image size but I think of it in regards of doing The Dance. The Dance is where you use the focal length to exclude all the unwanted elements in a frame while you include all those that tell the story. You can do it with any focal length but for wildlife and especially in the beginning, the 400mm just excels at The Dance.
Perhaps the greatest gift of this lens is the biological lenses it teaches. Didn’t know a piece of camera gear can teach biology? Get close physically and use optics to isolate, this is the very important mantra I learned from those first years shooting with the Nikkor 400mm f/5.6 ED-IF lens. No matter the lens, no matter the subject, this is a key concept to better photographs. In wildlife photography, the 400mm is the king at teaching this concept. You will have to zoom with your feet to get the image size you desire often shooting with the 400mm. Watching your subject to learn what to do and not do in approaching a critter is a vital lesson that you will learn with this lens!
Now are there other lenses, focal lengths you can successfully use in wildlife photography? Oh heck ya, tons, my favorite being the Nikkor 800mm f/5.6 VR, but I don’t recommend you start there. Even though I use the 800mm for much of my critter photography, I use the lessons I learned with the 400mm. And even though I own the 800mm, I have not one but two 400mm lenses I still depend on. The lens is a tool that your passion turns into the vehicle to tell stories. So while there is a best lens, never lose sight that it takes YOU to make the magic happen!
This guest post was written by the legendary photographer Moose Peterson, a well-known wildlife photographer whose work has been published in over 143 magazines world wide. Moose is the author of 26 books and has been recognized as A Nikon Ambassador (USA), Lexar Elite Photographer, recipient of the John Muir Conservation Award, Research Associate with the Endangered Species Recovery Program, to name just a few.
All images copyright Moose Peterson.
Brilliant, and a very inspirational and helpful article, thanks.
Hi! I bought a Canon EOS R last year and rented the Canon EF 100-400 v2 lens using the adapter. I went to Denali and shot many photos and overall was very pleased. On this trip I was not successful taking good eagle shots as the birds were too far away. My question is a theoretical one. 2020, Canon is most likely going to release a native RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1 lens. Later this year a RF 70-400mm 4.5-5.6 lens will most likely be coming out. This lens will be very compact and lighter than the EF version. We are heading off to Kenya in 2021 and do not have enough experience in which lens would be a better wildlife lens. I know more reach is great for bird shots but is losing stops worth it. Thoughts?
You can never have a long enough lens when it comes to wildlife. I photograph wildlife and birds from a 14 ft touring kayak, I call it the great equalizer on water but a kayak is useless on land, so I try to do my birding at wild life refuge that have an auto rout going through it such as Bombay Hook NWR in Delaware or places like Assateaque national seashore in Virginia. I shoot with a Pentax K5 MKII and a K3 with a Sigma 120-400 F 4.5-5.6 even shooting with a crop sensor camera at times I still come up short, as they say, it’s the nature of the beast
Sorry I am a Nikon shooter (D7100 + D750), I can’t help you on that. For wildlife shooting read Steeve Perry pdf that sells under 13$us. There are many sites that can help you on choosing a canon camera for wildlife, such as cameralabs; Tony Northrup (canon shooter); etc. reminding you that shooting BIF is the most challenging thing the AF has to do, so there few cameras that are adequate for the job.
Good luck
thanks
Hate to disagree with the pros, but a bit of misinformation here. In DX, 266mm on your zoom will get you the very same Angle of View as 400mm will on an FX (and 400 will get you the same as 600), so the area your camera will “see” and photograph will be the same. That’s not photographic expertise talking, it’s just science. Also, Angle of View and Field of View are the same thing (photographically speaking). This being true, you should get the same “dance” (with regard to angle of view) with 266mm on DX as you would at 400mm on FX. This doesn’t address other issues (DOF, etc.) but that wasn’t really the topic of Mr. Peterson’s post.
I seek your advise regarding the possible cause of my blurred images obtained with my Canon EOS 5D Mark II when used with my EF100-400 f/4.5-5.6 (image stabilised). The unit was purchased new. I took images with it on a 3-section 055X Manfrotto tripod with 486 RC2 ball head (image stabilisation – turned off). I have sent the camera together with the lens to the service centre with samples of the image to ask for a check and for calibration.
It was done (at least I hope so) but I do not see any discernible difference after the calibration. I still do not get the quality of images I see shown on the Internet with the same lens used by other wildlife photographers. I have tried mirror lock-up and remote shutter release but still to no avail. Does it come down to post-processing or is this a fault of the lens. With other lenses I own, I do not get such a problem. I am at my wits end. Am I missing something? Please help.
You probably have your answer there….., For wildlife try shooting with a gimbal head as Steve Perry does all the time, because any movement at shooting speed under 1/1000 sec will most of the time will show by a lack of sharpness (blurred image). Also the 5DMKII was never recognized for having a great AF system.
Thank you, Ardo. Never tried the gimbal. Will give it a try. What Canon camera, with a comparable price point or equivalent set of specifications as the 5DMkII, would you say has a better focussing system?
I’ve been using a Nikon D7100 with the TC-14E III and TC-20E III on my AF-S 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II.
It’s a great setup and I recommend it.
I have been shooting photos with my nikon D40 and Nikon D200. I have been using a nikon 70-300mm 1:4.5-5.6 G lens for wildlife photography and have not been very successful especially in low light. I am planning on taking a couple of trip this next year with my focus on wildlife photography (birds and other animals), so I have been browsing around to see what is available. I am currently comparing the Nikon D750 24.1 DX and the Nikon D810 FX. What I like about the 810 is the auto ISO. However, my funds are limited.
I have also been taking a look at the Nikon 70-200mm f/2 8G ED VRII AF-S.
Also will this lens be interchangeable with my other nikon cameras and will the lenses I have for my other nikon cameras work on either the Nikon D750 or the D810?
Thanks so much for your suggestions!
Deanna
Deanna,
The D750 and D810 are both 24x36mm cameras (FX) and they both feature auto ISO. 16x24mm (DX) cameras belong to the 3000, 5000 and 7000 series.
If we forget very old glass, all Nikon lenses work on all bodies, but DX lenses are not well suited to FX cameras because of vignetting. To avoid that problem, they are normally used in DX (cropped) mode. The D750 and D810 recognise DX lenses and switch automatically (by default) to DX mode. Obviously, you will then loose half of the costly pixels of your FX sensor.
The 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 and 70-200 are FX lenses,which means they work on all bodies without having to switch to DX mode.
However, the 70-200’s range is too short for wildlife. For lions and hippos, it could be enough if you can run very fast, but it’s definitly too short for birds. A good solution is given by Nasim: the 300mm f/4 and a 1.4x teleconverter. Unfortunately, you can’t use your 70-300 with a teleconverter.
Cheers
Deanna,
I’ll second Pierre’s suggestion of the 300 f/4 with the 1.4 TC, which on an FX body gives me 420mm. I’ve used it on a D7000, D610 and now D750 and it’s a superb lens. I sometimes miss having a zoom, but you can’t beat a prime lens with a fixed aperture. I get very sharp images with great contrast, color and bokeh. I photograph primarily birds with this lens and find it a great focal length. I started with the 70-300mm lens you mention and found it too soft and terrible in low light, and not long enough. But it was a great lens for learning and the light weight was wonderful. I once tried a Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 with a 2x TC and it was much better than the 70-300, but not nearly as sharp as the Nikon 300mm f/4 and the color in the images always came out a bit brownish/yellow which I did not like. I also tried a Sigma 150-400mm and didn’t like it either.
As for bodies, I used the Nikon D610 a bit and liked it a lot, getting much better detail than the D7000 and much better image noise levels than the D7000, which wasn’t very good at ISO of 800 and greater, but found the autofocus not as good as I hoped. I’m now using the D750 and like it as much as the D610 with the added bonus of better autofocus, which is extremely helpful with wildlife photography. I still have to shoot in shorter bursts than I would like because of the limited buffer, but I think it’s overall great for wildlife photography. I haven’t shot with the D810 but hear it’s an incredible camera, but much better suited to landscape, architecture, portraiture, etc. because it’s simply not fast enough for wildlife. So if you shoot mainly wildlife I’d go with the D750 in the FX category. I’m also using the D750 for landscape and am happy with it for now, though maybe some day I can add a D810. I have to save my money for a while after all of my above explorations. Good luck in your choice and hope this is of help.
I have never found anything that has been more informative and helpful that the article on settings for the d800 and the explanation of those settings. Thank you.
Excelllent article and some lovely photos!
While beeing a Canon user I can’t use Nikon lenses but July 2013 I invested heavily in Canon EF 200-400 mm/4 with a built in 1.4X extender, and I just love it!
I use it basically set on 400mm* and like you describe you are using your prime 400 mm. Due to a spinal disease I’m not so “mobile” any more so focusing with my feet is not always an option. With this lens you instantly get a 560mm lens (by pushing a lever) if you need it and you can go down to 200mm as an alternative for backing up.
The lens performs extremely well, fully at the level of Canons legendary 400 mm/2.8 (of course except the speed) and it’s not at all that heavy. For me it has given me a big step further in my shooting. The BIG con = the PRICE!!!!
I have also started to use this lens for video on a EOS 1DC filming in 4K from which you can get surprisingly good stills.
Looking forward to more articles from you!
* In Lightroom I can see that the majority of my photos are shot at 400mm.