Introduction to Super-Telephoto Lenses

Introduction to Super-Telephoto Lenses

Bristling along the sidelines of practically every professional sporting event, super-telephoto lenses are known for their ability to reach out and capture distant subjects with exceptional clarity and speed. They feel incredible in the hand, with top-of-the-line build quality and a heft that gives shooters confidence in their equipment. Many feature a variety of switches and buttons that allow users to set up the lens for optimal performance in any situation.

In addition to length, these lenses feature all of the latest technology, such as advanced optical construction, accurate image stabilization, and exceptionally quick autofocus motors. Super-telephotos sit at the top of their respective lens lineups because of this assortment of features and capabilities, and being packed with the latest tech ensures that any investment is well worth it.

Focal Length

The most important feature of these lenses will always be their focal length. The ability to photograph and record images from an extremely long distance cannot be understated, especially when dealing with subject matter that is inaccessible, easily spooked, or both. The most common use for lenses longer than 300mm would be sports and wildlife, where photographers are prevented from getting close to their subjects.

Prime lenses tend to dominate in terms of quality and length, with the longest offerings currently available being a few 800mm primes, although there have been even longer focal lengths available in the past. This compares to zoom lenses, which tend to top out around 600mm at their longest reach. While primes can be longer and certainly faster, zooms do offer greater flexibility to cover a huge array of super-tele focal lengths within a single lens.

Shot with Canon RF 800mm f/11 IS STM Lens

The next thing to consider is sensor size, especially since APS-C and Micro Four Thirds cameras come with inherent crop factors that will effectively extend the equivalent focal length. This makes these smaller sensor cameras incredibly useful for sports and wildlife shooters, since they can enjoy more reach and pack somewhat more lightly.


The second most important feature of any lens is the aperture. With super-telephotos, you will find that extremely fast apertures aren’t as common, and that the fastest options are also significantly larger and more expensive than the more conservative, slower models. If we look at 400mm lenses, we might find f/2.8 and f/4 options. Comparing just the size and weight, we can see an f/2.8 lens is significantly larger and heavier than an f/4 version. If quality and speed are all that matter, then the f/2.8 would appear to be the better option; however, one must consider one’s needs and decide whether it is worth taking a hike with the larger lens.

The f/2.8 lens is much larger and heavier than the f/4.
The f/2.8 lens is much larger and heavier than the f/4.

Zoom lenses will usually feature variable apertures, which keeps overall lens size down, though some do manage to maintain a constant maximum aperture. These options are generally slower than their prime lens counterparts, but can still be useful in a variety of situations, especially considering the ISO ranges possible on the latest digital cameras.

Canon RF 800mm f/11 IS STM Lens
Canon RF 800mm f/11 IS STM Lens

As focal lengths increase, so do the relative maximum apertures. Much of this has to do with size and practicality: an 800mm f/2.8 lens would be so large and heavy that it would be unrealistic for someone to carry, let alone mount on a tripod and use. Despite the impracticality of larger apertures on longer lenses, it’s still a balancing game, for many applications, between speed and size/weight of a lens. Especially with something like a 300mm lens, where you have choices to make between an f/2.8 or an f/4 or even an f/5.6, you should consider the shutter speed and ISO advantages of the faster lens, as well as the improved control over depth of field.

Differing from primes, it’s also worth noting that zooms have the advantage, or consequence, depending on how you look at it, of using a variable maximum aperture. It’s common to see tele-zooms with an f/4.5-6.3 or so maximum aperture, meaning that it can open up to f/4.5 at the widest focal length and only f/6.3 at the longest focal length. The benefit of this is reduced weight and a smaller form factor; the downside is, of course, the slower design. Zooms with constant maximum apertures, on the other hand, have the same maximum aperture throughout the zoom range but are noticeably heavier than variable maximum aperture lenses.

Image Stabilization

Image stabilization (IS) is almost necessary when attempting to handhold lenses at these focal lengths. The reasons for this are that the longer lengths show more camera shake, and the heft of these lenses makes them exponentially more difficult to handhold, which is why they are often found mounted on a monopod or tripod. Today's lenses are rated for several stops of compensation, which is exceptionally useful when trying to shoot handheld.

Another of the benefits found in super-telephotos is the multiple IS modes available. Usually, there are specific settings for panning and general handheld shooting. This allows shooters, like those working on monopods at a sporting event, to track horizontal motion more easily in the scene and capture it. A side benefit to IS is that it will usually stabilize your viewfinder, as well as your final image. This makes composition much easier, since the image you see won’t be jittery and shaking.

Simulation of image stabilization

One other consideration to be mindful of is the increasing popularity of in-body image stabilization (IBIS), which opens up the possibility to use older, non-stabilized lenses more effectively and lessens the need for manufacturers to have IS in all of their lenses. Or, on the other hand, IBIS can often be used in conjunction with lens-based IS for even more effective stabilization in a wide variety of shooting situations.


Focusing quickly and efficiently is a priority with super-telephoto lenses, especially relating to their use in action and sports photography. While much of this is reliant on the camera and user, the inclusion of a supersonic or ultrasonic motor does a lot to ensure speedy, quiet focusing. These lenses also benefit from the inclusion of multiple settings on the physical lens, such as a focus limiter that will focus on subjects within a certain range, or from a specific distance and farther. This means that the camera will not waste time hunting throughout the long focus range of the lens.

Other features include an AF lock button that will stop focusing so that users can prepare for a certain shot or position. Also, focus presets can be available on certain lenses to automatically return the focus distance to a specific setting. Additionally, these lenses will generally have a manual override option that will assist in fine-tuning focus.

Optical Technologies

Nearly every piece of optical technology is utilized in super-telephoto lenses, from nano coatings to prevent flaring to fluorite elements that control aberrations. Most common are extra-low dispersion elements, which work with other elements, like fluorite and, to a lesser extent, aspherical, to produce the sharpest, most detailed images possible by reducing visible aberrations and correcting for distortion. Beyond just improving image quality, Diffractive Optics or Phase Fresnel lenses (depending on the manufacturer) are used to reduce the overall size and weight of the lens while also reducing various aberrations.

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/4E PF ED VR Lens

Anti-reflective coatings are found on nearly all lenses nowadays, and super-telephotos are no exception. These coatings help eliminate flare and ghosting by reducing internal reflections. Also, many super telephotos have an additional fluorine or water- and dust-repellent coating on the front and rear elements that will allow users to clean their lenses easily when water or oil come in contact with the glass.

Filtration can be a challenge for these lenses, as most have front elements much larger than your standard screw-on options. Adding filters to the lenses is, instead, accomplished through the use of drop-in type filters that fit into dedicated holders found near the rear of the lens, which keeps filter size significantly smaller than would be needed with front-mounted filters.


As they stand at the top of their lens lineups, these lenses are built to the highest standards, using materials like magnesium alloy to increase strength and keep the lenses lightweight. In addition to this, they are weather sealed to ensure that the lens will keep functioning, even when out in the field during a rainstorm, or while trekking through a rainforest on a search for an elusive creature.

Now, one common question is, “Why are so many super-telephoto lenses white?” The explanation is simple: since these lenses have a larger surface area and are constantly being used in the great outdoors, a white finish on the lens barrel reflects some of the sunlight and reduces the chances that any critical elements or parts will expand due to heat and throw things out of alignment during shooting. Realistically, however, the actual amount of heat gain is probably negligible, and, with the durable build quality of these lenses, users of black lenses shouldn’t worry about it.


Many super-telephoto lenses are compatible with teleconverters to further extend their reach. These will magnify the focal length by 1.4, 1.7, or 2x without sacrificing important features like autofocus or IS. This additional reach does cost one to two stops, depending on the magnification of the teleconverter. Compatibility can also be an issue for some lenses and cameras, as teleconverters have a glass element that can come into contact with the rear element of some lenses. Also, with a loss of light, some cameras’ AF systems may not be able to function.

Canon Extender EF 1.4X III
Canon Extender EF 1.4X III

Alternative Lens Options

Many photographers will find that these lenses fall well outside their personal budgets and needs, but this doesn’t mean that they should be left out of the super-telephoto world. Many budget options are available, though without the plethora of features and abilities of their more famous big brothers.

There are some standard super-telephotos and zooms available without the corrective optics and fancy optical designs that make lenses sharper and more compact. These lenses tend to be a bit slower and have all-manual controls but, if you can’t afford the latest and greatest or are simply looking for an entryway to super-telephotos, any lens is better than no lens at all!

Are you a fan of super-telephotos? Which one(s) do you carry, and what features do you look for when purchasing one? Share your thoughts in the Comments section, below.


I bought the G-2 second gen Tamron 150-600mm .It came with a 90mm uv filter and the tap-on device. In the past I have owned several Sigma 150-600mm tele lenes. The glass in those is pretty good but the build quality isn't. I wore the zoom mech. twice.. The Tamron is a beautiful lens in every way. A solid build, quiet VC, spot on auto focus for just under $1,500 bucks, the extra 500 more than a Sigma of the same power but sooo worth it. My only complaint is the lens is a bit slower to lock on the flying subjects. Maybe when I use the tap  on adjustment I can tweek it more to my desires.. For the price, I'd give it 4-1/2 stars out of 5..  Sure, I'd rather have a Canon 800mm but 12 grand is out of my world at present.

Hi Frank, thanks for writing in to recommend the Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2 lens. It is indeed a beautiful lens, and it's so much more practical than that Canon 800mm you lust over! May it bring you many memorable pictures in the years ahead. Thanks again for the comment and for reading the Explora blog!

I currently have a Nikon d7200 and am looking at super telephoto lenses. I already have a 70-200 2.8 that I have used for horse shows. I’m now looking for more reach for bird and wildlife photo (as well as for horse shows where I cannot get close to the jumps and the 200 just isn’t doing the job). I’m having trouble figuring out which lens would be best: 150-600 tamron or sigma, or the Nikon 200-500. To throw another wrench into the question, I know at some point I will be upgrading my d7200 (maybe to d500 or the mirror less - not sure yet as I also do a lot of macro work, especially fast moving insects). Thank you so much for any advice!

Hi Keira,

To give you plenty of range and higher performance, I would recommend going with the Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Lens for Nikon F, BH # SI1506005SN, which can definitely keep up with a Nikon D500 in the future.

Planning to do a backpacking trip through peru, bolivia, argentina, chile and the antartica at the end of Sept through Dec. Wildlife and landscape are my two main goals as I will be visiting Machu Picchu, Amazon, Iguazu Falls and the Antarctica. I ordered the Nikon 500mm pf back on Marc 31 and I currently have a d7500 with an all-around 18-300mm and the lightweight ultra wide angle 10-20mm. I have always traveled with the 18-300mm but as I grow as a photographer, I begin to notice how soft my images are with that lens even though it’s great to cut down on weight by having an all-around lens.

For this trip, I definitely want to get a sharper telephoto and a sharper all-around zoom as it will be a one in a lifetime trip and if I am spending so much on the trip itself, I definitely want to have good photos as well. I have the 500mm pf ordered (still backordered and hasn’t shipped), should I

1. Instead order the 300mm pf to go with the d7500 (with extra reach) and a better zoom lens for landscape and general use?

2. or should I get a Sony mirrorless with the 100-400mm super zoom and a 24-70mm f/4?

3. or get the Z7 with the 500mm pf or 300mm pf and the kit 24-70mm f/4?

Does it make sense to carry these setup (about 3kg total) of gear in my backpack and try to keep it to around 10kg total with all of my other stuff for 3 months of backpacking and hiking on Inca trail and in Patagonia for about 10miles a day?

To cut down the weight and still be able to use your lenses with autofocus, I would go with the Nikon Z7 with the FTZ adapter, the 500mm PF for the extra telephoto range and the Z 24-70mm f/4 to cover the wide to mid-telephoto range.


Really liked the article, a lot of cool tips I didn't already know. 

I had a couple questions so hopefully someone could help me out. I apologize in advance I am all over the place, very indecisive. 

Currently I have a canon 5d mark iii with some wide lenses like the 16-35 but, I really want to move into the telephoto area simply because I love animals (hope to shoot them one day) and I love the compression telephotos give you. My problem is I can only buy or am limiting myself to one lens for now and I don't know which to get. 

I'm looking at the canon 70-200 f2.8 version 1 vs the version 2. I've done my research and the version 2 is hands down better in every possible way so it would be better to buy but it is at least $500 more in the used category and more if brand new. I was looking at the 70-200 because photographers say everyone should have this iconic lens and it makes sense since I have the occasional wedding and I'm doing a bunch of couple photos, portraits and singles. 

As mentioned earlier I want to do bird and animal photography as well so I have begun looking and reading about the entry level telephotos such as the 300 f4 canon L and the 400 f5.6 L. Both of these being around $1000 used and $2000 new. The 300 is ever so slightly cheaper so I would probably add in a 1.4 teleconverter. Another problem comes in here, I haven't really read too much about pro/cons and which lens would the best and which completely suck with teleconverters.

Sorry, I'm so indecisive but recently someone posted a 300 f2.8L version 1 canon online for sale for cheap, I'm talking low 2000"s while this is a $8000 dollar lens. So I started reading about this lens and yeah, hopefully you can see where my problem is.

Essentially I would prefer something fast(aperature wise), weight will not be an issue here I'm young and I'll carry it if I have to, money wise I think I'm willing to spend a bit but I won't go into the thousands 100% no. 

If you have free time and a good heart let me know your thoughts and suggestions. 

Much Appreciated!!

If you are just starting out with telephoto, going with a 70-200mm f/2.8 (IS II if you can afford) is your best bet. It gives a great range and feel without getting too big or too expensive. It even serves wonderfully as a portrait lens and can take a teleconverter (at a loss of 1 stop for a 1.4x and 2 stops for a 2x and some sharpness) if you need extra range later on. Otherwise, go with the entry-level primes, such as the 300mm f/4 as a good start. 300mm f/2 for low 2000s is tempting, but unless you really want to invest heavily in this stuff the 70-200mm is a good starting place.

The simplest answer would be to try to purchase the longest and brightest lens you can afford.  Unfortunately, that is not always possible.  Of the lenses you listed, the Canon 300mm f/2.8 lens would be my favorite option, as it is both bright and extremely sharp, and even if you added a 2x teleconverter on the lens, it would become the equivalent of a 600mm f/5.6 lens.  You would lose the brightness, but gain distance at a relatively low price point for the teleconverter (compared to the price of a 600mm lens alone).  That would be the "best luck" circumstance option.  Of the other options, the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 lens would be the most flexible option, working for portraits, weddings, and some closer wildlife images.  For a prime option, if you can find the Canon 300mm f/4 lens, it would be a good option for the price and the focal length.

Hi. My wife has a Canon EOS 5D MK 2 with a 24-105mm lens. She would like a telephoto lens for wildlife and discrete portraiture photography. Weight is a factor  as although she has a tripod she doesn’t often use it. What would you suggest to supplement her equipment. I’m buying this for her Christmas present and I have a max budget of about €1000. I should be grateful for your help. 

Unfortunately, it seems as if you are asking for two different type of lenses.  You are asking for a lens for discreet portraiture, and a lens for wildlife.  A lens that is good for one is not necessarily great for the other.  That being said, the lenses I would recommend for your usage needs would be the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro AF Lens for Canon EOS DSLR Cameras, B&H # TA7020028MC, which would be the best if you wanted one lens to do both.  It would be good for both portraiture and for wildlife if the wildlife is close enough.  If it is not, then you will need a lens with more zoom range.  In that case, the Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary Lens for Canon EF, B&H # SI100400C, would be a smaller, lightweight option that has reach and would be considered discreet for its focal length.  The Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary Lens for Canon EF, B&H # SI1506005CC, would be a good option if you need the most zoom for wildlife in a zoom lens option.



I listed the options in order of optical quality.  The 70-200mm lens would be the best for sharpness and brightness and great for portraiture, but not as great for wildlife due to its range.  The 100-400mm lens may be the best all-around option for both usage needs, but it is not as bright or sharp as the 70-200mm lens.  The 150-600 is the better telephoto lens for wildlife, but may be too large for portraiture and would be the largest/heaviest of the three lenses.  I hope that helps.

I have a canon 8d and an 18-135 mm lens with it. I am looking into a telephoto lens which one would be good for both sports and wildlife

Hi John - 

Spanning a useful telephoto range, the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM Lens from Canon is a flexible zoom well-suited for a variety of subjects, ranging from portraiture to wildlife. Similarly versatile, the lens utilizes NANO USM technology that combines a fast, stills-optimized ring-type Ultrasonic Motor and a smooth, silent video-optimized Stepping Motor for all-around focusing performance to benefit multimedia image-makers. This dual-purpose AF motor also offers notably quicker performance throughout the zoom range for more responsive shooting from near to far. Additionally, also aiding both photo and movie recording, an Image Stabilizer system compensates for up to four stops of camera shake for sharper handheld shooting when working with slower shutter speeds.

Beyond its performance attributes, this lens is also characterized by its unique Lens Information Display, which clearly showcases focus distance, focal length, and stabilizer settings on a top-facing screen for easy recognition. Benefitting optical performance, the lens' construction utilizes one Ultra Low Dispersion (UD) element to control chromatic aberrations and color fringing for improved clarity, and, additionally, a nine-blade diaphragm is used to produce a pleasing bokeh quality for shallow depth of field imagery.

I have Canon 750D with kit lens 18-55mm and 50mm f1.8. I would like to go for zoom lens with reasonable price. What is your recommnedation?


Considering your current kit, I would say that a Canon 55-250mm will likely fit into your price range and provide a decent range that is complementary to the 18-55mm.

I would love to take  pictures to my kid in his soccer tournaments.  I got a D3300 . Which lense do yo recommend?


Hi Liliana -  

The AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3G ED VR Lens from Nikon is an all-in-one zoom lens capable of shooting wide angle to super telephoto focal lengths. This lens has a zoom range of 18-300mm, which provides the 35mm focal length equivalent of 27-450mm in the DX format, making it useful in a wide range of shooting situations.

what is the best super telephoto lens for nikon d5200?

Hi Dan,

Without knowing many specifics about your needs, I would recommend the Nikon 200-500mm f/5.6 Lens for your D5200. I think it is a great balance of affordabilty, features, and size that should work well with your camera.

How would yu compare the optical quality of the two Sigma 150-600mm lenses and the new Tamron?

Hi David,

It's going to be hard for me to judge the lenses not having used all of them, but per Sigma the Sport version should provide better optical quality than the Contemporary. And, the Tamron should be equal or greater than Sigma's Sport version. 

You make mirror lenses sound like a low class choice. I am VERY happy with my 1,000 mm Nikor.

Hi Larry,

I'm really glad that you are super happy with your lens, a 1000mm Nikkor has to be a great sight. But coming from a technical standpoint, a true telephoto lens will provide better optical quality and features than a mirror lens, which is why they are presented in such a way. Many people find them great choices though for many reasons.

When I was in Korea in '81, I bought a Soligor 500mm mirror lens for my 35mm Minolta SLR to take pictures of North Korean guardposts and odd and sundry North Korean activity in the DMZ.  Given that this was an out of pocket purchase to substitute for expensive Nikon gear which the local Military Intelligence unit had allowed to be stolen, I certainly wasn't going to buy a $1,000 lens for the U.S. Army to use for free.  The images which I obtained were perfectly adequate for the task at hand.

Having somehow misplaced the Soligor, I recently bought a 500mm Opteka mirror lens (with 2x teleconverter) to use on my Canon T4i.

Despite my upfront statements that I understood the limitations of budge mirror lenses, some people told me how much I'd hate this lens.  In fact, it's no worse than the Soligor, and probably a little bit faster.

I didn't buy this lens to sell images to National Geographic.  It was simply a tool to allow me to get images I otherwise couldn't obtain with my existing 70-300mm zoom.  For what amounts to an idle amusement infrequently indulged in, I'd have to be a fool to spend $800 and up on what amounts to a toy.

Due to hideous Cleveland winter weather, I haven't had much opportunity to use it, but on those rare decent days, I've been able to get a few decent shots out of it, some of which I posted to a photography forum.  Someone posted words to the effect of, "I wouldn't put my name on those pictures!  They look like they were taken with a $100 lens!", to which I replied, "It's a $119 lens and worth every penny!"

First of all, I acknowledge this reply is to an old post. However if BH is going keep a post up, I am going to reply to correct.

S. Steiner, not sure what you have for experience, but you are incorrect here. A true tele does have features, but so does a mirror (better handling/steadiness & less weight/cost). Both have drawbacks too (long bulky tele vs fixed aperture mirror). But the mirror can be as good as the tele optically, as was my Canon 500 f8. As a mirror has little to no glass, it has nearly zero chromatic aberration but does have fantastic out of focus bokeh.

What is the pixel quality of a 4/3 Olympus with 300mm pro at equivalent 600mm vs a true full frame sensor using a true 600mm prime?  A head to head competition will determine the future direction of lens and bodies. If it is a tie,  then the smaller lighter systems will eventually win like in computers etc. 

Hi Karl,

There are so many variables here, but all things equal a full-frame sensor should provide better low light performance by a significant margin, which can lead to improved AF in many situations. And, it will likely provide a higher resolution. But, as always, this all comes down to personal preferences and needs, and the specific lens and camera combination.

I,m anxiously waiting for the Olympus 300 mm f4 pro. I'm sure that the future, even for pros, is compact size. Sony and Oly are leading the way to the future. Think than Nikon and Canon should reconsider the speed of their tranformation or they will be overpassed.

The Olympus 300 mm f4 Pro was available  in Tokyo recently, but the yen price is higher by about $500 at the current exchange rate than the so-far announced dollar price, so I'm waiting for B&H.  It was good to see, in person, that it's compact and lightweight, considering its speed.  So is the Panasonic 100-400 mm zoom.  

I may be too late to ask, but my Camera is a Nikon D-5100 with an18-55 and a 55-300 MM zoom lenses.  I love the camera & lneses and am still learning how to use them.  I would love a longer zoom lens, 400-800 MM but can't ever see affording one (I like night/moon & landscape as well as up close).  Suggestions on something that would keep auto focus and not totally blure or darken the images would be welcomed.

Doesn't HAVE to be a Nikon lens, compatible is fine with me.

Thanks in advance.

Try the Tamron 150-600mm lens. I use iut on one of my two Nikon D7100's, and I am very satisfied. At about $1000, it is a bargain compared to the Nikon and Canon offerings, and in my opinion, the Image Quality is comparable enough to produce very satisfying results.

Gregg, I'd suggest renting the new Nikon 200-500mm lens. At $1399 it's close enough to the cost of the Tamrons or Sigma's new 'standard' long lens. Remember- for anything taking a photo worth keeping you'll be spending $1,000 or more for a good telephoto-telephoto zoom. I wasn't as happy with the Tamron as the Canon 100-400mm after trying each by renting but have friends that LOVE their Tamron 150-600mm lenses. Yes, the Canon is double the money but you have to think of it as a long term investment- and whether it suits your needs or not. 

Finally- I think you'll be surprised at the quality of the images compared to your 'kit' lenses- fine for just starting out but the better Canon/Nikon and even the better 'after market' glass will amaze you in crops- large prints.

The Sigma 150-500 sport is a super, but heavy lens--and it works well with the Sigma apo 1.4x teleconverter  


As mentioned above, the Tamron 150-600mm and Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary lens for Nikon would both be relatively inexpensive options for the D5100, and both would retain autofocus on your camera.  That being said, you might also see if you could find a used Sigma 150-500mm lens for Nikon.  A used version of the lens shouldn’t run too much, and would be fully compatible with the D5100.  It was a very popular lens for wildlife and bird photographers before being replaced by the 150-600mm models by Sigma. 

I have a Nikon D600 and a D7100 and my compromise long lens was the Nikon 200–400 f/4. Because both cameras are about 24 megapixels the D7100's crop sensor gives me more reach (mind you with slightly smaller pixels). I can handhold it for a while as it has VR but usually prefer to use a monopod. 

Good article - with one glaring exception in this sentence: "The next thing to consider is sensor size, especially since APS-C cameras come with inherent crop factors that will extend the equivalent focal length. " What a crop sensor does is change the field of view, not the focal length. An 800mm lens is an 800mm lens whether it's on a full frame camera, a crop sensor, or a 4 X 5.

Hello Bill,

Thanks for reading, but please understand that these articles are written in a manner that simplifies some topics in order to allow both beginners and veterans to understand. Crop factor is an interesting, hotly debated topic that we have addressed most recently in this article. And while you are correct, that it does not change the focal length, the use of an "equivalent" focal length has become a common way to explain the "cropping" of the image circle by a smaller image sensor and for many is the the best method for equating the cropped field of view into a more relatable focal length measurement.


While I understand your response that you need to keep it simple or brief and to the point, Bill's point is important, in that from a FOV perspective, you could accomplish the same in a large sensor camera by merely cropping.  

When presenting an article that is outlining benefits of lenses that cost from $1,000 to $5,000, details can be important. The DOF and light gathering capabilities (equivalent f#) when using on a crop sensor is a trade off that needs to be conveyed along with the benefiting FOV.

Overall, this article is very well written and informative. Sorry that I didn't read it a year ago.


It is extremely difficult to get good photos with prime long lenses. Whether shooting fast moving birds, animals or hockey players, it is virtually impossible to successfully track the unpredictable action without using a zoom lens, finding the subject at the wide end of the lens, then crashing in and getting the shot at the long end.

Further, most extreme long primes are too slow (5.6 or slower) for fast-moving wildlife, and too bulky for wilderness shooting. A big heavy lens means you need a big heavy tripod to put it on. As Robert Capa famously said, if your pictures aren't any good, then you aren't close enough. You'll have a lot more luck getting closer to wildlife if you aren't dragging a lot of heavy equipment with you. I've shot mountain gorillas in Rwanda, polar bears in northern Canada, and monkeys in Bangladesh. My experience always suggests that taking the time to get as close as possible to subjects like these is much more productive than trying to shoot with super long lenses from a distance.

Unless your goal is just to show off on photo safaris by having the longest lens of the group (something I've witnessed many times), you are much better off using a moderately long, fast  zoom lens, then blowing up the image with your photo-editing software, when you'll have the luxury of framing the shot exactly as you want it.

Hi, Peter , my name is Daisy, l love shooing wildlife animals especially birds. I have Nikon d7100 with lens 55-300mm . I do not satisfy the photos that I took and keep thinking change a better lens, more close to the subject , more clearly of the subject . I read all the comments and I felt yours make more sense . Can you give me some suggestion of which is the better lens that I should buy to maintain my goal with my Nikon D7100. Thank you, I will be appreciated .

Thelens I most often use for wildlife is the higher end Nikon 70-300mm zoom which costs around $500-600. Some of the best wildlife photos I've ever  made were shot with this lens and for the price it is hard to beat! I use it with a Nikon D7000.

Capa was a  photo journalist that died in 1954.  He photographed the Spanish Civila war along with many others and WW2.  They didn't have extreme Telephoto lenses then.  As far as wildlife shooting, Wildlife is smarter than all the humans on this planet.  The top predators can smell us miles away, so getting close is usually slim.  Getting close to any of the Apex Predators is just beyond stupid.  When you go out to shoot wildlife take out a spotter with you and the best thing to wear are running shoes.  I had an assistant that saw my shoes and said, you actually think you can out run Bears?  I said nope, I just have to outrun you.  

  You can only crop so far before you just end up with a second rate or junk image.  Sometimes the saying "Go Big or Go Home" really matters.  

Having photographed wildlife, not as a profession, for over thirty years I've experienced a number of long lenses like, Questar 700mm, Leitz Telyt 400mm, both with doublers and finally settled on a Zeiss Diascope 85 T FL, which provides 1000mm and can be doubled, but difficult at 2000mm. Wondering why that approach hasn't been mentioned?

The use of teleconverter was touched upon in the article and praised their ability to provide 1.4, 1.7 or 2x magnification, while in many cases, also be able to provide autofocus and stabilization. Use of use of Catadioptric lenses like that Questar 700mm were also noted, but are not ideal for many popular uses of Super Telephoto lenses such as sports, or wildlife in motion. Using a scope like the Zeiss Diascope 85 T FL is another method that could be used, (we delved into this a bit further in this article here) but for our purposes here we were attempting to keep focus on lenses directly compatible with todays DSLRs.

There are also a lot of bird and wildlife photographers that would die for a Questar Field Model. I would agree you can forget about moving objects.

Where is Olympus micro 4/3 300 mm prime??   waiting !!!

I have it and have never gotten very good results with it, especially at 300 mm. I think I have some sort of palsy.

I mean a PRIME 300mm, not a zoom.  Suposed to be available in 2015 and no wod yet.

I have an OMD-M5 and waiting anxiously for their "Pro" series 300mm. I was told it woud be out by the "Holidays". Whatever that means. Also I hope their new 1.4X teleconverter will work with this lens. An awsome combination, in my opinion. I got tired of carrying monster Nikon bodies and lenses and love these small cameras.

My thought exactly.  Also wondering abut the price tag....Could be out of sight for me.   Regards.   Silently Waiting Ed


Unfortunately, we do not have a price from Olympus at this time for their M.Zuiko Digital ED 300mm f/4 PRO Lens.  If you haven’t already, you could choose the Notify Me When In Stock option on the lens’s page on our site.  We would then send you an email when we received more information about the lens.

Unfortunately, I’m not finding an ETA in our system for the Olympus 300mm f/4 PRO Lens.  If you haven’t already, you could choose the Notify Me When In Stock option on the lens’s page on our site.  We would then send you an email when we received more information about the lens, such as when it is in stock. 

Can't find that option when I went to site.  ??????

If you look on the Right Hand side of the screen, where the Add to Cart button is typically located, there will be a button that says Notify Me When in Stock.  If you click on that button , you will be able to enter in your email address. 


Show older comments