Wildlife lenses need to have good reach to photograph animals far away, good low-light capabilities to shoot at dawn or dusk and have exceptional optics for detailed wildlife images. The very best wildlife lenses excel in each of these categories, especially when paired with one of the best cameras for wildlife photography, but, unsurprisingly, these can cost thousands — some even cost into the tens of thousands.
So, we’ve rounded up the best wildlife lenses under $1,000 to get you started if you’re either at the beginning of your wildlife journey or are shopping on a budget. We’ve included picks for all our favorite camera brands, plus some alternatives to consider so you can make an informed decision.
The quick list
NIKKOR Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR
Best Nikon
This lens has great image quality and a versatile zoom range for wide-angle landscapes and wildlife photography.
Canon RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM
Best Canon
Sharp images, fast autofocus and a relatively short close focusing distance that opens up opportunities for almost macro-style close-ups.
Tamron 50-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD
Best Sony
The best sub-$1,000 wildlife lens for Sony cameras, with excellent image quality and accurate autofocus.
Fujifilm XF 70-300mmF4-5.6 R LM OIS WR
Best Fujifilm
The best (and only) native Fuji lens for wildlife photography under $1,000. It’s not without flaws, but it ticks a lot of boxes.
OM System M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-600mm f/5-6.3 IS
Best Micro Four Thirds
Not the smallest or most lightweight lens, but it’s rugged and produces lovely wildlife images.
The best lenses for wildlife photography we recommend in 2025
Why you can trust Live Science
Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best ones for you. Find out more about how we test.
Best Nikon
Image 1 of 1
Buy it if:
✅ You need a wide focal range: 24-200mm is very versatile.
✅ You want image stabilization: This lens has it.
Don’t buy it if:
❌ You want to photograph distant wildlife: The 200mm focal length will be too short.
❌ You want to shoot in low light: The f/4-6.3 aperture isn’t the best for this, so your camera will need to be good at high ISO.
The bottom line
Nikon NIKKOR Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR: A good, versatile lens that can photograph nearby wildlife and wide-angle landscapes all rolled into one. ★★★★½
As far as native Nikon lenses go, this is the best option for wildlife photography if you don’t want to spend over $1,000. Although the maximum aperture may struggle in low light, and 200mm is on the shorter side for a wildlife lens, it’s a sharper-than-average superzoom lens that offers good versatility.
While wildlife shooters will mostly utilize the longer end, its ability to shoot 24mm makes it a great lens to have for travel, and it means you won’t need to keep swapping out lenses on the go. It’s a smart investment if you want to try wildlife photography but don’t want to commit to that niche, as you’ll still be able to get great landscape and portrait shots out of it. Generally, anything above 400mm is recommended for serious bird and wildlife photography, but, unsurprisingly, that’ll cost you a lot more.
The construction is a little plasticky, but that’s expected for a mid-range lens. It has a control ring towards the back of the lens, which can be set to control manual focus or other settings. The autofocus is quick and reliable, although this will somewhat depend on the effectiveness of your camera’s autofocus capabilities. It also suffers surprisingly little from focus breathing, which is a plus if you’re using manual focus or doing video work.
Image quality, contrast and sharpness in the center of the image are great throughout the focal range, although there’s pincushion distortion and vignetting at 200mm at the widest f/6.3 aperture. The vignetting brightens up at f8, and the distortion can easily be fixed using editing software, so it’s not a dealbreaker. It’s worth noting that the corners are a little soft at 24mm, but this will only be an issue if you regularly shoot wide.
If the Nikon 24-200mm is still a little expensive for you, the other lens we’d recommend for Nikon under $1,000 is the Tamron 70-300mm F/4.5-6.3Di III RXD. The image quality isn’t quite as good, and it isn’t image stabilized, but it’s around half the price of the Nikon and it has an extra 100mm reach.
|
Attributes |
Notes |
|---|---|
|
Design |
Plasticky construction. |
|
Performance |
Sharp image center, but noticeable distortion and vignetting. |
|
Functionality |
Image stabilized. |
Best Canon
Image 1 of 1
Buy it if:
✅ You want to shoot various subjects: This lens can photograph wildlife, the moon and even close-up shots.
✅ You want good autofocus: The USM motor provides fast and effective autofocus.
Don’t buy it if:
❌ You want to shoot in low light: Unless your camera can happily handle high ISOs, its F5.6-8 aperture isn’t great for low light work.
❌ You want more reach: Consider the Canon RF 600mm F11 IS STM instead.
The bottom line
🔎 Canon RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM: A super telephoto lens with great image quality, reliable autofocus and a compact and lightweight form. Great for wildlife, moon shots and close up images. ★★★★½
There are two affordable wildlife lens options under $1,000 for Canon lenses; the RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM and the RF 600mm F11 IS STM. Both are great lenses, and they both have their own strengths and weaknesses, but due to versatility and price, our pick is the 100-400mm.
Being Canon’s first ever low-budget 100-400mm lens, it’s perfect for beginners and is a lightweight and easy lens to carry around with you. Despite it having a more affordable price tag, Canon has added a nano USM autofocus system into the lens, giving it fast and effective autofocus for tracking wildlife, which is a known limitation of the 600mm F11 prime lens. Plus, if you pair it with an APS-C camera body, like the brilliant Canon EOS R7, it becomes an effective 160-640mm lens.
However, its downside is that it has a darker maximum aperture than a typical telephoto zoom. At 400mm, it can only shoot as wide as F8, resulting in weaker low-light performance and a lack of a super blurry background. But, they have to keep the cost down somehow to make this lens as affordable as it is. Speaking of which, it’s also not weather-sealed, so you’ll need to be careful with it when you’re shooting in wet weather.
That said, it does feature image stabilization, which is a great help, particularly at the longer end of the zoom range, both for sharper images and a steadier view when composing your image.
The sharpness at the center of the images is great at every focal length, although image quality is best at F8. It’s not as bitingly sharp as it is in their L-series lenses, but we aren’t expecting it to be. It does suffer from vignetting at the maximum aperture, and there’s noticeable pincushion distortion throughout the whole focal range — but nothing so severe that it can’t be fixed in editing. Plus, there’s virtually no flaring when shooting in bright sunlight.
It’s also a great lens for photographing large insects. While you can’t get as close as you can with a true macro lens, it has a close focusing distance of 2.9 ft (88cm) when you’re shooting at 200mm, giving you some almost macro style images. And at 400mm, it would also make a pretty decent lens for photographing the moon.
If you want to spend even less, the new Canon RF75-300mm F4-5.6 lens is launching for $219 at the end of July. It has shorter reach and no image-stabilization or USM motor, but it’ll provide an incredibly affordable entry into wildlife photography to practice the basics.
|
Attributes |
Notes |
|---|---|
|
Design |
No weather sealing. |
|
Performance |
Sharp images, although there’s pincushion distortion. |
|
Functionality |
Image stabilized and USM motor for quick autofocus. |
Best Sony
Image 1 of 1
Buy it if:
✅ You want versatility: 50-300mm is a great zoom range for various purposes.
✅ You want to try macro: Although it can’t do true macro, it can shoot 1:2 close-up shots.
Don’t buy it if:
❌ You want native Sony: In that case, you’ll have to spend over $1,000 or try the used market.
❌ You want more reach: Consider the Tamron 150-500mm F/5-6.7Di III VC VXD, but this lens is over $1,000.
The bottom line
🔎 Tamron 50-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD: An excellent budget lens for Sony E-mount full frame cameras, with a versatile zoom range and 1:2 macro capabilities. ★★★★½
We know what you’re thinking; “that’s not a Sony lens”, and no, it’s not. However, the most affordable native Sony for full frame is the Sony FE 24-240mm F3.5-6.3 OSS, but this lens exceeds the $1,000 budget. The Sigma Contemporary 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG DN OS is also great for Sony, but that still exceeds the budget (but only just).
The 50-300mm zoom range offers great versatility across a number of subjects and photographic genres, and it can even shoot 1:2 macro at the wide end with a close focusing distance of 8.66 inches (22cm). The image sharpness is fantastic, so it’s a great lens to consider if you don’t want to get a dedicated true macro lens.
The build feels high quality despite its plastic construction, and it features full weather sealing, a programmable function button and a fully weather-sealed USB-C port for firmware updates.
The darker maximum aperture of a variable F/4.5-6.3 is fine if you’re shooting in bright light during the day, but it’ll struggle as the light starts to fade; particularly if you’re photographing fast-moving subjects. There’s basically zero ghosting or flare when shooting towards the sun, either, which is beneficial for wildlife photography in case your subject moves or flies between you and the sun.
The continuous autofocus is almost instantaneous, and it works quietly and reliably to track your subject across the frame, although this will be somewhat dependent on how good the camera’s autofocus is. Plus, the telephoto end of the zoom range sees the best image quality, even at F/6.3, which is an advantage for capturing distant wildlife. There’s a bit of pincushion distortion and vignetting throughout, but it’s easily corrected in editing.
Overall, it’s a fantastic beginner lens for wildlife photography, but we do think it’s a shame that Sony hasn’t made any sub-$1,000 wildlife lenses.
|
Attributes |
Notes |
|---|---|
|
Design |
Compact and lightweight. |
|
Performance |
Excellent image quality at the long end. |
|
Functionality |
Features image stabilization, accurate autofocus and close-up focusing. |
Best Fujifilm
Image 1 of 1
Buy it if:
✅ You don’t have a telephoto lens: This lens will tick a lot of boxes.
✅ You want a lightweight lens: This lens is compact and lightweight.
Don’t buy it if:
❌ You want to shoot in low light: You’ll need a lens with a bigger maximum aperture, which will likely involve upgrading to a full frame.
❌ You want more reach: The Fujinon XF150-600mmF5.6-8 R LM OIS WR has double the longest focal length.
The bottom line
🔎 Fujifilm XF 70-300mm F4-5.6 R LM OIS WR: A good wildlife lens for Fuji shooters, with lovely image quality in a compact package. ★★★★½
Fuji shooters are sadly not spoiled for choice when it comes to wildlife lenses under $1,000, but the XF 70-300mm F4-5.6 R LM OIS WR does tick a lot of boxes.
It has impressive image sharpness throughout the whole zoom range, with F8 being the sweet spot at most focal lengths. There’s a slight amount of softness in the corners at 300mm, but this won’t cause much of an issue in wildlife photography. Chromatic aberration is also well controlled. There’s some pincushion distortion, and vignetting at wider apertures, but both of these are easily fixed in editing. It does produce some flaring if a bright light source is directly in the field of view, so that’s something to keep in mind when you’re out shooting in bright daylight.
The lens features a clickable aperture ring and image stabilization, although it lacks an IS on/off switch on the lens barrel. Instead, you need to go into the camera’s menu to adjust the lens’s IS setting, which is a little annoying.
The autofocus works quite well, but it’s nothing to write home about compared to some of its competitors. The accuracy can also be a bit hit and miss in low light, so you’ll need to shoot in good light for the best results. The manual focus is a little jerky, but it doesn’t suffer from any focus breathing.
The Sigma CONTEMPORARY 16-300mm F3.5-6.7 DC OS is also a great affordable lens for Fuji cameras, and would perhaps be a better option if you also intend to shoot wide-angle landscapes, as it has a much wider shortest focal length. The maximum aperture is also slightly wider, meaning it would be a touch faster in low light. Ultimately, we stuck with the native Fuji lens due to the fact that it’s compatible with teleconverters, and the Sigma isn’t, which gives the option to extend the focal length.
|
Attributes |
Notes |
|---|---|
|
Design |
Compact and lightweight. |
|
Performance |
Good image quality, average autofocus performance. |
|
Functionality |
Image stabilized and weather sealed. |
Best Micro Four Thirds
Image 1 of 1
Buy it if:
✅ You want a rugged lens: This lens has excellent build quality, but that results in a fairly heavy lens.
✅ You don’t want to upgrade: If you’re happy with the M43 system, it’s a great lens to invest in.
Don’t buy it if:
❌ You want more reach: Consider the 150-600mm f/5-6.3, but keep in mind it’s double the price.
❌ You want a lightweight lens: This lens is the heaviest in this list.
The bottom line
🔎 OM System M.Zuiko 100-400mm f/5.0-6.3 IS: If you want a lens with decent reach and a good maximum aperture that produces stunning images without breaking the bank, this is the lens to get. ★★★★½
In terms of both value and specs, we rate the OM System M.Zuiko 100-400mm f/5.0-6.3 IS as one of the best affordable lenses for wildlife photography. We had the chance to test it out during our OM System OM-1 Mark II review and got some beautiful images of birds and insects with it. But it is the most expensive lens in this list, and you won’t get much change out of $1,000.
As the 100-400mm focal length can double up for other pursuits, like landscapes and portrait photography, it’s certainly a very versatile lens. And with a maximum aperture of f/5, it’s best suited to shooting during the daytime, like most affordable wildlife lenses.
We were really impressed with the image quality of this lens, particularly when shooting insects up close, although we found the autofocus tended to struggle when we were photographing distant birds in flight. The images were sharp throughout the frame, chromatic aberration is well controlled and we didn’t have any issues with flaring.
While the excellent build quality is an advantage, this does mean the lens is quite heavy. In fact, it’s the heaviest in this guide. That said, we didn’t find it too cumbersome to shoot with.
Image 1 of 5
|
Attributes |
Notes |
|---|---|
|
Design |
Quite large and heavy. |
|
Performance |
Sharp images. |
|
Functionality |
Autofocus was a bit hit and miss. |
Best lenses for wildlife photography: Comparison
|
Name |
Focal length |
Aperture |
Image-stabilized |
Compatibility |
Dimensions |
Weight |
|
Nikon NIKKOR Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR |
24-200mm |
f/4-6.4 |
Yes (Vibration Reduction) |
Nikon Z |
3.1 x 4.5-inches (76.5 x 114mm) |
20.2 oz / 570 g |
|
Canon RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM |
100-400mm |
F5.6-8 |
Yes (IS) |
Canon RF |
6.48 x 3.13-inches (164.7 x 79.5mm) |
1.4 lb. / 635 g |
|
Tamron 50-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD |
50-300mm |
F/4.5-6.3 |
Yes (Vibration Compensation) |
Sony E |
5.9 x 3.1-inches (150 x 78mm) |
23.5oz / 665 g |
|
Fujifilm XF 70-300mm F4-5.6 R LM OIS WR |
70-300mm |
F4-5.6 |
Yes (Optical Image Stabilization) |
Fuji X |
2.95 x 5.21-inches (75 x 132.5mm) |
1.28 lbs / 580 g |
|
OM System M.Zuiko Digital ED 100-400mm F5.0-6.3 IS OM |
100-400mm |
f/5-6.3 |
Yes (IS) |
OM System |
3.4 x 8.1 inches (86 x 206 mm) |
2 lb 8 oz (1,120 g) |
FAQs
What focal length do you need for wildlife photography?
Most wildlife photographers won’t shoot with anything under 400mm, but unfortunately, you’re unlikely to find any 400mm+ lenses under $1,000. It also depends on what subject you’re photographing, and how close you can get to them.
Is a zoom or prime lens better for wildlife?
Zoom lenses have more flexibility as you can zoom in and out on your subject for better composition, but prime lenses often have better image quality and a higher maximum aperture. For this reason, prime lenses are usually more expensive, which explains why they aren’t any in this guide.
Is 200mm enough for wildlife photography?
200mm is an acceptable focal length if you’re photographing pets, animals at the zoo or any other wildlife that’ll let you get close. For distant wildlife, however, 200mm is not long enough.
Is 70-300mm good for wildlife?
A 70-300mm lens is a great starting point for beginners, as 300mm gives a good amount of reach without bumping the cost up too much. 300mm will be able to capture a lot of animals, although you might need more reach if your subject is very far away.
Is image stabilization necessary for wildlife photography?
When you’re shooting at longer focal lengths, image stabilization helps to give a sharper final result, and also hold the view steady in the EVF or LCD screen while you’re composing your image. All of the lenses in this guide have image stabilization.
Why are wildlife lenses so expensive?
Longer lenses need big glass elements and precise image stabilization in order to produce sharp images at long distances and in low light.
Can you photograph wildlife with a kit lens?
Most kit lenses have a focal length of around 16-50mm, although there are exceptions, with some kit lenses having a focal length of up to around 150mm. These lenses can’t zoom in far enough for distant wildlife, but they’d be a good starting point for photographing pets and friendly wildlife.
What lens do professional wildlife photographers use?
Pros often use 500mm or 600mm prime lenses, but these can cost over $10,000. Many also use 100-400mm or 150-600mm lenses too, for a light and more compact option.
How do you get sharp wildlife photos with a cheap lens?
Use a fast shutter speed of 1/1000 or higher, have a good hold of your camera and lens to avoid camera shake and make sure the animal’s eye is in focus.
Is f/6.3 good enough for wildlife photography?
Yes, especially if you’re shooting in daylight. But as the light changes, for example, at dawn or dusk, or if you’re shooting in a dense forest, you might struggle at f/6.3.
Latest updates
Future updates to this guide will be detailed here.
How we tested the best lenses for wildlife photography
How we test the best lenses for wildlife photography
Image 1 of 3
To find the best wildlife photography lenses under $1,000, we run a mix of hands-on and practical tests focused on what really matters when you’re out in the field. This helps beginners and hobbyists get a clear picture of what each lens can actually do.
We look at autofocus speed and accuracy by tracking fast-moving subjects like birds or pets. We also test sharpness throughout the zoom range, especially at the longer end where many budget lenses tend to lose detail.
We also observe how well the image stabilization holds up when shooting handheld at long focal lengths. Built quality is considered, too. We look at how heavy the lens is, whether it’s weather-sealed and how it feels to handle.
Finally, we check for issues like chromatic aberration, vignetting and distortion, and consider its value for money overall. We compare lenses where possible, so we can recommend what actually performs well, not just what looks good on paper.