Telephotos For Landscapes

Sigma 150-500mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM APO; Sony 70-400mm ƒ/4-5.6 G Alpha A-Mount Telephoto Zoom

Telephotos For Wildlife

The main thing outdoor photographers use long lenses for is wildlife, of course, because they "bring the subject to you." A long lens lets you fill the frame with wild subjects that won't let you approach closely. Pro and big-budget amateur bird/wildlife shooters use 500mm ƒ/4, 600mm ƒ/4 and even 800mm ƒ/5.6 lenses, which start above $5,000 and go well past $10,000.

More affordable options include telephoto zooms (Canon 100-400mm, Nikon 80-400mm, Sigma 150-500mm, Sony 70-400mm, Tamron 200-500mm, for example, all of which sell for less than $2,000) and slower moderate telephotos (Canon, Nikon and Pentax 300mm ƒ/4, Canon 400mm ƒ/5.6—also for less than $2,000—for example).

Cameras with smaller-than-full-frame sensors include in their specs a focal-length or "crop" factor: 1.5X for APS-C (1.6X for Canon APS-C); 2X for Four Thirds. That means that a given lens on one of these camera's frames is like a longer lens on a full-frame camera, because the smaller sensor sees less of the image produced by the lens. For example, a 100mm lens on an APS-C camera frames like a 150-160mm lens on a full-frame camera. A 100mm lens on a Four Thirds (or Micro Four Thirds mirrorless camera) frames like a 200mm lens on a full-frame camera.

A given lens produces an image of a given size at the image plane when focused at a given distance. This size doesn't change because you put a larger or smaller sensor at the image plane. What changes is how much of the image the sensor "sees" and thus, how large in the frame a given subject appears. A smaller sensor doesn't increase focal length (100mm is still 100mm) or magnification; it only changes the "crop."

From a practical standpoint, however, you can think of the crop factor as magnification: Putting a 300mm lens on an APS-C camera will produce an image that's framed like one produced by a 450-480mm lens on a full-frame camera, and the subject's image will appear larger in the frame because of the tighter cropping.

Nikon 70-300mm ƒ/4.5-5.6G ED IF AF-S VR Zoom

Short answer: Yes, if you shoot handheld. No, if you always use a tripod. Image stabilization in camera bodies and lenses helps you get sharper handheld images, and if you prefer to shoot landscapes handheld, you should opt for it.

Some manufacturers use sensor-shift stabilization in their DSLR bodies (Pentax, Olympus and Sony, for example), while others provide optical stabilization in certain lenses (Canon, Nikon, Sigma, and soon, Tokina).

Canon EF 70-200mm ƒ/2.8L IS II USM

In-body stabilization has the advantage of working with any lens you use on the camera; in-lens stabilization has the advantage of stabilizing the viewfinder image, as well as the recorded one. If you use Live View mode, the live image will be stabilized with either type of stabilization.

It's best to shoot landscapes from a tripod, though, because a tripod can hold the camera steadier than we can (even with stabilization) and will lock your composition in place, so you can carefully examine it and it won't accidentally change as you squeeze off the shot.

Tamron 28-300 XR Di VC LD

As you can see in the accompanying chart, there are a number of wide-range "superzoom" lenses that include our focal lengths. These offer the advantages of providing focal lengths from wide-angle to telephoto in a single package, minimal bulk and at relatively low cost. Their main drawback is that they aren't quite as sharp as shorter-range zooms or prime lenses—trying to correct all aberrations, distortions and vignetting at a wide range of focal lengths is quite an engineering challenge. But, if you want to travel really light or have a very limited lens budget, a superzoom can be just what you need.

Pro-Optic 500 ƒ/6.3 mirror lens

The Pro-Optic mirror lenses provide an economical way to experiment with "compressed" long, focal-length landscapes. Really long lenses "zero in" on a small, very distant portion of a scene, producing images in which objects are squeezed together—a definitely different landscape look. While conventional refracting long lenses are costly, the Pro-Optic mirror lenses (500mm ƒ/6.3, 800mm ƒ/8 and a 1000mm ƒ/11 kit consisting of a 500mm lens and 2x converter) sell for just $99.95 to $224.95 (available from Adorama). Besides being less costly than conventional telephotos, mirror lenses are also much more compact and easier to cart into the field. Mirror lenses are also less sharp than refracting telephotos and turn out-of-focus highlights into rings rather than disks—some like the effect, some don't.

But, the price certainly is right, and long lenses let you produce landscapes with a different look.

As their name implies, macro lenses were designed for close-up work, optically optimized for close-focusing distances. They're especially good with flat copy and provide good edge-to-edge sharpness. But, they work well at normal shooting distances, too. In fact, one advantage of macro lenses over other close-up gear is that they also let you focus out to infinity—something you can't do when using extension tubes, close-up diopter lenses or a bellows. So, if you want the ability to shoot telephoto landscapes and also be able to zero-in on intriguing flowers and insects along the way, a macro lens is a great choice: It can focus close enough to produce a life-size 1.0X magnification at the image plane, yet also double as a normal tele lens, good for landscapes, portraits and anything else you'd use choose to shoot with that focal length.