Forum Special Interests Nature Photography Wildlife Photography in Natural Settings
Profile picture
Klaus Berbig 12.11.2023, 20:33 #1

Wildlife Photography in Natural Settings

Tracking, Observing, and Photographing Animals
Of course, this is a very general question since wildlife populations vary greatly by region.
I'm not a forester or hunter, but in my local area, it definitely feels like the number of wild animals has significantly declined over the past few years. I do track animal signs, but I’m seeing wild animals less and less often. I’m also against baiting.
For example, when I spot a buzzard or kite in the sky, I can barely get my camera ready in time. Holding the camera constantly in hand, keeping one hand free, or carrying the camera around your neck just increases the risk of falling. The hiking trails—even in the nature reserves around here—leave a lot to be desired.

So, my question is: how do you approach wildlife photography in the great outdoors?
Profile picture
Ulf Simon 12.11.2023, 22:12 #2
I think it’s a good idea to diversify a bit:
Insects: generally not a problem, as well as other small creatures like lizards, frogs, etc. You know where to find them and can prepare accordingly—sometimes a bit of patience is required.
Birds in local areas: track sightings, for example on ornitho.de, then pick a good spot to settle in and wait...
Chance encounters while hiking: once you spot something for the first time, usually having your camera ready is no problem—like at Kaiserstuhl, or generally in the Swiss Jura. In the Alps, it’s not possible everywhere... (okay, I’m pretty sure-footed and not afraid of heights)
Wildlife watching abroad, birds, reptiles, and monkeys in Costa Rica, trekking in Borneo... there, I rely on my guide’s instincts. It’s always worth it.
Profile picture
Uwe Naumann 12.11.2023, 22:38 #3
Tough topic. In the end, it basically comes down to exploring the animal’s habitat and then finding a spot there to regularly return to. Wandering around aimlessly only leads to random encounters—and those are just that: random.
Profile picture
Klaus Berbig 13.11.2023, 00:54 #4
Yes, it’s a tricky topic, and I mostly agree with you all.
I’ve also more than once slipped away unseen at dawn and had some success (though the wildlife was always too far away—I’ll try to upload one or two photos of those moments).
But the most beautiful and unbelievable experiences I’ve had came from careful, quiet hiking (luck and chance played a big part).
Here are two examples related to my question:
- On a windy August day, I was standing at the edge of a field, taking in the view of the valley. Suddenly, a roe buck appeared behind me, stopped briefly right next to me (no more than 2 meters away), looked at me, then trotted proudly and slowly across the field.
My camera was in my backpack, and even if I’d had it in my hand, the movement needed to take a shot would have scared the buck away instantly.
- On a day with a mix of sun, wind, and clouds, I came out of the forest and was about to cross a field when I unknowingly startled a hawk. It disappeared between the trees after what felt like just two seconds.
The hawk’s black-brown back briefly shifted to a dark green color due to the sunlight filtering through the green leaves.
Again, my camera was in my backpack, and even if I’d had it in hand, I wouldn’t have had time to look through the viewfinder in those few seconds.
I’m a bit better at photographing birds in flight—I use the “Sports” mode on my Canon EOS 2000D—but I still struggle to keep the bird in the frame (they usually fly too high, etc.).
My telephoto lens is an EF-S 55-255mm f/4-5.6 IS II.
What do you think—should I consider a different telephoto lens? I’m also asking because of the weight; my backpack is already quite heavy.
Profile picture
Klaus Berbig 13.11.2023, 15:50 #5
@ Ulf Simon.
I just saw your message elsewhere—sorry I missed it earlier.
So you also think a stronger telephoto lens would be better. Unfortunately, I’m still not very advanced when it comes to photography.
Quote: As far as I know, that lens is also available for Canon. An original Canon tube is probably better, but significantly more expensive. I can’t say how much better, since I’m not very familiar with Canon.
I’m completely in the dark about this. I’ll have to do some research.

Thanks to both of you for your input.
Profile picture
Ulf Simon 13.11.2023, 21:19 #6
As I mentioned, it really depends on how seriously you want to get into it. The more powerful and longer the telephoto lenses, the heavier—and more expensive—they get. A decent beginner zoom lens in the 150-600mm range, with an aperture suitable for wildlife photography and a reasonably reliable autofocus, can be found used for around 600 euros. That kind of lens weighs about 1500g. (Since you’re working with an APS-C sensor, lightweight options are limited. While teleconverters save weight, they also reduce light significantly, making them only somewhat suitable for wildlife photography.)

A prime lens is generally lighter and faster, but then you’ll be carrying two or three lenses instead. However, primes usually have fewer corner distortion issues and typically offer better overall sharpness. A good fixed focal length telephoto lens starts at around 2000 euros.

If weight and mobility are top priorities for you, take a look at the Micro Four Thirds (MFT) format. Of course, that would mean switching systems entirely. I’ve retired my APS-C Sony A77 II but still use its lenses on a full-frame A99 II for special occasions. For travel, hiking, mountain trekking, and similar activities, I carry the compact Olympus MFT (E-M1 II), and for trips where every gram counts, the even smaller E-M10 II. Depending on the occasion, I bring more or fewer lenses. For an average mountain hike (15-20 km with 800 meters elevation gain and loss), my total gear weight (camera, lenses, accessories) is about 2.5 kg, plus sometimes a lightweight carbon tripod (+500g). That setup is well-suited for landscapes, wildlife, and plants. For dedicated photo tours, I sometimes carry 7 or 8 kilos, but only on shorter hikes (up to 10 km) without significant elevation changes.

Most of my gear is used—well-maintained, display models, or liquidation stock—which saves about a third to half compared to new gear. But I always buy from professional dealers to ensure warranty coverage. While platforms like eBay might be cheaper, they come with higher risks. Just browse the web for offers and reviews—you’ll definitely find something suitable for your needs.
Profile picture
Klaus Berbig 13.11.2023, 23:00 #7
Good evening, Ulf.
Thank you very much for this detailed information.
Thanks to what you’ve shared (even though much of it is new to me), I now know how I want to proceed.
The wildlife will just have to be observed with binoculars, or if I’m lucky enough to photograph them from a distance, I still have the option of editing the images.
You’ve been a great help—thank you.
 
Profile picture
Uwe Naumann 13.11.2023, 23:09 #8
@Klaus Berbig

Hi Klaus,

there are quite a few challenges here.

Yes, you’ve been lucky a few times that something just happened to come your way. But that’s not something you can plan for, and you always face the problem of not having the right gear ready to go. Wearing your equipment switched on doesn’t help much either if the birds are gone in two seconds. The only solution is scouting locations and patiently waiting. To start with, you need to find spots that make things easier.

Winter songbirds at feeding stations are great subjects. If you build yourself a nice, isolated perch, with some patience you can get some really amazing shots. Or in spring/summer, focus on nests or nesting holes. I can even photograph woodpeckers right here in the city on trees with nesting holes. Usually, you don’t need a camouflage tent or hide for that. In the forest, you might need a bit more if natural hiding spots aren’t enough. If we ever get a proper winter again, you can even “disappear” under a white bedsheet in a pinch. For summer, a small camo net or a large camo scarf to hide under can already work wonders.

Alternatively, there are various locations with observation huts you can use for free or for a small donation. NABU has quite a few of these. I know some from Kattinger Watt or the Kranorama in Groß Mohrdorf. Also, at many coastal areas or inland lakes, especially less frequented spots, you can often find various bird species that you can approach with some patience. These birds are usually more accustomed to humans and less shy. My little stint with the sand plover photo here on the forum was taken at such a spot. That took two mornings of lying on the beach for hours, sneaking closer whenever the adult bird ran off to distract potential predators from the nest. Even at these locations, you have to understand the behavior of the species if you want to get closer. I still needed a 560mm focal length (400mm lens with 1.4x teleconverter) at just 4-5 meters distance!

Then there are wildlife parks. Even if you don’t like them, they offer a good opportunity to practice because the animals are more likely to come into view. But even there, it’s not guaranteed. In a good wildlife park, animals can hide, and you might see nothing! One of my favorites is the animal enclosure in Neuschönau (Bavaria). It’s worth visiting year-round. Unfortunately, I don’t have any photos online from there yet—I really should get on that...

By the way, right around your corner (Geiseltalsee, specific spots available on request): https://www.vieledinge.de/2023/06/30/bienenfresser-in-sachsen-anhalt/

Then there’s the topic of baiting—or rather, your own standards. Even if no one likes to hear it, you have to accept that many impressive photos are taken with baiting or even more controlled setups. There are some striking images of eagles, sometimes fighting over food, where anyone in the scene can immediately tell you exactly where in Poland the distinctive perch is located. Yes, it’s unfortunate. Yes, you don’t have to like it (I don’t either). But that’s just how it is.

Now, about the gear: In short, wildlife photography—especially birds, preferably in flight or action—has become a gear battle. New technology makes many things possible but also raises the bar for what’s achievable and what’s being done. It’s a vicious cycle. What Fritze Pölking delivered as top-level work 30 years ago probably wouldn’t even qualify for a GDT full membership today.

With your EF-S 55-255mm f/4-5.6 IS II lens, you actually have two issues: not enough focal length for many subjects and not great light-gathering ability. The latter can be somewhat compensated with modern, low-noise cameras and current software, but focal length can’t be replaced—except by more focal length. For Canon EF, the current 100-400mm is a possible option. However, EF is a tricky matter. EF isn’t dead yet, but it’s definitely on its way out. The future is clearly RF. There hasn’t been anything new in EF lenses for years, and I don’t expect that to change. For RF, there’s also a 100-400mm that outperforms the EF model in every way. There’s also the RF 100-500mm, which I personally like a lot—it’s a fantastic lens and works well with teleconverters. And brand new: the RF 200-800mm, which I haven’t tested yet but consider a fantastic lens for a relatively affordable entry into wildlife photography. I’m leaving out the big, white, fast lenses for now.

The catch: EF lenses fit RF cameras with an adapter, but not the other way around. For RF lenses, you need an RF body. But current RF models offer several advantages over your 2000D, especially in autofocus and noise performance. Mirrorless cameras are a real game changer. I haven’t regretted switching for a second.

Camera operation: You often use the sports mode. Why? I don’t like the scene modes. You have to rely too much on unclear camera logic. In the end, you need shutter speed, aperture, and ISO. You have to understand their effects and interplay and be able to operate the camera almost blindly based on that. Then you don’t have to guess which auto mode will do what and which might be best. Scene modes just adjust shutter speed, aperture, and ISO anyway...

That’s a lot of info. There’s definitely much more to say and discuss. But for now, I’m off to bed...

Best regards, Uwe
Profile picture
Klaus Berbig 14.11.2023, 00:22 #9
Good morning, Uwe.
First of all, I want to thank you for all the information you provided.
Thank you!
As I already told Ulf, I’ve made my decision for now. I’m going to stick with what I have and focus more on what’s doable.
I also have a lot of catching up to do when it comes to technology. That’s why I’ve always shot in scene mode. The creative mode offers more flexibility anyway, and I plan to start exploring it more, at least for buildings and landscape shots.
Your suggestion about Geiseltalsee is a great idea. I had some work there a few years ago, and I’ll head back on a less busy day with less favorable weather to check it out.
Still, your points and advice about my lens have reinforced my decision to keep things as they are, but they’ve also made me more curious, so I’ll be doing some reading on the topic.

Best regards, Klaus
Profile picture
Klaus Berbig 14.11.2023, 00:48 #10
Oh, just following up out of curiosity. I was previously considering the Tamron Ultra Tele Mega Zoom 18-400mm f/3.5-6.3 lens offered on Amazon. Would that have been a step up or down?
Profile picture
Ulf Simon 14.11.2023, 09:01 #11
@Klaus Berbig
In terms of brightness, it’s about the same (at 400mm, it’s one stop slower than the current 250mm), making it a versatile all-around lens. It covers everything from wide-angle to telephoto. In most cases, this comes at the expense of image quality. Conclusion:
Better mobility and reach, but not necessarily better image quality.
Profile picture
Klaus Berbig 14.11.2023, 09:20 #12
Good morning, Ulf.
Great, learned something new again.
Thanks.
Profile picture
Uwe Naumann 14.11.2023, 23:04 #13
@Klaus Berbig Hi Klaus,

You’re very welcome. I also started out small and was grateful for any help I could get.

Geiseltalsee: 51.318661256037004, 11.823516426641124 (after the dive center, take a left to the slag heap) and 51.32404525853315, 11.899630354311352 (take the lower path, the entire clay wall is inhabited). I was there this May. I can’t say whether the birds stay here over the winter.

Tamron 18-400: Just Google “superzoom.” Such an extreme zoom range—from ultra-wide angle to a long telephoto—is always a huge compromise optically. Technically, it just can’t be done any other way. Definitely not something you want.
Profile picture
Klaus Berbig 15.11.2023, 04:43 #14
@ Uwe Naumann Noted!
Maybe I'll head over there early tomorrow morning; at the moment, I'm feeling a bit under the weather.
Profile picture
Gert Trumpold 26.09.2025, 03:18 #15
@Klaus Berbig For capturing animals in motion, a fast autofocus is crucial. I saved up for a long time to get the Canon 2.8 300mm. For example, when photographing birds in flight at a bird show, every shot was sharp as long as the AF point was on the bird. It doesn’t get any better than that. However, the 300mm focal length is a bit short for birds. Using a teleconverter increases the focusing time by the magnification factor, so teleconverters are only somewhat suitable for fast-moving subjects.
Profile picture
Klaus Berbig 26.09.2025, 07:53 #16
Well, you’re always learning something new here in the Photo Club. Thanks for your comment, Gert.
Profile picture
Ulf Simon 26.09.2025, 08:04 #17
@Gert Trumpold “A 300mm focal length is too short for bird photography.” Absolutely true. That’s why I switched to Olympus MFT for wildlife and travel photography (often on trekking tours). Unless you’re shooting for wall-sized prints, the smaller sensor is more than sufficient. Plus, the autofocus, lenses, and image stabilization are top-notch. I can easily shoot handheld with a 600mm MFT lens, which is equivalent to 1200mm on a full-frame camera. And the weight savings really make a difference when moving around in the field.
Profile picture
Sven Leutherer 30.08.2026, 17:16 #18
I'm lucky that a good friend is a hunter. But that would be my approach. Talk to the hunter or forester who knows where and when animals are on the move and might also give you tips on where to position yourself best.
Statistics - 2479 Views | 18 Posts