Tamron 18/400mm on the Nikon Z50. Ultra lightweight, compact travel solution.

I’ve frequently traveled with large DSLR bodies and accompanying lenses. With the advent of Nikon’s Z bodies, I finally felt I had found a perfect way to travel much lighter and more compact, while still maintaining a good level of image quality. However, the lenses were still responsible for a great deal of weight and packaging size. Enter the Tamron 18-400mm lens. I love the upper-end Nikon glass, and had pretty much sworn-off anything aftermarket, years ago. However, this lens made a compelling argument to give it a shot (pun intended).

Today was my first outing with this new travel combo, and I have to say I was pleasantly surprised. Pictured is my full compact travel set-up. I’d read battery life can be a downside of the Z50, so I picked up a Kastar two-battery charger with 3 batteries, for $88.99 on eBay. Problem solved, and the charger is actually much smaller then the single-battery Nikon unit.

I’ve attached a handful of photos, and I really am impressed with this lens. Is it as clear as high-end Nikon glass? Well, no. Is it good enough for travel, when weight and bulk are the big considerations? I think so, but you can decide for yourself. Especially when you consider the epic versatility in this one, little, lightweight lens.

I will say I do have one complaint, which is really only a problem when shooting video. The zoom action is very stiff- particularly in about the middle third of its travel. Where I found it to be a problem is when trying to hand-hold video of fast-moving vehicles. Zooming made it almost impossible to hand-hold and zoom, as the vehicles came closer and moved further away. A tripod would help immensely, and would probably mitigate the issue.

So here are a few photos, and it dies appear the website compresses them slightly. There’s one shot where the lettering can be read in the center of the wheel, in the actual image but not the uploaded one, here. Overall, I think this lens did a great job!

The added bonus will be the ability to also downsize my tripod, with this combination’s vastly lighter weight than my D850 and Nikkor 100-500mm lens. Again, not expecting the same level of performance as that much more expensive lens. But for ultra lightweight travel situations, I think this will work great.


Full travel package. Not pictured is the battery in the body. This lens makes this all so easy to carry, without any fatigue, I can go anywhere with it, and be completely comfortable the entire time.


70mm, f/6.3


65mm, f/4.5


145mm, f/5.6


400mm, f/6.3


270mm, f/6.3

Todd in San Diego said:

I’ve frequently traveled with large DSLR bodies and accompanying lenses. With the advent of Nikon’s Z bodies, I finally felt I had found a perfect way to travel much lighter and more compact, while still maintaining a good level of image quality. However, the lenses were still responsible for a great deal of weight and packaging size. Enter the Tamron 18-400mm lens. I love the upper-end Nikon glass, and had pretty much sworn-off anything aftermarket, years ago. However, this lens made a compelling argument to give it a shot (pun intended).

Today was my first outing with this new travel combo, and I have to say I was pleasantly surprised. Pictured is my full compact travel set-up. I’d read battery life can be a downside of the Z50, so I picked up a Kastar two-battery charger with 3 batteries, for $88.99 on eBay. Problem solved, and the charger is actually much smaller then the single-battery Nikon unit.

I’ve attached a handful of photos, and I really am impressed with this lens. Is it as clear as high-end Nikon glass? Well, no. Is it good enough for travel, when weight and bulk are the big considerations? I think so, but you can decide for yourself. Especially when you consider the epic versatility in this one, little, lightweight lens.

I will say I do have one complaint, which is really only a problem when shooting video. The zoom action is very stiff- particularly in about the middle third of its travel. Where I found it to be a problem is when trying to hand-hold video of fast-moving vehicles. Zooming made it almost impossible to hand-hold and zoom, as the vehicles came closer and moved further away. A tripod would help immensely, and would probably mitigate the issue.

So here are a few photos, and it dies appear the website compresses them slightly. There’s one shot where the lettering can be read in the center of the wheel, in the actual image but not the uploaded one, here. Overall, I think this lens did a great job!

The added bonus will be the ability to also downsize my tripod, with this combination’s vastly lighter weight than my D850 and Nikkor 100-500mm lens. Again, not expecting the same level of performance as that much more expensive lens. But for ultra lightweight travel situations, I think this will work great.


Full travel package. Not pictured is the battery in the body. This lens makes this all so easy to carry, without any fatigue, I can go anywhere with it, and be completely comfortable the entire time.


70mm, f/6.3


65mm, f/4.5


145mm, f/5.6


400mm, f/6.3


270mm, f/6.3

Click to expand...

Nice shots, and an informative review!

Smaller sensors are always a bit noisier, which affects image quality, of course.

I noticed there is some noise in the nice photos of the dog, which any of the modern packages (from DxO, ON1, and others) would be able to cure easily.

New ones come all the time, it's hard to keep up!

I use the 'old' DxO PhotoLab 5 (there is a totally new version out but I have to save till I can afford to upgrade), which is very good at denoising (especially RAW files). The new upgrade adds a lot of new functions, and seems to be worth the extra investment!

--
tordseriksson (at) gmail.....
Owner of a handful of Nikon cameras. And a few lenses.
WSSA #456

Some updated photos, this time it’s some colorful urban street art. Freak Alley Outdoor Gallery, in Boise, ID. Mostly shaded, but a few are still in sunlight. All hand-held, most are 200 ISO.


18mm, f/4, 160s


62mm, f/6.3, 1/640s. A lot of contrast going on here, and I think both the Z50 and the lens handled it very well.


46mm, f/5.6, 1/125s


80mm, f/5.6, 1/500s


35mm, f/4, 1/60s


18mm, f/7.1, 1/200s


65mm, f/4.5, 1/250s


27mm, f/4.5, 1/80s

All-in-all, I think both the camera and the lens did a great job. Photos are clear and detailed, colors are incredibly accurate, and VC made hand-held shots possible in lighting where I didn’t expect to have the option.

I’m impressed with this combo, and the easy-carry made this whole experience very simple. Airport security was simple, and I could walk all day with this in-hand and a battery or two in my pocket.

I’ve seen posts about the mediocre battery life in the Z50. I’m just not experiencing this issue. This is the same battery from the shots/comments in the post above, several days ago. In addition to that weekend video/photo/uploading, I shot/reviewed 208 photos here, and again uploaded with Snapbridge at full res. Uploading took over 30 minutes, and the battery indicator now sits at two of three bars. That seems more than adequate, especially when the batteries are relatively small and easy to drop in a pocket.

If you’re looking for a compact all-in-one travel solution with massive versatility, plus the ability to still extend your lens capabilities when desired, I think this is a fantastic combination.

400mm on a DX sensor is a lot of focal length- do you need that for general travel? I used to use a Nikkor 18-200 on my D300, but occasionally I would have wanted a little more focal length. I was wondering if an 18-300 or even down to the Nikkor 18-140 would be smaller and lighter for general travel, just a question.

I do a lot of wildlife photography, so in my case, yes. However, it does absolutely depend on your personal needs. I recently had my D7100 in Yellowstone, with my Nikkor 100-500mm and it was just enough to get this guy. On my D850, or if it were only an 18-300mm, and I’d have lacked the length. Even then, I had to crop the second one a bit.

I really wish I’d had this little Z50. I missed a lot of good shots due to the D7100’s very low burst rate and max buffering, when shooting raw. Z50 would have been much better.

Something else to consider. If you have the ability to shoot with an affordable and manageable 400mm lens, it might open a whole new world of shots for you.

Todd in San Diego said:

I do a lot of wildlife photography, so in my case, yes. However, it does absolutely depend on your personal needs. I recently had my D7100 in Yellowstone, with my Nikkor 100-500mm and it was just enough to get this guy. On my D850, or if it were only an 18-300mm, and I’d have lacked the length. Even then, I had to crop the second one a bit.

Click to expand...

The D850 has enough resolution that you can crop it to get almost the same results as the D7100 or Z50 with the same focal length on either one.

Todd in San Diego said:

I really wish I’d had this little Z50. I missed a lot of good shots due to the D7100’s very low burst rate and max buffering, when shooting raw. Z50 would have been much better.

Something else to consider. If you have the ability to shoot with an affordable and manageable 400mm lens, it might open a whole new world of shots for you.

Click to expand...

I frequently carry a Sigma 100-400 when I travel, but that does not make for a lightweight or compact system. I'm usually carrying 2 bodies with lenses and the long lens separate. I keep that bag in the car and just take out one body at a time. I can do pretty well when traveling just using a D750 with 28-105 lens. Sometimes I want shorter, on rare occasions I want something a lot longer. Actually I do about as well with the D810 and 18-35 lens, but sometimes need something just a bit longer. I should probably get a 24-120.

Overall though your original post is interesting. I have thought about getting a small DX body for hiking, a Z50 plus 18-400 is a good consideration. I've toyed with the idea of a D3400 and 18-140 lens for hiking, this is a pretty light combo. I'm afraid if I bought another DX camera I would not be able to resist getting a 16-80 or maybe a Sigma 18-35 f1.8.

I haven’t tried cropping my D850 down to DX size, yet, and comparing with an actual DX camera’s quality. I’ve thought about it, though, and based on your comment I need to give it a shot (pun intended).

I often car-travel much as it sounds like you do, with all or most of my gear. That was my recent Yellowstone trip. However, for several reasons there are times for me when this isn’t at all practical. I’ve been looking for something that I could easily hike with, or drop in a small backpack for easy work-travel, that provides quality results but is almost as if it’s not there. The Nikon1 system fell WAY short of that, unfortunately. The Z50 is amazing for this. And I’ve now found this lens is, too. I love shooting with them.

This Z50 and 18-400mm is a pretty amazing combo for these needs. Regardless of your lens choice, I’d skip straight from a smaller DX body like the 3400 (I had seriously considered that, too, at one point), and just go with the Z50- unless you have large hands. Hands-down, the size and features blow the 3400 right out of the water. However, if you did go that route, I’d bet this lens would be a fantastic pairing on that body, too.

The next post I’ll add will be my Nikkor 100-500mm vs. this Tamron. We’ll see how they compare in image quality. What’s my quality sacrifice at the limits, by downsizing?

Todd in San Diego said:

I haven’t tried cropping my D850 down to DX size, yet, and comparing with an actual DX camera’s quality. I’ve thought about it, though, and based on your comment I need to give it a shot (pun intended).

I often car-travel much as it sounds like you do, with all or most of my gear. That was my recent Yellowstone trip. However, for several reasons there are times for me when this isn’t at all practical. I’ve been looking for something that I could easily hike with, or drop in a small backpack for easy work-travel, that provides quality results but is almost as if it’s not there. The Nikon1 system fell WAY short of that, unfortunately. The Z50 is amazing for this. And I’ve now found this lens is, too. I love shooting with them.

This Z50 and 18-400mm is a pretty amazing combo for these needs. Regardless of your lens choice, I’d skip straight from a smaller DX body like the 3400 (I had seriously considered that, too, at one point), and just go with the Z50- unless you have large hands. Hands-down, the size and features blow the 3400 right out of the water. However, if you did go that route, I’d bet this lens would be a fantastic pairing on that body, too.

The next post I’ll add will be my Nikkor 100-500mm vs. this Tamron. We’ll see how they compare in image quality. What’s my quality sacrifice at the limits, by downsizing?

Click to expand...

Eagerly awaiting!

Todd in San Diego said:

The next post I’ll add will be my Nikkor 100-500mm vs. this Tamron. We’ll see how they compare in image quality. What’s my quality sacrifice at the limits, by downsizing?

Click to expand...

That will be an interesting comparison. Frequently consumer level lenses with wide zoom ranges suffer a bit at the long end. I used to use a Nikon 18-200 on my D300 and at 200mm it did suffer a bit.

bjn70 said:

bjn70 said:

The next post I’ll add will be my Nikkor 100-500mm vs. this Tamron. We’ll see how they compare in image quality. What’s my quality sacrifice at the limits, by downsizing?

Click to expand...

That will be an interesting comparison. Frequently consumer level lenses with wide zoom ranges suffer a bit at the long end. I used to use a Nikon 18-200 on my D300 and at 200mm it did suffer a bit.

Click to expand...

The AF-P 70-300 VR DX is a typical example, the Sigma 100-400 C is an exception.




A police helicopter passed low overhead my house in really dreadful weather today. I grabbed my 100-400 C (that happened to be mounted on my D3300) and I got this, at 400mm, slightly underexposed but still OK (no crop used).




I loved the rotor tip vortices! No crop, and again, handheld.



--
tordseriksson (at) gmail.....
Owner of a handful of Nikon cameras. And a few lenses.
WSSA #456

I had a quick chance this weekend to just shoot a few quick shots, using the Tamron and the Nikkor 100-500mm lens. I’d suggest saving them, and zooming-in to enlarge the bolts. Those are the most telling details. I have to say, I was expecting a greater difference in quality, given the cost difference and the broad range of this Tamron.

Initially, it’s almost impossible to see the differences. However, zooming to bring up just the bolts does show some aberrations and lack of overall detail. To me, this Tamron is almost identical for most end photo uses except big enlargements.

All shots are using a tripod, shot at ISO 100, f/11, Z50 on Aperture Priority metering and highest JPEG quality setting. For each lens there is a shot at 300mm, at 400mm, plus for the big Nikkor I added one at the full 500mm. Two reasons for the added shot, 1) That’s an advantage the longer lens offers, and 2) It puts it at its limit, like 400mm shot does with the Tamron.

Let me know your thoughts on this lens, and this comparison. I’m very impressed with this Tamron- more so than I ever expected. I’ll still keep ly Nikkor glass for ultimate, crisp clarity. However, when carrying a lot of gear or a large lens isn’t practical, I feel this little Tamron offers a very capable alternative. I just need to understand that enlargement size will need to be somewhat limited, by comparison.


Tamron, 300mm, 1/200s


Tamron, 400mm, 1/200s


Nikkor, 300mm, 1/200s


Nikkor, 400mm, 1/200s


Nikkor, 500mm, 1/200s

I’d be interested in any thoughts.