Lightweight Telephoto options DX vs FX > 300mm

Gary Barnett · May 26, 2023

I have a Nikon Z5 and I was looking at Tamron 70-300mm.

However, I find that if I wanted a longer reach than 300mm, the cost goes up a lot more and naturally, the size and weight of FX telephoto lenses increased too so that made me think that I could get a Z30/Z50 and 50-250mm combo for less than the more expensive FX telephoto options. Its 250mm end would give you 375mm in FX view and also DX option can be used as a casual carry around camera, especially with the Z30.

But I would love to hear some opinions from anyone who has both systems...and to their advantages and disadvantages.

AlanWatson · May 26, 2023

Gary Barnett said:
I have a Nikon Z5 and I was looking at Tamron 70-300mm.

However, I find that if I wanted a longer reach than 300mm, the cost goes up a lot more and naturally, the size and weight of FX telephoto lenses increased too so that made me think that I could get a Z30/Z50 and 50-250mm combo for less than the more expensive FX telephoto options. Its 250mm end would give you 375mm in FX view and also DX option can be used as a casual carry around camera, especially with the Z30.

But I would love to hear some opinions from anyone who has both systems...and to their advantages and disadvantages.

The obvious thought is that if you fancy that as a more portable casual carry then go for it. A lot of people here like the setup, and I've seen some very nice shots with that lens. I have never used either it or the Tamron myself so cannot compare directly.

If you already had the 70-300mm I'd personally not bother to do this just for the reach. 250mm on DX gives you about 79% of the horizontal angle of view of 300mm on FX, against which you are talking 20MP vs 24MP, which is about a 10% reduction in linear resolution. So I reckon you gain about 15% in resolution from the DX solution, which isn't that much. However if you don't have the 70-300 the Z30+2 lens kit isn't much more expensive than that lens by itself, and it's a significant fraction of the Z50+2 lens kit.

The question I'd ask myself would be whether for the sort of shooting you'd use the tele lens for you'd be happy without a viewfinder? That would be my reservation with the Z30 solution, though Z30 + 16-50 has obvious attractions as a "large pocket" camera. Hopefully those with direct experience will be able to help with that.

mrbr · May 26, 2023

Gary Barnett said:
I have a Nikon Z5 and I was looking at Tamron 70-300mm.

However, I find that if I wanted a longer reach than 300mm, the cost goes up a lot more and naturally, the size and weight of FX telephoto lenses increased too so that made me think that I could get a Z30/Z50 and 50-250mm combo for less than the more expensive FX telephoto options. Its 250mm end would give you 375mm in FX view and also DX option can be used as a casual carry around camera, especially with the Z30.

But I would love to hear some opinions from anyone who has both systems...and to their advantages and disadvantages.

I would not buy the Z30 for a telelens solution ( no viewfinder ).

I can recommend without hesitation the Z50 + Z dx 50-250 mm kitlens , very portable and a pleasure to use. Very good IQ and excellent VR, much better then I expected.

If you don't own the Z50 yet, the Z50 + 16-50 + 50-250 as a kit is certainly a solution to consider.

See Nikon 50-250mm f/4.5-6.3 DX Lens Review | Thom Hogan (zsystemuser.com)

I also own the nikkor F AF-P 70-300 mm fx lens , this lens is also very good, but a lot larger and heavier. I use it on my D7200 and Z6, it gives very good results.

--
Greetings,
Marc

mrbr · May 26, 2023

mrbr said:
Gary Barnett said:

I have a Nikon Z5 and I was looking at Tamron 70-300mm.

However, I find that if I wanted a longer reach than 300mm, the cost goes up a lot more and naturally, the size and weight of FX telephoto lenses increased too so that made me think that I could get a Z30/Z50 and 50-250mm combo for less than the more expensive FX telephoto options. Its 250mm end would give you 375mm in FX view and also DX option can be used as a casual carry around camera, especially with the Z30.

But I would love to hear some opinions from anyone who has both systems...and to their advantages and disadvantages.

Click to expand...

I would not buy the Z30 for a telelens solution ( no viewfinder ).

I can recommend without hesitation the Z50 + Z dx 50-250 mm kitlens , very portable and a pleasure to use. Very good IQ and excellent VR, much better then I expected.

If you don't own the Z50 yet, the Z50 + 16-50 + 50-250 as a kit is certainly a solution to consider.

See Nikon 50-250mm f/4.5-6.3 DX Lens Review | Thom Hogan (zsystemuser.com)

I also own the nikkor F AF-P 70-300 mm fx lens , this lens is also very good, but a lot larger and heavier. I use it on my D7200 and Z6, it gives very good results.

--
Greetings,
Marc

Gary Barnett · May 26, 2023

Thanks for some insights and also for posting nice examples, especially the last pic.

I should mention that I had owned Z50 before and I did not like the touchscreen buttons on the right side of the LCD so Z30 does not have that and also the Z50 is only a bit more compact than the Z5 I already have, so maybe not much of an advantage to me apart from the smaller 16-50mm lens.

If I were to get Z50, I'd rather to get 70-300mm for Z5 as the differences are not so great between them. Maybe it is just extra compactness of Z30 that appeals to me although I knew it would be tricky to shoot 300mm just using the LCD only in the sunlight.

sirhawkeye64 · May 26, 2023

Gary Barnett said:
I have a Nikon Z5 and I was looking at Tamron 70-300mm.

However, I find that if I wanted a longer reach than 300mm, the cost goes up a lot more and naturally, the size and weight of FX telephoto lenses increased too so that made me think that I could get a Z30/Z50 and 50-250mm combo for less than the more expensive FX telephoto options. Its 250mm end would give you 375mm in FX view and also DX option can be used as a casual carry around camera, especially with the Z30.

But I would love to hear some opinions from anyone who has both systems...and to their advantages and disadvantages.

Well, you could look adapting say a Sigma 100-400 or Tamron 100-400 (you can find these used for around $500-$700 depending on condition). The corners aren't the best in these lenses as they are geared more towards wildlife shooting. The sigma might be a tad bit sharper than the Tamron in the corners. The nice thing about these lenses is if you have to use crop mode, you do get 150-600mm equivalent, of course at the cost of resolution loss.

I would avoid using DX mode on the Z5 as it results in a 9MP image (OK for on-screen use, but probably too small if you're planning to print anything larger than about 5x7 and being able to crop if need be). Also if you used the 50-250 you would get 75-375 equivalent but only a 9MP image due to the forced DX crop mode on the Z5.

--
NOTE: If I don't reply to a direct comment in the forums, it's likely I unsubscribed from the thread/article..

PerL · May 26, 2023

Gary Barnett said:
Thanks for some insights and also for posting nice examples, especially the last pic.

I should mention that I had owned Z50 before and I did not like the touchscreen buttons on the right side of the LCD so Z30 does not have that and also the Z50 is only a bit more compact than the Z5 I already have, so maybe not much of an advantage to me apart from the smaller 16-50mm lens.

If I were to get Z50, I'd rather to get 70-300mm for Z5 as the differences are not so great between them. Maybe it is just extra compactness of Z30 that appeals to me although I knew it would be tricky to shoot 300mm just using the LCD only in the sunlight.

I have Z5 and Z50 and also the 50-250 which I use on both cameras. We have lots of birds and wildlife around our summer/weekend house, and the 50-250 performs excellent for my needs. I would not get a FF 70-300, it has to be at least 400 mm for me to consider it. Now I am waiting for what the 200-600 Z will bring. It if is to expensive or heavy I will probably stay put until we have more choices. Or get the FTZ adapter and maybe the 200-500.

AlainCh2 · May 26, 2023

mrbr said:
mrbr said:

I would not buy the Z30 for a telelens solution ( no viewfinder ).

I can recommend without hesitation the Z50 + Z dx 50-250 mm kitlens , very portable and a pleasure to use. Very good IQ and excellent VR, much better then I expected.

...
I also own the nikkor F AF-P 70-300 mm fx lens , this lens is also very good, but a lot larger and heavier.

Click to expand...

I have a Z30, I cannot use EVF, I'm barely able to read the monitor,
and mostly I focus manually 'cause I see the color change of the focus spot.

I returned the 50-250 and got instead the 18-140 that's now locked to the camera.
Best choice I made. 850gr Shooting Weight. Fantastic everyday range.

I got FTZ + 70-300 5.6E - 700gr - 500€ another fantastic lens, 1.360gr SW w/Hood

And a few days ago a perfectly working Sigma 150-600C. 800€. 2,450gr SW w/Hood

The Tamron has no VR. All my lenses have it 'cause Z30 has no IBIS.

Today I did a full session of tests - 100mt range - tripod + remote:
some results are below. --- ALL IMAGES SOOC---

Range. The orange dots are for the 3Turtles 1Duck picture

24mm - no crop - the signpost is below the tree on the right

All photos cropped 100%

70-300 @450mm

150-600 @450mm

150-600 @900 - 1/1000 freeze that fly on the signpost!!! ( best shot of a 3 burst )

PL6 - slight crop for composition

And this is a 2,1km shot handheld - crop 100%

@450 - - crop 100%

@900 - No crop - Just astounding VR

Hope it helps

--
DPRreview - I moved to > DPRevived.com - as 3700 other people
___.......................................................... ___
In the Mid of French/Italian Alps - Hardiness Zone 8A
I Love all Carnivores, I have mostly Red Dioneas.
https://eu.zonerama.com/AlainCH2/1191151

Gary Barnett · May 26, 2023

AlainCh2 said:
mrbr said:

mrbr said:

I would not buy the Z30 for a telelens solution ( no viewfinder ).

I can recommend without hesitation the Z50 + Z dx 50-250 mm kitlens , very portable and a pleasure to use. Very good IQ and excellent VR, much better then I expected.

...
I also own the nikkor F AF-P 70-300 mm fx lens , this lens is also very good, but a lot larger and heavier.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I have a Z30, I cannot use EVF, I'm barely able to read the monitor,
and mostly I focus manually 'cause I see the color change of the focus spot.

Hope it helps

AlainCh2 · May 27, 2023

Gary Barnett said:
AlainCh2 said:

I have a Z30, I cannot use EVF, I'm barely able to read the monitor,
and mostly I focus manually 'cause I see the color change of the focus spot.

Hope it helps

Click to expand...

Thanks for posting this, I guess you were saying that you had to focus manually due to lack of the evf?

No, sorry for not having been clearer enough.

I've hypermetropia so focusing under 60cm needs add-ons over my multifocal that do cover the astigmatism + presbyopia but only a little of the Hyp. I do use them at home for tasks that require precise handling.

It seems complicated but it's not: The focused image forms in the back of the retina being my bulb too short.
( The image is Blurred, but if I "pump" the bulb I can see Crisp for a few instants. After 2-3 times I get a headache - When younger I could do it 20-30 times in an hour before a headache )

So I cannot use EVF, and the monitor is useful for composition but not for details.

I do use AF > BB + AFC < but often I never know if the focus is correct.
So I lose patience and focus manually with better results,
being able to see the color change in the center of the monitor.

Well, I use 150-600 (900mm) handhelds on the Z30 with some results....
... FYI > I point the camera by axis not by visual from 1974.

This Morning - 45mt - (900mm) - No crop

Yesterday
as part of the tests I did for my new 150-600C

Yesterday - 2.1km - SOOC - Handheld - Crop 100%

--
DPRreview - I moved to > DPRevived.com - as 3700 other people
___.......................................................... ___
In the Mid of French/Italian Alps - Hardiness Zone 8A
I Love all Carnivores, I have mostly Red Dioneas.
https://eu.zonerama.com/AlainCH2/1191151

Gary Barnett · Jun 9, 2023

I have just tested out Tamron 70-300 earlier this week and I was really disappointed with its performance beyonds 200mm. I read that the 300mm end is sharper than 70mm but it was totally the opposite experience for me. Impressively sharp from 70mm to 180-200mm even at close distance but meh at 200-300mm, regardless of the shutter speeds and distance. It is quite soft at the end, the rendering has very slightly fuzzy look which reminded me of my old Nikon AF 70-300G lens in the past! With my old D7500, I saw it as a portrait lens which kinds of soften the skins but definitely not for the mirrorless cameras which uses its sensor to focus.

I found a couple of reviews saying the Nikon AF-P 70-300E is actually sharper in all focus range than Tamron.

jthomas39 · Jun 10, 2023

Gary Barnett said:
I have just tested out Tamron 70-300 earlier this week and I was really disappointed with its performance beyonds 200mm. I read that the 300mm end is sharper than 70mm but it was totally the opposite experience for me. Impressively sharp from 70mm to 180-200mm even at close distance but meh at 200-300mm, regardless of the shutter speeds and distance. It is quite soft at the end, the rendering has very slightly fuzzy look which reminded me of my old Nikon AF 70-300G lens in the past! With my old D7500, I saw it as a portrait lens which kinds of soften the skins but definitely not for the mirrorless cameras which uses its sensor to focus.

I found a couple of reviews saying the Nikon AF-P 70-300E is actually sharper in all focus range than Tamron.

I've seen thread posts that mention heat distortion at longer distances, which can make the lens seem soft. Perhaps do a test with the Tamron and with a known good lens at the same scene.

Or distortion shooting from an opened car window or even distortion from the air flow around the big lens hood.

Gary Barnett · Jun 10, 2023

jthomas39 said:
Gary Barnett said:

I have just tested out Tamron 70-300 earlier this week and I was really disappointed with its performance beyonds 200mm. I read that the 300mm end is sharper than 70mm but it was totally the opposite experience for me. Impressively sharp from 70mm to 180-200mm even at close distance but meh at 200-300mm, regardless of the shutter speeds and distance. It is quite soft at the end, the rendering has very slightly fuzzy look which reminded me of my old Nikon AF 70-300G lens in the past! With my old D7500, I saw it as a portrait lens which kinds of soften the skins but definitely not for the mirrorless cameras which uses its sensor to focus.

I found a couple of reviews saying the Nikon AF-P 70-300E is actually sharper in all focus range than Tamron.

Click to expand...

I've seen thread posts that mention heat distortion at longer distances, which can make the lens seem soft. Perhaps do a test with the Tamron and with a known good lens at the same scene.

Or distortion shooting from an opened car window or even distortion from the air flow around the big lens hood.

To be honest, in years of using telephoto lens such as AF-P DX 70-300 and Z 50-250, as well as Fuji 50-230, I don't think I have seen modern telephoto lens as bad as Tamron's end. Nothing to do with the heat otherwise I would have identified it easily. Could be that I got the dud one but I just saw a YouTube review saying the sharpness is good only after post processing(!), that killed it for me. Also saw a review of E mount version for Sony, which has almost matched my experience.

So I'm just not convinced of Tamron 70-300, which is shame because it looked good on the paper minus the VR. In the end, I decided to order an used AF-P 70-300 plus a FTZ adapter. Don't think Nikon will come up with Z version for a long while since it's not on their road map yet, especially that they have only released AF-P as recently as 2017.

Just noticed that Sony sells 70-300 OSS for £1079! If Nikon were to release a Z version, it's very much likely it won't be cheap!

Also I looked into Z30 twin kits but it costs some more and having to carry 2nd body just for the sake of using telephoto seemed to be overkill for me anyway.

Bob A L · Jun 10, 2023

I suppose it depends on individual preferences, but I find my 50-250 Z is good enough that I have no fear of cropping it to 500 and 666mm FF equivalent fields of view anytime I want more reach out of it. I actually have a setting for cropping it clear to 889 mm field of view for web sharing and don't hesitate to use it. I have a 150-500 sigma that works well on my Zfc, but is way to heavy and unwieldly for this ol man to handle, so the crop situation is better solution for me.

I also have the Nikon 55-300 dx and 70-300, but seldom use them anymore, preferring the 50-250 and my 18-300.

sirhawkeye64 · Jun 10, 2023

Gary Barnett said:
jthomas39 said:

Gary Barnett said:

I have just tested out Tamron 70-300 earlier this week and I was really disappointed with its performance beyonds 200mm. I read that the 300mm end is sharper than 70mm but it was totally the opposite experience for me. Impressively sharp from 70mm to 180-200mm even at close distance but meh at 200-300mm, regardless of the shutter speeds and distance. It is quite soft at the end, the rendering has very slightly fuzzy look which reminded me of my old Nikon AF 70-300G lens in the past! With my old D7500, I saw it as a portrait lens which kinds of soften the skins but definitely not for the mirrorless cameras which uses its sensor to focus.

I found a couple of reviews saying the Nikon AF-P 70-300E is actually sharper in all focus range than Tamron.

Click to expand...

I've seen thread posts that mention heat distortion at longer distances, which can make the lens seem soft. Perhaps do a test with the Tamron and with a known good lens at the same scene.

Or distortion shooting from an opened car window or even distortion from the air flow around the big lens hood.

Click to expand...

To be honest, in years of using telephoto lens such as AF-P DX 70-300 and Z 50-250, as well as Fuji 50-230, I don't think I have seen modern telephoto lens as bad as Tamron's end. Nothing to do with the heat otherwise I would have identified it easily. Could be that I got the dud one but I just saw a YouTube review saying the sharpness is good only after post processing(!), that killed it for me. Also saw a review of E mount version for Sony, which has almost matched my experience.

So I'm just not convinced of Tamron 70-300, which is shame because it looked good on the paper minus the VR. In the end, I decided to order an used AF-P 70-300 plus a FTZ adapter. Don't think Nikon will come up with Z version for a long while since it's not on their road map yet, especially that they have only released AF-P as recently as 2017.

Just noticed that Sony sells 70-300 OSS for £1079! If Nikon were to release a Z version, it's very much likely it won't be cheap!

Also I looked into Z30 twin kits but it costs some more and having to carry 2nd body just for the sake of using telephoto seemed to be overkill for me anyway.

I wonder if at some point, we will get a VR (well, VC) version of the 70-300 in another year or so. I'm sure Tamron doesn't want the bad reputation for the Z system, so my guess is that they will let the current 70-300 sit (it seems like it's dropped in price, or just always on sale for $100 off MSRP), possibly to make way for a newer version that has VC and possibly better optics.

The lack of VC was a bit of a deal breaker (especially at that price) personally and stopped me from considering it, which was a letdown because I really wanted a native Z variant of a 70-300.... but unless they come out with a VC version with improved optics, I may just go back to Nikon's AFP version and adapt it.

--
NOTE: If I don't reply to a direct comment in the forums, it's likely I unsubscribed from the thread/article..

Randy Roy · Jun 11, 2023

The lack of VR (VC) is a deal breaker for me.

Gary Barnett · Jun 11, 2023

Bob A L said:
I suppose it depends on individual preferences, but I find my 50-250 Z is good enough that I have no fear of cropping it to 500 and 666mm FF equivalent fields of view anytime I want more reach out of it. I actually have a setting for cropping it clear to 889 mm field of view for web sharing and don't hesitate to use it. I have a 150-500 sigma that works well on my Zfc, but is way to heavy and unwieldly for this ol man to handle, so the crop situation is better solution for me.

I also have the Nikon 55-300 dx and 70-300, but seldom use them anymore, preferring the 50-250 and my 18-300.

I think I might not mind using smaller 50-250 Z as it is quite cheap.

However, does using the DX crop mode still let you shoot RAW? It is something I haven't thought of.

capanikon · Jun 11, 2023

via https://www.digitalbirdphotography.com/3.1.html

Could also use smaller format:

From left:

1" with 70-300 (810mm equivalent)

FX with 800mm

Micro Four Thirds with 300mm (600mm equivalent):

f7a4c6e89b3a475d9ae48b3ee9843c28.jpg.png

--
irc.libera.chat #photogeeks

mrbr · Jun 11, 2023

Gary Barnett said:
Bob A L said:

I suppose it depends on individual preferences, but I find my 50-250 Z is good enough that I have no fear of cropping it to 500 and 666mm FF equivalent fields of view anytime I want more reach out of it. I actually have a setting for cropping it clear to 889 mm field of view for web sharing and don't hesitate to use it. I have a 150-500 sigma that works well on my Zfc, but is way to heavy and unwieldly for this ol man to handle, so the crop situation is better solution for me.

I also have the Nikon 55-300 dx and 70-300, but seldom use them anymore, preferring the 50-250 and my 18-300.

Click to expand...

I think I might not mind using smaller 50-250 Z as it is quite cheap.

for its money this is a fantastic lens !

Gary Barnett said:
However, does using the DX crop mode still let you shoot RAW? It is something I haven't thought of.

Yes, you can use raw in dx crop mode.

sirhawkeye64 · Jun 11, 2023

Randy Roy said:
The lack of VR (VC) is a deal breaker for me.

I think it was for a lot of people. And even Matt Granger says it's a decent lens.... BUT only if you're shooting in good light and can keep your shutter speed up (around 1/320s or faster). I mean on a FF camera, it has better chance than on the APSC bodies but still, I'd take the bulk of the FTZ (so I can get VR) in exchange for the smaller size of the Tamron Z version.

Lightweight Telephoto options DX vs FX > 300mm

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Active member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts