Tamron recently announced that their 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 lens is going to be available for the Nikon Z system beginning September 19th! This $1300 lens could be a budget alternative for the Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 S, and a brighter alternative to the Nikon Z 28-400mm f/4-8.
At first glance, there are definitely some things to like about the Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3. The lens is meaningfully lighter than Nikon’s 100-400mm S (1180 grams versus 1435 grams) while going to 50mm on the wide end instead of 100mm. In theory, this wider focal length makes it a more versatile choice to pair with lenses like Nikon’s 14-30mm f/4 S. However, it is a little slower on the long end, with a maximum aperture of f/6.3 at 400mm. And one of the biggest benefits of Nikon’s 100-400mm is the excellent focus speed. We’ll have to wait and see how Tamron fares on that front.
Another thing to like about this new lens is that the Nikon Z version is the same price as the Sony E version! This is a nice new development, since Tamron’s previous Z-mount glass has been a little more expensive than the E-mount version of the same lens. I hope that this is just the first of many times that we will see this be the case! And for $1300, it really is a nice price. Nikon’s 100-400mm S is clearly a higher-end lens, so comparing them is a little unfair, but that lens retails for $2700. Certainly a lot of photographers on a budget, who may have had their eye on the Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6, will be interested in the new Tamron.
Finally, I’m encouraged by the extremely close focusing distance and high magnification of the Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3. With a minimum focusing distance of 24.9 cm (9.8 inches) and a maximum magnification of 0.5× (1:2), we are pretty close to macro photography territory. It’s one of the best magnifications you’ll find outside of dedicated macro lenses.
Here are the specifications of this lens:
- Full Name: Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD
- Mount Type: Nikon Z mount (and Sony E mount)
- Focal Length: 50-400mm zoom (8x zoom)
- Maximum Aperture: f/4.5 to f/6.3
- Minimum Aperture: f/22 to f/32
- Aperture Blades: 9 (rounded)
- Filter Size: 67mm
- Lens Elements: 24
- Lens Groups: 18
- Special Elements: 2 XLD, 3 LD, 1 molded aspherical, and 1 hybrid aspherical
- Image Stabilization: Yes
- Internal Focusing: Yes
- Control Rings: Zoom, focus
- Function Button: Yes
- Switches: AF/MF and custom switch
- Focus Motor:VXD linear focus
- Minimum Focus Distance: 24.9 cm (9.8 inches)
- Maximum Magnification: 0.5× (1:2)
- Mount Material: Metal
- Weather/Dust Sealing: Yes
- Dimensions (Length × Diameter): 186 x 89 mm (7.3 x 3.5 inches)
- Weight: 1180 g (2.60 lbs)
- MSRP: $1299 (Pre-order here)
Personally, I’m encouraged to see more telephoto zoom options for Nikon in this range, given that Nikon has focused more on the supertelephoto side of things and especially primes. I’m looking forward to testing it both in the field and in the lab! The Sony version looks like it has good reviews although I haven’t personally tried it.
What do you think, are you planning to get this lens or have some reservations about it? Let me know in the comments below!
Eagerly awaiting this review.
Hi Spencer, I’m already looking forward to this review, it will help me a lot in my purchasing decision.
Regards
I recently bought the E-mount version of the 50-400 for using it with the Megapad ETZ21PRO. While I love the flexibility, it’s a bit clumsy because you can either use the lens VC or camera IBIS. Thus, I am pretty happy Tamron has finally announced the Z mount version and will soon switch.
Even with my Z7 II, the image quality leaves little to complain in normal magnification rations. I found the 1:2 at 50mm rarely usable due to very poor borders outside the APS-C area.
Nevertheless, 14-30 & 50-400 build a pretty compelling hiking kit.
This lens will work great as a companion to the excellent Nikon 14-30. It will be even better if and once they introduce the Tamron 50-300mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Lens which is currently available in the Sony E mount which looks to be the replacement of the Tamron 70-300mm (adding VR and going a little wider).
The specs of that lens are:
3.1 x 5.9″ / 78 x 150 mm
1.5 lb / 665 g
Maximum Magnification / Reproduction ratio: 0.5x / 1:2
Once that is introduced, one can decide between the 50-300 and 50-400 on whether one prioritizes access to 400mm vs a smaller, lighter lens.
Ich denke, es wird sehr spannend, wie dqas Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 for Nikon Z sich letztlich schlägt. Das Nikon Z 100-400 S ist verdammt gut, jedoch auch sehr teuer und verhältnismäßig schwer. Das Nikon Nikkor Z 28-400 ist hingegen leichter und auch günstiger, aber halt wegen der geringen Lichtstärke schon deutlich eingeschränkter zu gebrauchen. Außerdem ist es optisch nur im Bereich unterhalb der Normalbrennweite recht brauchbar. Im Telebereich hingegen mittelmäßig. Wie sich das neue, gleich teure Tamron letztlich schlägt, macht mich schon neugierig. Leider ist erfahrungsgemäß der Stabilisator Tamrons bisher immer d3eutlich schwächer als der Nikons. Was mir an dem Tamron jedoch gefällt, ist das relativ moderate Gewicht und die guten Nahgrenzen, die es zu einem Halbmakro machen. Deshalb freue ich mich schon auf Eueren Test, wie das Teil, besonders im Brennweitenbereich zwischen 200 und 400 mm performt. Wenn es sich dort gut schlägt, könnte ich mir durchaus vorstellen, es zu kaufen.
Ich freue mich in jedem Fall auf Euer Review!
Sinnvoller Kommentar, aber wohl leider für die meisten Besucher von PhotographyLife nicht verständlich.
Das 50-400 ist aus meiner Sicht bei 50mm im Nahbereich nicht wirklich nutzbar – im Gegensatz zu normalen Abbildungsverhältnissen.
The 50-400 ist IMO pretty unusable at 50mm and 1:2 – in opposite to normal magnification ration.
I use the Z100-400 and do feel that it would have been quite something if it did reduce to 50mm.
I class it as my all round lens, where it superseded a F Mount 70-200mm.
I had many more opportunities to get in close with the Family at 70mm, but did feel that 200mm was too short for the Nature Opportunities that could show up as a chance capture.
I also agree there is an attractiveness for Multi-Brands to make available variances in the Options offered for Zooms. Especially if they are able to keep the long end from being too slow as the aperture option, and costing for the Lens attractive.
I look forward to follow up info presented for this Tamron lens.
The 28-400mm is still much smaller and lighter than the 50-400mm which is a big advantage. I know the 50-400mm is faster at the tele end (F6.3 vs F8) but the 28mm on the wide end is more important for me than the 1-stop advantage on the tele end. Here is a size comparison of these three lenses if interested:
cameradecision.com/blog/…0mm-Lenses
If they had a 16-35mm lens, you might have a good two lens hiking kit with this.
In the minimum aperture spec above I think there is a typo.
Thank you, fixed the typo! And I agree. Already makes a good pair with the 14-30mm f/4 if you don’t mind the 30-50mm gap. Or are willing to use the 40mm f/2 there.
Interesting that this lens has been released so close to the Nikon 28-400 f4-8 which I have been enjoying recently. Similar prices too. Clearly the Tamron is faster at the long end which could be useful, and the Nikon can be a little soft sometimes, so would be great to see a detailed comparison between the two.
Interesting lens. Personally, I think the 0.38x reproduction ratio of the 100-400 at the long end is more useful than the 1:2 magnification of this lens at the short end. And my suspicion is that the Nikon is sharper (soon to be confirmed or disproven by rigorous testing, I presume ;) ). However, I like that this one goes to 50 mm. For landscape-related applications, I often feel that being able to zoom out a little bit more on the 100-400 would be useful.
I agree, the front element of the lens has to almost touch the subject in order to get that 1:2 mgnification which is not practical in the field at all. 100-40mm at tele end gives you some working room at least, and not so scary for the bugs and stuff :)
Tamron lists the maximum reproduction at 400mm as 0.25X, which is still pretty solid, although a bit below the Nikon. I wonder if it improves linearly as you shorten the focal length?
My guess is that it falls between the 28-400 and 100-400 for sharpness. That said, the 150-500 Tamron makes is tack sharp. My copy was sharper cropped to 600mm equivalent view than the 180-600 I tried. The stabilization was quite poor though.
Seems like an awesome lens for anyone left using Nikon APS-C. A 75-600mm wildlife lens is pretty substantial range!
I do not think reproduction ratio improves linearly, no. It seems to be worst in the middle, best at the short end, and decent at the long end.
Regarding sharpness, given some prior tests, I would expect it to be sharp in the center and a bit soft at the edges at the long end.