Interesting review, but the images speak for them self. And that is the issue here, these lenses are all fantastic and I am very impressed with the Tamron results. The 150-500 at the price is a crazy good lens and I think when Nikon release the Z6iii or even a DX camera with great focus, this lens will be fantastic value. Even the 70-300 Tamron as a second zoom lens to a prime lens shooter who wants a light weight zoom for flexibility is crazy good for the price. This lens like the Sony 200-600 and Canon 100-500 has become the go to lens for those who do not have the budget or the need to spend big $$ on a top end prime, and they smiling all the time.
Patrick M
February 29, 2024 2:37 pm
Excellent review. My only quibble is 1) 200-500mm should be included in the sharpness charts, as tons of potential buyers are shooting with this lens (of course can find these elsewhere on your site) and 2) the conclusion: only 4/5 stars for value? But 5/5 for sharpness? It seems sharpness is very good but not great/superb, but for the price this thing is incredible value. Compare it to *ANY* other Nikon lens outside maybe the 24-120mm f/4 and you won’t find better value. Value should be full 5/5. How much more cheaply would you price this thing to earn 5 stars?!?
The star ratings that you’re referencing were in error. Somehow the sub-scores got copied from a different lens review. It is definitely a 5/5 value lens, and sharpness is good but not 5/5. I’ve updated the review to reflect the proper star ratings.
Bruce
February 21, 2024 4:25 pm
Never mentioned is how well a S lens performs on a Z7 or Z6 camera. With f-mount lenses the autofocus varied greatly depending upon whether it was used with a D5 or a D850 camera.
The limiting factor in that case is the Z6 or Z7, not the lens. It can focus as quickly and accurately as those cameras are capable of achieving.
Stefano Dalle Luche
February 3, 2024 9:43 am
I am the owner of a Z9 and I photograph concerts and theater shows. I have been thinking about purchasing a zoom lens instead of a fixed 300 and 400 for some time because often when changing cameras I risk losing important moments, so I thought, for the versatility of a zoom lens, aware of the difference in quality, but honestly I’m very undecided whether in the dark to opt for a 100-400 or a 180-600 I already have a z tc 1.4 which I sometimes mount on 70-200 and with internal crop in the camera I get to 420mm (f4) and I see it a bit like a copy of the 100-400 which is why I had spotted the 180-600, but I that 5.6 – 6.3 is a little scary in the dark settings of concerts and theaters. What do you think?
I tried out the Z180-600 at a dealer today with a Z6ii — it struggled to latch on to faces etc indoors…🥴
Thomas
December 15, 2023 8:04 am
Thanks so much, Libor, for this in-depth review. I had the opportunity to test the lens while spending time with a friend who owms it already, and I loved it straight away for its handling, its versatility and the first impressions regaring IQ.
Being aware that lab tests and real life are two different things, it might still be interesting to put the Z 180-600 in a different context. Before going for Z system, the AF-S 180-400 1:4 FL TC was something I dreamt of, because of the combination of versatilty of a zoom with the IQ of a high end F-Mount lens and I think most people here would agree that this still is a great lens – with a 5 digit price tag though.
If you compare the test results of this lens with those of the Z 180-600 you’ll find that both are not really far apart at 400mm and that the Z 180-600 at 600mm is actually kind of on par with the F-Mount 180-400 with the integrated TC engaged !
That said, I looked at it assuming that the tests with the F-Mount 180-400 were done with an equivalent test setup compared with today’s standard (i.e. 45MP sensor), but I think since the results of the F-Mount 180-400 are already shown with the latest chart layout, this shoould be the case.
I can’t wait to get my copy of the Z 180-600 to complete my single Z8 zoom line-up – hopefully still this year :-)
BTW: Are there any experiences regarding sample variation for the Z 180-600 yet ??
To your question on the 180-400mm, yes, those tests are comparable! All of the MTF charts on Photography Life can be compared, with the exception of a few older F-mount lenses whose reviews have a very different graphic design on the MTF charts. I’ll be updating those old reviews throughout 2024, either with disclaimers or with new data.
Thank you, Spencer for this confirmation and kudos for all the effort going in this site from you as well as your “colleagues”. That said, considering the amount of work going into it IMHO apart from a few exceptions the disclaimer should do the job. I guess the most interesting lenses would be the ones where people are in serious doubt whether to prefer an adapted F-mount lens over a new Z lens and where these doubts are initiated by the price tags, e.g. the F-Mount E series FL lenses, the 400 and 600 are already updated. But something I think would be interesting for a considerable group of people could be lab test results added to the review by John “Verm” Sherman for the 500 f4 E FL. Looking at the price tags of around 15.000 to 16.000 it could be really appealing to get a used 500 f4E FL with a FTZ II for about half the money and get a super lens that already triggered some discussion whether or not a lens can be “too sharp” :-)
All this of course depends on getting hands on the lens for updating the data. I’m looking forward to whatever you will come up with.
Best regards an Merry Christmas
Thomas
Sean E
December 14, 2023 8:35 pm
Been debating between getting this or doing the 100-400 with a 1.4 TC only because the 100-400 is S line which all my other lens are. Any thoughts is it worth not being an S line. Looking for some causal wildlife use during traveling, some birds sometimes but not like going all out birding or anything but want some extra reach for the occasional deer, bear, elk near the cabin once or twice a year and then around the house birds and other things
The 100-400 is more portable, but more expensive and not as good with the 1.4x TC as the 180-600 bare. For wildlife, I would probably go for the 180-600, unless portability (size/weight) is important.
bg5931
December 14, 2023 11:40 am
Given some of the buzz after release, I expected this one to be stronger MTF-wise. But given the non-S designation and the long zoom range, this was probably unrealistic.
abarataphoto
December 14, 2023 4:42 am
I got mine a couple of weeks ago, and at this point I very pleased with it. Yes, it’s a pain to acquire focus on low contrast with a Z6II, but that’s not the lens fault. Nothing that a small manual adjustment won’t solve, and as a macro photographer I’m so used to manual adjustments that they’re almost imbued in my way to take photos anyway! Ahahah. The lens impressed me for the quality of results on several situations: strong back-light, busy backgrounds. In both situations it can get focus quickly and create beautiful bokeh, creating very nice, artsy photos. Quite happy with the lens, and anxious to try it more and more. And as I never used a telephoto before, I’m very excited to get better with it too!
SteveTQP
December 13, 2023 8:56 pm
Very comprehensive review as always…however, two points may need clarification. First, I find the build quality quite robust on my Z8, but I still wonder why Nikon refuses to make the tripod collar foot Arca-Swiss compatible! This just necessitates extra time and money on an Arca-Swiss plate. Secondly, I think your verdict on the lens’ sharpness belies the excellent image quality possible with this lens. Though I admittedly don’t have NIkkor telephoto primes to compare it to, I can say that with good technique, using a solid tripod, delayed exposure to eliminate vibration, and proper post processing, I’m obtaining absolutely superb sharpness and detail, especially in my landscape images. Thanks again, and Happy Holidays!
Our upcoming 600mm f/6.3 review (next Tuesday) will show side-by-side crops between the two lenses in our strict test chart environment. As this review and those upcoming photos show, there are clear differences that favor the prime. However, careful sharpening and good technique will lead to very sharp photos from the 180-600mm f/6.3. Most photos do not take full advantage of a lens’s sharpness anyway.
Interesting review, but the images speak for them self. And that is the issue here, these lenses are all fantastic and I am very impressed with the Tamron results. The 150-500 at the price is a crazy good lens and I think when Nikon release the Z6iii or even a DX camera with great focus, this lens will be fantastic value. Even the 70-300 Tamron as a second zoom lens to a prime lens shooter who wants a light weight zoom for flexibility is crazy good for the price. This lens like the Sony 200-600 and Canon 100-500 has become the go to lens for those who do not have the budget or the need to spend big $$ on a top end prime, and they smiling all the time.
Excellent review. My only quibble is 1) 200-500mm should be included in the sharpness charts, as tons of potential buyers are shooting with this lens (of course can find these elsewhere on your site) and 2) the conclusion: only 4/5 stars for value? But 5/5 for sharpness? It seems sharpness is very good but not great/superb, but for the price this thing is incredible value. Compare it to *ANY* other Nikon lens outside maybe the 24-120mm f/4 and you won’t find better value. Value should be full 5/5. How much more cheaply would you price this thing to earn 5 stars?!?
The star ratings that you’re referencing were in error. Somehow the sub-scores got copied from a different lens review. It is definitely a 5/5 value lens, and sharpness is good but not 5/5. I’ve updated the review to reflect the proper star ratings.
Never mentioned is how well a S lens performs on a Z7 or Z6 camera. With f-mount lenses the autofocus varied greatly depending upon whether it was used with a D5 or a D850 camera.
The limiting factor in that case is the Z6 or Z7, not the lens. It can focus as quickly and accurately as those cameras are capable of achieving.
I am the owner of a Z9 and I photograph concerts and theater shows. I have been thinking about purchasing a zoom lens instead of a fixed 300 and 400 for some time because often when changing cameras I risk losing important moments, so I thought, for the versatility of a zoom lens, aware of the difference in quality, but honestly I’m very undecided whether in the dark to opt for a 100-400 or a 180-600
I already have a z tc 1.4 which I sometimes mount on 70-200 and with internal crop in the camera I get to 420mm (f4) and I see it a bit like a copy of the 100-400 which is why I had spotted the 180-600, but I that 5.6 – 6.3 is a little scary in the dark settings of concerts and theaters. What do you think?
With the Z9 I think you are able to crank up the ISO to compensate. I love my 180-600 but I use it predominantly outside.
I tried out the Z180-600 at a dealer today with a Z6ii — it struggled to latch on to faces etc indoors…🥴
Thanks so much, Libor, for this in-depth review.
I had the opportunity to test the lens while spending time with a friend who owms it already, and I loved it straight away for its handling, its versatility and the first impressions regaring IQ.
Being aware that lab tests and real life are two different things, it might still be interesting to put the Z 180-600 in a different context.
Before going for Z system, the AF-S 180-400 1:4 FL TC was something I dreamt of, because of the combination of versatilty of a zoom with the IQ of a high end F-Mount lens and I think most people here would agree that this still is a great lens – with a 5 digit price tag though.
If you compare the test results of this lens with those of the Z 180-600 you’ll find that both are not really far apart at 400mm and that the Z 180-600 at 600mm is actually kind of on par with the F-Mount 180-400 with the integrated TC engaged !
That said, I looked at it assuming that the tests with the F-Mount 180-400 were done with an equivalent test setup compared with today’s standard (i.e. 45MP sensor), but I think since the results of the F-Mount 180-400 are already shown with the latest chart layout, this shoould be the case.
I can’t wait to get my copy of the Z 180-600 to complete my single Z8 zoom line-up – hopefully still this year :-)
BTW: Are there any experiences regarding sample variation for the Z 180-600 yet ??
To your question on the 180-400mm, yes, those tests are comparable! All of the MTF charts on Photography Life can be compared, with the exception of a few older F-mount lenses whose reviews have a very different graphic design on the MTF charts. I’ll be updating those old reviews throughout 2024, either with disclaimers or with new data.
Thank you, Spencer for this confirmation and kudos for all the effort going in this site from you as well as your “colleagues”. That said, considering the amount of work going into it IMHO apart from a few exceptions the disclaimer should do the job. I guess the most interesting lenses would be the ones where people are in serious doubt whether to prefer an adapted F-mount lens over a new Z lens and where these doubts are initiated by the price tags, e.g. the F-Mount E series FL lenses, the 400 and 600 are already updated. But something I think would be interesting for a considerable group of people could be lab test results added to the review by John “Verm” Sherman for the 500 f4 E FL. Looking at the price tags of around 15.000 to 16.000 it could be really appealing to get a used 500 f4E FL with a FTZ II for about half the money and get a super lens that already triggered some discussion whether or not a lens can be “too sharp” :-)
All this of course depends on getting hands on the lens for updating the data.
I’m looking forward to whatever you will come up with.
Best regards an Merry Christmas
Thomas
Been debating between getting this or doing the 100-400 with a 1.4 TC only because the 100-400 is S line which all my other lens are. Any thoughts is it worth not being an S line. Looking for some causal wildlife use during traveling, some birds sometimes but not like going all out birding or anything but want some extra reach for the occasional deer, bear, elk near the cabin once or twice a year and then around the house birds and other things
The 100-400 is more portable, but more expensive and not as good with the 1.4x TC as the 180-600 bare. For wildlife, I would probably go for the 180-600, unless portability (size/weight) is important.
Given some of the buzz after release, I expected this one to be stronger MTF-wise. But given the non-S designation and the long zoom range, this was probably unrealistic.
I got mine a couple of weeks ago, and at this point I very pleased with it. Yes, it’s a pain to acquire focus on low contrast with a Z6II, but that’s not the lens fault. Nothing that a small manual adjustment won’t solve, and as a macro photographer I’m so used to manual adjustments that they’re almost imbued in my way to take photos anyway! Ahahah.
The lens impressed me for the quality of results on several situations: strong back-light, busy backgrounds. In both situations it can get focus quickly and create beautiful bokeh, creating very nice, artsy photos. Quite happy with the lens, and anxious to try it more and more. And as I never used a telephoto before, I’m very excited to get better with it too!
Very comprehensive review as always…however, two points may need clarification. First, I find the build quality quite robust on my Z8, but I still wonder why Nikon refuses to make the tripod collar foot Arca-Swiss compatible! This just necessitates extra time and money on an Arca-Swiss plate. Secondly, I think your verdict on the lens’ sharpness belies the excellent image quality possible with this lens. Though I admittedly don’t have NIkkor telephoto primes to compare it to, I can say that with good technique, using a solid tripod, delayed exposure to eliminate vibration, and proper post processing, I’m obtaining absolutely superb sharpness and detail, especially in my landscape images. Thanks again, and Happy Holidays!
Our upcoming 600mm f/6.3 review (next Tuesday) will show side-by-side crops between the two lenses in our strict test chart environment. As this review and those upcoming photos show, there are clear differences that favor the prime. However, careful sharpening and good technique will lead to very sharp photos from the 180-600mm f/6.3. Most photos do not take full advantage of a lens’s sharpness anyway.
Now I cannot wait for Tuesday. :D Is the 400/4.5 review in the works too?
Superb sample images!
Thank you CAT.
I agree wonderful images