I’m really interested to understand how your sharpness tests for Dx lenses can be compared to your tests of Fx lenses, if the Fx lens is used on a Dx body.
For example, looking at the Imatest scores at 50mm in the centre at f/5.6:
Z 50-250 on Dx sensor: 2401 Z 24-200 on Fx sensor: 3074 Z 24-200 on Dx sensor: ????
If the 24-200 was tested on a Dx sensor with the same pixel density as the Fx sensor, would the Imatest score still be 3074, or would the reduced Dx picture height in pixels affect the result? i.e. would the Z 24-200 on Dx achieve an Imatest score of approximately 3074/1.5 = 2049?
Or looking at it practically, if both lenses were used on the same Dx body, when images are viewed at the same size on a large print, would the Z 50-250 appear sharper in the centre, or would the Z 24-200 appear sharper?
Thanks!
Sean U
November 26, 2024 1:56 pm
I purchased the 50-250mm as my travel telephoto for my Z7. Along with the 24-70mm f/4 and 40mm f/2 I feel I have the perfect (for me) travel combo. The lens is super sharp, priced right (under $300 lightly used) and super light weight for the range. I personally don’t mind the slow aperture range for my intended use, and the vr + ibis makes up for some of that. Thanks for an inspiring review.
Saurabh
April 10, 2023 12:46 am
I own a Z 50 Camera with NIKKOR Z DX 16-50mm f/3.5-6.3 VR & NIKKOR Z DX 50-250mm f/4.5-6.3 VR Lens. I want to know whether NIKKOR Z TELECONVERTER TC-2.0X is compatible with these lenses or not. If Not, kindly tell which Teleconverter may be used with the these lenses.
Dear Saurabh, I also have the same camera Z 50 along with both the lenses you have. I have enquired from NIKON persons and some other persons who have good knowledge. Both of these lenses are not compatible with the NIKKOR Z TELECONVERTER TC-2.0X.
Fabrice
December 24, 2020 10:33 am
Thank you Nasim. Very handy as I am playing with my son’s Z DX 50-250mm.
George
July 5, 2020 1:12 pm
Once again, a great review, balanced and accurate. Thank you Nasim. I have this lens and I agree that it makes a great combination with the 16-50 and the Z50.
No all I have to do is get my photos to look as good as yours…
Jason
July 4, 2020 1:26 pm
I got this Z50+2 lens kit for casual hikes and daily walks and I have been impressed with the amount of value for the price. The mass of the full-frame DSLR and lenses were really starting to dig into my shoulders on hikes and that problem has been solved by this set up.
My only complaint would be that the auto-focus is very hunty at long focal lengths and I often have to get it started in a good place with the manual focus ring and then let it fine tune. This is easy to do once you get used to it.
It is so light and easy to use and the picture quality is great for a kit in this price range. The lenses are compact when stowed, so it is easy to fit in a pack. It seems like one of the most under-rated deals out there.
Richard
July 4, 2020 12:20 pm
Thanks for continuing to cover Nikon’s DX offerings, which I feel are often overlooked by more “snobbish” photography sites. Both this and the 16-50 lens look great for kit zooms, and they make an impressive package together with the Z50. But I think I’m probably going to be sticking with my aging D5300 plus AF-S 16-80 and AF-P 70-300 DX combo. The three together aren’t that heavy and the camera does most of what I’d like it to do, although AF can be a slow or slightly inaccurate sometimes. I do really like both of those F-mount lenses too. Maybe if Nikon could give us a few Z DX primes plus some brighter zooms that would combine to cover 16 to 300 or 400mm, I might be persuaded to make the switch, but I can’t see it happening any time soon.
Niko Vita
July 4, 2020 1:39 am
Great review as always. Great pictures too. You never disappoint your readers.
As a happy Z6 shooter for over a year now I am wondering what to do about the tele range. I have quite a few Z lenses already and all of them are really stellar. Even the mixed-bag Z 15-30 exceeds my needs and abilities. Recently I purchased a couple of extension rings from Meike and they perform surprisingly well with my prime lenses, so even my limited macro needs are covered. For the tele I did consider the 50-250 lens but it will produce 10 Mpix images on Z6 which is not enough. Currently I am using the new 70-300 FX with an adapter, and sometimes my son’s 70-300 DX from his D5600 with an adapter. They are not bad but I would like to avoid the adapter as it is rather clumsy. The question is what to do. I do not shoot birds but I do need a long lens for my travels. Now we have the Z 24-200 coming, which has received much applause by Ricci on youtube. I guess it will be a good lens but it only goes to 200. It looks like an alternative to 24-70 with a longer reach, rather than a dedicated tele option. Then on the Nikon roadmap we have 200-600, which I believe will be a good but very big lens. We also have the S-line 100-400 coming but I guess it will be a big and expensive professional lens. The ideal for me is to have a Z 70-300 lens equivalent to the FX one, but there is no such a lens on the roadmap. What is your advice? Get the 24-200 anyway? Get the Z50+2DX lenses, which could be the cheapest option and also be a nice travel kit? Wait for the updated roadmap hoping that the 70-300 will show up there?
Aruna
July 3, 2020 9:20 am
Thank You, great images. I think I am convinced about this kit lens and z50. I finally started my transition in to mirror-less, ordered a Z6 and it is on its way, was thinking about z50 too. My old D750 and D7500 will retire soon.
Aruna, not sure of the value of getting a DX kit, as well as FX, but looks like you have already done it before with the D750 and D7500. When using DX along with FX, I would recommend to get FX lenses only, so that you can use them on both. Otherwise the 50-250mm will be cropped to 1.5x automatically on the Z6, unless that’s what you actually want…
Go for it. I’ve had the Z6 for about a year and love it, but there are many times when the lighter weight of the Z50 is the more attractive option. I bought the twin lens kit and both lenses give great results.
SSM
July 2, 2020 3:21 pm
Hi Nasim, I have used this lens extensively with my Z7 and I have the following two observations: 1) The colors are a bit greenish compared to the Z FX lenses, but still pleasant. Have you noticed that? 2) I know this is a DX lens and many reviewers say you are losing more than half your Z7 sensor with a DX lens. However, I have found that when I use a telephoto lens, in many cases, I crop my pictures by more than the DX crop factor, anyways! So, the only thing I really lose, using this lens on the Z7, is some framing flexibility. Your thoughts?
SSM, thanks for letting me know. I haven’t done side-by-side color comparisons, but when I looked through my images, I did not see the green color cast you are referring to. Contrast is not as high as on high-end lenses, but that’s to be expected.
In regards to losing resolution, if that’s what you end up doing anyway, then perhaps it makes sense for you. But I personally wouldn’t do it, since that wastes a lot of resolution, and I don’t crop my images that much.
There are other benefits to cropping with a Z7 and DX lenses. Filling the frame with your subject improves focus tracking and metering. I mostly used my 70-300E in DX mode on my Z7II for sports anyway. The 70-300E has slightly better bokeh, color rendering is nearly identical (Lightroom Classic,) and most of the time I preferred the 50-250’s overall rendering and sharpness. However, the newer native lens focuses better, is half the size, cheaper, and doesn’t require the FTZ. I also find the extra 20mm on the wide end more useful than the 50mm on the tele end. My initial impression of the 50-250 was not liking the 75mm equivalent or the lens unlocking, but I can now look past both. ;) Also, don’t forget the amazingly useful minimum focus on the newer lens!
Hi Spencer,
I’m really interested to understand how your sharpness tests for Dx lenses can be compared to your tests of Fx lenses, if the Fx lens is used on a Dx body.
For example, looking at the Imatest scores at 50mm in the centre at f/5.6:
Z 50-250 on Dx sensor: 2401
Z 24-200 on Fx sensor: 3074
Z 24-200 on Dx sensor: ????
If the 24-200 was tested on a Dx sensor with the same pixel density as the Fx sensor, would the Imatest score still be 3074, or would the reduced Dx picture height in pixels affect the result? i.e. would the Z 24-200 on Dx achieve an Imatest score of approximately 3074/1.5 = 2049?
Or looking at it practically, if both lenses were used on the same Dx body, when images are viewed at the same size on a large print, would the Z 50-250 appear sharper in the centre, or would the Z 24-200 appear sharper?
Thanks!
I purchased the 50-250mm as my travel telephoto for my Z7. Along with the 24-70mm f/4 and 40mm f/2 I feel I have the perfect (for me) travel combo. The lens is super sharp, priced right (under $300 lightly used) and super light weight for the range. I personally don’t mind the slow aperture range for my intended use, and the vr + ibis makes up for some of that. Thanks for an inspiring review.
I own a Z 50 Camera with NIKKOR Z DX 16-50mm f/3.5-6.3 VR & NIKKOR Z DX 50-250mm f/4.5-6.3 VR Lens. I want to know whether NIKKOR Z TELECONVERTER TC-2.0X is compatible with these lenses or not.
If Not, kindly tell which Teleconverter may be used with the these lenses.
Dear Saurabh, I also have the same camera Z 50 along with both the lenses you have. I have enquired from NIKON persons and some other persons who have good knowledge. Both of these lenses are not compatible with the NIKKOR Z TELECONVERTER TC-2.0X.
Thank you Nasim. Very handy as I am playing with my son’s Z DX 50-250mm.
Once again, a great review, balanced and accurate. Thank you Nasim. I have this lens and I agree that it makes a great combination with the 16-50 and the Z50.
No all I have to do is get my photos to look as good as yours…
I got this Z50+2 lens kit for casual hikes and daily walks and I have been impressed with the amount of value for the price. The mass of the full-frame DSLR and lenses were really starting to dig into my shoulders on hikes and that problem has been solved by this set up.
My only complaint would be that the auto-focus is very hunty at long focal lengths and I often have to get it started in a good place with the manual focus ring and then let it fine tune. This is easy to do once you get used to it.
It is so light and easy to use and the picture quality is great for a kit in this price range. The lenses are compact when stowed, so it is easy to fit in a pack. It seems like one of the most under-rated deals out there.
Thanks for continuing to cover Nikon’s DX offerings, which I feel are often overlooked by more “snobbish” photography sites. Both this and the 16-50 lens look great for kit zooms, and they make an impressive package together with the Z50. But I think I’m probably going to be sticking with my aging D5300 plus AF-S 16-80 and AF-P 70-300 DX combo. The three together aren’t that heavy and the camera does most of what I’d like it to do, although AF can be a slow or slightly inaccurate sometimes. I do really like both of those F-mount lenses too. Maybe if Nikon could give us a few Z DX primes plus some brighter zooms that would combine to cover 16 to 300 or 400mm, I might be persuaded to make the switch, but I can’t see it happening any time soon.
Great review as always. Great pictures too. You never disappoint your readers.
As a happy Z6 shooter for over a year now I am wondering what to do about the tele range. I have quite a few Z lenses already and all of them are really stellar. Even the mixed-bag Z 15-30 exceeds my needs and abilities. Recently I purchased a couple of extension rings from Meike and they perform surprisingly well with my prime lenses, so even my limited macro needs are covered. For the tele I did consider the 50-250 lens but it will produce 10 Mpix images on Z6 which is not enough. Currently I am using the new 70-300 FX with an adapter, and sometimes my son’s 70-300 DX from his D5600 with an adapter. They are not bad but I would like to avoid the adapter as it is rather clumsy. The question is what to do. I do not shoot birds but I do need a long lens for my travels. Now we have the Z 24-200 coming, which has received much applause by Ricci on youtube. I guess it will be a good lens but it only goes to 200. It looks like an alternative to 24-70 with a longer reach, rather than a dedicated tele option. Then on the Nikon roadmap we have 200-600, which I believe will be a good but very big lens. We also have the S-line 100-400 coming but I guess it will be a big and expensive professional lens. The ideal for me is to have a Z 70-300 lens equivalent to the FX one, but there is no such a lens on the roadmap. What is your advice? Get the 24-200 anyway? Get the Z50+2DX lenses, which could be the cheapest option and also be a nice travel kit? Wait for the updated roadmap hoping that the 70-300 will show up there?
Thank You, great images. I think I am convinced about this kit lens and z50. I finally started my transition in to mirror-less, ordered a Z6 and it is on its way, was thinking about z50 too. My old D750 and D7500 will retire soon.
Aruna, not sure of the value of getting a DX kit, as well as FX, but looks like you have already done it before with the D750 and D7500. When using DX along with FX, I would recommend to get FX lenses only, so that you can use them on both. Otherwise the 50-250mm will be cropped to 1.5x automatically on the Z6, unless that’s what you actually want…
Go for it. I’ve had the Z6 for about a year and love it, but there are many times when the lighter weight of the Z50 is the more attractive option. I bought the twin lens kit and both lenses give great results.
Hi Nasim, I have used this lens extensively with my Z7 and I have the following two observations: 1) The colors are a bit greenish compared to the Z FX lenses, but still pleasant. Have you noticed that? 2) I know this is a DX lens and many reviewers say you are losing more than half your Z7 sensor with a DX lens. However, I have found that when I use a telephoto lens, in many cases, I crop my pictures by more than the DX crop factor, anyways! So, the only thing I really lose, using this lens on the Z7, is some framing flexibility. Your thoughts?
SSM, thanks for letting me know. I haven’t done side-by-side color comparisons, but when I looked through my images, I did not see the green color cast you are referring to. Contrast is not as high as on high-end lenses, but that’s to be expected.
In regards to losing resolution, if that’s what you end up doing anyway, then perhaps it makes sense for you. But I personally wouldn’t do it, since that wastes a lot of resolution, and I don’t crop my images that much.
There are other benefits to cropping with a Z7 and DX lenses. Filling the frame with your subject improves focus tracking and metering. I mostly used my 70-300E in DX mode on my Z7II for sports anyway. The 70-300E has slightly better bokeh, color rendering is nearly identical (Lightroom Classic,) and most of the time I preferred the 50-250’s overall rendering and sharpness. However, the newer native lens focuses better, is half the size, cheaper, and doesn’t require the FTZ. I also find the extra 20mm on the wide end more useful than the 50mm on the tele end. My initial impression of the 50-250 was not liking the 75mm equivalent or the lens unlocking, but I can now look past both. ;) Also, don’t forget the amazingly useful minimum focus on the newer lens!