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.
Joachim
July 2, 2020 2:14 pm
Nice review, thanks a lot, Nasim. “A lot of fun to shoot with” – I only can agree. A bit more emphasizing the minimal focus distance would have been great, though, as it shines here as well. I was surprised about the bokeh which was not as nervous as I expected it to be.
I comparison to a Tamron 100-400 with adapter, I got much more keepers from Demoiselles in flight – although I often didn’t know where I was aiming at. The AF is faster than the one of the DSLR lens in front of the adapter.
Which makes the 50-250 the longest and fastest focusing telephoto lens in Nikon’s Z line-up. Ridiculous.
Joachim, I guess I didn’t go there, as I personally don’t do as much macro, but thanks for pointing it out – I am sure others will find value in your comment!
Bokeh definitely looks quite pleasing, something I also did not expect to see from a basic kit lens.
In regards to the Tamron 100-400mm, that’s exactly the lens I have in my hands right now, and will be posting a review of fairly soon. To be honest, I am disappointed in this lens. Sharpness isn’t great, and autofocus is questionable. I observed that when the lens focuses, AF is confirmed as good, but in reality, it is slightly out of focus. Not sure why, but that’s what happens quite a bit, even when shooting in good lighting conditions. Mine definitely needs an adjustment with the Tap-in console, it looks like.
The Tamron is a mixed bag to me. It performed well on the D850. Of course not excellent, but alright. Then I started to hate Tamron for waiting 9 months to put a firmware update together and make it work on the Z bodies. The 150-600 got this update in December 2018, the 100-400 in September 2019.
I like that the 100-400 has a rather smart way to set it’s focus limiter. Via dock I can decide if I want the “normal” way or a better one. I can set a distance to my like and after that it depends, if the focus ring is in front or behind this distance. So, with only one switch I can decide if I want to limit it for close or far range. I wished other lenses would have that feature, too.
But the worst thing is: RAWs with this lens on the Z 50 are not recognized by Apple’s RAW converter – see for yourself, if you like. I cannot import them in to any app depending on Apple’s RAW converter (like photos.app, pixelmator, Affinity Photo). Capture One, Lyn and Iridient (as well as LR) bring their own converters and have no problems.
Yes, the minimum focus distance was a pleasant surprise to me, as well. Whilst not a macro lens, it provides a more than passable alternative, if you’re out walking and don’t want the bulk and weight of a dedicated macro – in my case the Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG MACRO.
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.
Nice review, thanks a lot, Nasim. “A lot of fun to shoot with” – I only can agree. A bit more emphasizing the minimal focus distance would have been great, though, as it shines here as well. I was surprised about the bokeh which was not as nervous as I expected it to be.
I comparison to a Tamron 100-400 with adapter, I got much more keepers from Demoiselles in flight – although I often didn’t know where I was aiming at. The AF is faster than the one of the DSLR lens in front of the adapter.
Which makes the 50-250 the longest and fastest focusing telephoto lens in Nikon’s Z line-up. Ridiculous.
Joachim, I guess I didn’t go there, as I personally don’t do as much macro, but thanks for pointing it out – I am sure others will find value in your comment!
Bokeh definitely looks quite pleasing, something I also did not expect to see from a basic kit lens.
In regards to the Tamron 100-400mm, that’s exactly the lens I have in my hands right now, and will be posting a review of fairly soon. To be honest, I am disappointed in this lens. Sharpness isn’t great, and autofocus is questionable. I observed that when the lens focuses, AF is confirmed as good, but in reality, it is slightly out of focus. Not sure why, but that’s what happens quite a bit, even when shooting in good lighting conditions. Mine definitely needs an adjustment with the Tap-in console, it looks like.
The Tamron is a mixed bag to me. It performed well on the D850. Of course not excellent, but alright. Then I started to hate Tamron for waiting 9 months to put a firmware update together and make it work on the Z bodies. The 150-600 got this update in December 2018, the 100-400 in September 2019.
I like that the 100-400 has a rather smart way to set it’s focus limiter. Via dock I can decide if I want the “normal” way or a better one. I can set a distance to my like and after that it depends, if the focus ring is in front or behind this distance. So, with only one switch I can decide if I want to limit it for close or far range. I wished other lenses would have that feature, too.
But the worst thing is: RAWs with this lens on the Z 50 are not recognized by Apple’s RAW converter – see for yourself, if you like. I cannot import them in to any app depending on Apple’s RAW converter (like photos.app, pixelmator, Affinity Photo). Capture One, Lyn and Iridient (as well as LR) bring their own converters and have no problems.
Yes, the minimum focus distance was a pleasant surprise to me, as well. Whilst not a macro lens, it provides a more than passable alternative, if you’re out walking and don’t want the bulk and weight of a dedicated macro – in my case the Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG MACRO.