Should I swap my nikkor Z 70-180mm f/2.8 + 2x teleconverter for the Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3? Or get the Nikon 100-400m
in Discussion Forum May 20, 2025, 14:49


My current hypothesis - which I'd like you to challenge - is that I should swap my Z 70-180 (& 2x tc) for the Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD. Or maybe even the Nikon Z 100-400mm.

I have recently purchased the NIKKOR Z 70-180mm f/2.8, which I plan to use with a 2x teleconverter to increase its reach. Coming from a D7200 used primarily with AF-S 18-300mm (450mm effective!), I really miss/want the extra range, which I used a lot . However, I received some interesting feedback suggesting that this might be a suboptimal choice.

I'm now considering returing the 70-1800 and 2x tc (I'll get all money back) and purchasing the Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 instead. This would be the main lens I walk around with and take on trips, so it's a big - and rather costly - decision for me.

My kit for context

- Nikon Z6 III
- Nikon Z 70-180mm f/2.8 - current main lens
- 2x teleconverter - only used with the 70-180mm
- Tamron 90mm f/2.8 VC - primarily used for macro; I will look into selling it if I feel that I don't lose too much on with other not-technically-macro lenses (though I got it for <€250 so that's not urgent);
- NIKKOR Z 40mm f/2 - primarily for low-light/indoor use (maybe it will help me not miss the Z 70-180mm, expecially if I also keep the 90mm for longer, bright reach)
- AF-S NIKKOR 24-120mm f/4G ED - I would most likley return this if getting the Tamron 50-400mm as discussed below
- FTZ II adapter - only used with the AF-S 24-120mm


Here are the key questions I'd like input on.

1) Is the Tamron 50-400 going to give me a noticeably better IQ in the 200mm+ range? <- This would be a key factor in the decision

2) How does the IQ from the Tamron 50-400 compare with that from the Z 70-180 in the 70-180mm range? <- I expect the Nikkor to be a very clear winner; if not, then it's a strong reason to swap

3) Under what conditions do you think I will suffer the most vs. the Z 70-180? <- Perhaps I can mitigate this by using the Tamron 90mm or Z 40mm in those situations?

4) Should I instead go for a Nikon Z 100-400mm VR f/4.5-5.6 FX instead?


Main reasons for swapping
i. Greater ability to take the pictures I want to take, thanks to:
- Higher versatility / range
- Reaches slighlty further (vs. 360mm effective with the 2x tc)
- No need to fiddle with the 2x tc, which I would have to add/remove to shoot in different ranges
- Better stabilisation

ii. €250 cheaper, or even €700 cheaper if I also sell my AF-S NIKKOR 24-120mm f/4G ED and FTZ, which would only give me a 24-50mm range I don't necessarily need too much right now.

iii. I'll need to carry (and own!) fewer items
- No 2x tc converter needed
- (Bye bye FTZ and AF-S 24-120mm? - TBD)

Main reasons for sticking with Z 70-180mm (and 2x tc)

Tamron 50-400 is/has..
- Significantly darker over the full 70-180mm range, which I expect will limit its performance in portraits/subject isolation/bokeh, and make it challenging to use indoors (but perhaps I just shouldn't as I can
- Slower autofocus - but perhaps the 2x tc changes things?
- Slightly heavier & bulkier, even when considering the 2x tc - but I don't see it as a big deal, even for hand-held photography - am I wrong?

Thank you Juza community!


0 comments, 39 views - Show/Reply