u/happyguardian74

Aside from reading mechanical reviews online, I would like to hear about user experience: which lens for the Nikon Z system is sharper? Is it the Tamron 50-400 or the Tamron 150-500? I am debating which one I should get. My primary use is photography of airplanes. I understand the 400-500 range can be beneficial, but if it's soft, then it's useless.

My question applies across the common range, so it would be between 150 and 400.

Thanks

Hey everyone,

I’ve been doing some side-by-side testing with the Tamron 50-400mm and the 70-300mm on my Nikon Z5, and I’m having a really hard time justifying keeping the 50-400mm.

Given that it costs almost three times as much, I was expecting significantly better edge-to-edge sharpness. Instead, the photos are basically identical. Depending on the scene, the 70-300mm actually looks a tiny bit sharper sometimes.

My main subject is commercial aviation. The 300mm range covers about 80% of my shots perfectly. The 400mm reach is nice, but I really only use it for small private jets or tight cockpit close-ups.

The biggest kicker for me is the handling. The 70-300mm is incredibly lightweight and balances beautifully on the Z5. By comparison, the 50-400mm feels massive. On top of that, the image stabilization on the 50-400mm has been super underwhelming—I'm only getting about 1 to 2 stops of actual stabilization out of it.

Aside from the slightly wider start and the extra 100mm on the long end, I just don't see where the extra money went.

For anyone who has used both: Did I just get a lucky copy of the 70-300mm (or a bad copy of the 50-400mm)? What are your thoughts on the performance and stabilization gap between these two?