jcwall396 Loc: Roswell, GA

Knowing that this question will likely generate a LOT of comment - but I love this forum, so here goes....I'm thinking about purchasing a Nikon Z50. I saw it at B&H in New York last month and was incredibly impressed with its small size and weight. I'm thinking about the kit that comes with the 16-50mm and 50-250mm Z lenses.

Here is the question: Would it make any sense at all to purchase Nikon's AF-S 18-300mm instead of the Nikon Z 50-250 to get more reach? The pros are more reach, a slightly faster lens at f/3.5, higher minimum aperture at f/22 vs. f/16, and the lens itself is actually just a bit shorter. Cons would be it's heavier, I'd have to purchase the FTZ adapter to make it work, which would make it even heavier, and not sure if the IQ would be as good.

Start your engines: What are your thoughts?

BebuLamar

The difference between 250 and 300 isn't all that big. The zoom ratio of the 18-300 is much greater so I think it would not be as good as the 50-250.
Of course it's your decision. You should make your decision based on anybody said.
For me if I were in your case I would not buy the 18-300mm.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Just as a thought exercise, the 18-300 is a 17:1 zoom. The 50-250 is 5:1. The 50-250 is all telephoto, the 18-300 will have to have movements for both wide-angle and telephoto operation. So the Z lens is a simpler design operating over less than 1/3 the zoom ratio. Weight difference, complexity, performance, and longevity are all going to track the relative simplicity. I would expect that you would be way ahead with the simpler lens even if you crop to get from 250 to the equivalent of 300mm.

Of course the best thing is to try both lenses and see if this is really what happens.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

You really need to look at the photos you been taking up to now. How often do you shoot subjects at more than 250 mm? What general range are the majority of your photographs in? Additionally, the 16-50mm kit lens is 2 mm wider than the 18-300. In my experience the extra, 2 mm on the wide will be more noticeable than the last 50 mm on the long end of a lens like the 18-300mm.

Ultimately the choice is up to you, but purchasing the Z50 specifically for its small size and weight and then adding the f mount 18-300 and FTZ adapter kind of defeats the purpose. I would also suggest that the quality of the images from the the kit 16-50mm and 50-250mm z kit lenses will likely be superior to the f mount 18-300.

When my wife had her Canon DSLR you also had a Tamron 18-270 mm lens attached. Before purchasing the Z50, I did an analysis of the previous 5 years of her photographs and discovered that perhaps 5 to 10% were at more than 50 mm, and of that 5 or 10% scarcely any were more than 100 millimeters. It was an eye-opening discovery. As a result when I bought her the Z50 I got it with the 16-50mm kit lens and also got her the Z 18-140mm lens for those outings where she thought she may need the greater reach. I'm not suggesting your analysis will be similar, but It is definitely a helpful exercise to understand the focal range you actually use before you purchased a new lens.

jcwall396 Loc: Roswell, GA

Great points. I rarely ever need the longer reach. I almost always have my 24-70mm lens mounted on my Z6ii and very rarely need anything more. Also good point about the IQ.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

If that is the case, maybe you should just opt for the kit 16-50 mm lens with its 35 mm full frame angle of view similar to a 24-75mm lens. I'm not suggesting the EQ will be as good as your 24-70 mm, but it definitely punches well above its weight. It is sharp with good contrast, extremely compact, extremely light, and relatively speaking very inexpensive. Most people that use it on the Z50 or the Z fc (which I own) are very pleased with the results they get.

That lens may not look very high quality in comparison, but looks are deceiving. In the end it's the quality of the images you capture with it that count.

The Z50 and Nikkor Z 16-50 lens combination is very small and light weight even though the Z50 body is made of magnesium alloy. And, unlike your Z 6II, it has a pop-up flash which can work as a fill flash, and is available to you for other purposes in case you need it.

jcwall396 Loc: Roswell, GA

I actually “touched” the Z50 with that 16-50 lens on it at B&H last month and was really impressed with the size and lightweight feel.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

If you already a Nikon shooter anyway, it's very good bang for the buck. And, that body with the 16-50
lens will fit very comfortably in a moderately sized jacket pocket. My wife uses hers with the Peak Design Leash strap. I use the same strap on my Nikon Z fc. Be aware that a Nikon Z50 II will probably be introduced sometime this year. It will almost certainly have a 24 megapixel sensor but I have no idea of any of the other design parameters. However, if you're planning on getting this camera soon and don't want to wait I wouldn't let that stand in your way. There is always a newer or better camera around the corner.

jcwall396 Loc: Roswell, GA

Yeah, I was wondering when they will come out with the second version. I'm really torn on getting it now or waiting....the only thing I see on Nikon Rumors is the Z8, which is way more than I need. Have you seen any rumors about another Z50?

Bill_de Loc: US

From what I'm reading here, and my own experience, the 2 kit lenses go hand in hand with the Z50. I did use a Z50 with the FTZ adapter, but it seemed silly.

---

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

There is also the Nikkor Z 18-140mm which is a popular choice for Z50 and Z fc shooters who regularly need more reach than the Z 16-50mm kit lens but still want a relatively small and light one lens solution.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Agree, the difference in 250mm and 300mm is slight. Especially as frequently the 300mm on s0me lenses is fudged.
I would go with the kit, you were impressed by the size and weight the turn around and want to put an old larger and heavier lens on requiring an adapter.
higher useable ISO makes up for the difference and by f16 as is generally agreed diffraction is degrading the photos a bit and f22 is that much worse.
Get the kit and don't look back.

jcwall396 Loc: Roswell, GA

All good thoughts, thanks so much for the replies. I think the kit is the winner here! Might poke around and see if there are any rumors of a Z50ii since the Z50 I think was released in 2019. Seems like it's time for an upgrade - if so, I'd like to get the newest thing out there.

lyndacast

I have the z50 with both kit lenses. They are fabulous! I also purchased the Nikkor 18-140 3.5 lens that is a mirrorless mount. It was under $400. I have not been disappointed with this system…the 18-140 is perfect for travel when I only want to carry one camera and one lens. You can’t go wrong with this set up!

lyndacast

I have the z50 with both kit lenses. They are fabulous! I also purchased the Nikkor 18-140 3.5 lens that is a mirrorless mount. It was under $400. I have not been disappointed with this system…the 18-140 is perfect for travel when I only want to carry one camera and one lens. You can’t go wrong with this set up!