amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

The Tamron 18-400, Sigma 100-400 and Tamron 100-400mm will all require an adapter to use on a Z50. Those lenses are only available in F-mount... so the F to Z adapter is necessary. I don't know how well that works. I use Canon gear and their own Canon EF lenses adapt well for use on the RF-mount mirrorless cameras. However not all third party EF lenses adapt well. In some cases, with more recent lenses, the manufacturers have been able to do various fixes to make them adapt better.

400mm on your DX Z50 will be equivalent to "600mm on full frame" (just as your SX60's longest focal length is "1000mm full frame equiv.")

If you frequently use the SX60 to it's fullest extent (1000mm FF equiv.), you might instead want to consider one of the 150-600mm lenses from Sigma or Tamron, as those will give you "900mm FF equiv.) on you Z50. Of cousrse, those are significantly larger and generally more expensive.

There is a new Nikkor 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 coming soon for Z-mount... It's not in stores yet and is pretty pricey. $2700! (The Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7/1 is similarly expensive, they just increased the price to $2900. However, Canon also offers a much less expensive, smaller, lighter 100-400mm.)

Finally, a pro-grade F-mount Nikkor that you may want to consider adapting for use on your camera is the 80-400mm. It's one of the more expensive options, but top notch in all respects.

Comparisons:

Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 OS HSM "C"*... $799... 67mm filter, 7.25" long, 2.5 lb.
Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 VC USD*.... $799... 67mm filter, 7.25" long, 2.5 lb.
Nikkor 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR............. $2700... 77mm filter, 8.75" long, 3.25 lb.
Canon 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM**....... $649... 67mm filter, 6.5" long, 1.5 lb.
Nikkor AF-S 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR*..... $2300... 77mm filter, 10.25" long, 3.5 lb.

Notes: Prices, weights and dimensions are all rounded off. Length given above are lens fully retracted. All these grow in length when zoomed and focused. Weight and length do not include the addition of an adapter, as would be necessary with the Sigma and Tamron. The Canon and Sigma do not have any provision for a tripod mounting ring. The Nikkor includes a tripod mounting ring. There is an optional tripod ring available for the Tamron, sold separately for $129 (has built in Arca-Swiss quick release compatibility, as well as standard threaded mounting point). *Lens is F-mount, FTZ adapter required. Only the Nikkor 100-400mm is Z-mount, so will not require an adapter to use on a Z50. **The Canon 100-400mm is included for comparison only and it's ET-74B lens hood is sold separately for $45.

Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 OS HSM "C"*... $899... 95mm filter, 13.25" long, 4 lb.
Tamron 150-600mm f/5-6.3 OS HSM*..... $1400... 95mm filter, 13.25" long, 4.25 lb.
Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6/3 OS HSM "S"* $2000... 105mm filter, 15" long, 6.25 lb.
Canon 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM..... $2900... 77mm filter, 8.25" long, 3 lb.
Nikkor AF-S 200-500mm f/5.6 VR*......... $1400... 95mm filter, 13.5" long, 5 lb.

Notes: Prices, weights and dimensions are somewhat rounded off. Length given above are lens fully retracted. All these grow in length when zoomed and focused. Weight and length do not include the addition of an adapter, as would be necessary with the Nikkor, Sigma and Tamron. All five of these lenses come with a tripod mounting ring. *Lens is F-mount, FTZ adapter required. **The Canon 100-500mm L is included for comparison only.

Nikon FTZ II adapter.... $249... 0.25 lb. (Urth and Fotodiox F-to-Z adapters are avail. at much lower cost.)

Of the above third party lenses, the Tamron 100-400mm or Tamron 150-600mm G2 would likely be my personal choice (assuming they adapt well to Nikon Z-mount). I like that the Tamron 100-400mm can be fitted with a tripod mount. And their 150-600mm is the newer and improved design with better image quality than the less expensive Sigma (C or "contemporary). The other Sigma (S or "sport") has good IQ as well, but is also the biggest, heaviest and one of the most expensive options.

Since I shoot with Canon gear, I use the OEM EF 100-400mm L "II" instead. Although one of the more expensive, it's a top quality lens in all respects.

Unfortunately, so far there are very few third party party lenses being offered in either Canon RF-mount or Nikon Z-mount.

Tokina is offering two catadioptric (mirror) lenses in Z-mount (and Canon RF-mount): 400mm f/8 ($250) and 500mm f/8 ($379). But both lenses are manual focus only, have no image stabilization and their f/8 apertures are fixed (use ND filters to "stop down").

They can't be adapted to fit Nikon, but FYI Canon also offers fairly compact, lightweight and affordable RF 600mm f/11 ($800) and RF 800mm f/11 ($1000) prime lenses for their R-series cameras. These have fixed apertures, too (like the Tokina above). But they are not mirror lenses, both have autofocus and both feature image stabilization.

You probably noticed that I didn't include the Tamron 18-400mm. I'm just not a fan of those "all in one" or "do it all" zooms. They just compromise too much on image quality, autofocus performance and other factors. Yes, they may be convenient. I bet ANY of the above will outperform that Tamron, except for the two relatively low cost mirror lenses. In fact, among all-in-one lenses the Tamron 18-400mm is the most extreme with more than 20X zoom range. It's actually pretty good for that type of lens... and it's something I might consider if I could only carry one lens. But I have no problem carrying several lenses or changing them out when needed. So I'll stick with 4X and 5X zooms, like above.

Cameras like the Sony RX10 IV may be another alternative if you cannot carry much gear. But, again, there are bound to be compromises and I'll stick with DSLRs or mirrorless cameras with larger APS-C or full frame sensors for their better image quality, better high ISO performance, etc.

The Capt.

Shooting an FX lens on a DX camera will not make the subject any larger. You just won't have to crop out as much of the image.

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

I guess that means 92 percent of us camera users are never going to be pro’s

splatbass Loc: Honolulu

I've used the 500mm PF with my Z50 with good results for birds. You do need the FTZ adapter though. It is a very sharp lens and reasonably lightweight too. That gives you 750mm equivalent, and with a 1.4x teleconverter you have 1050mm equivalent.

ELNikkor

If you need to go beyond 300mm (450 equiv.) for the Z50, you are talking front-heavy weight and expense. That Sony will put you out $1700, but will return excellent images at a 600mm equiv. What do you want to do with those images? With current programs, the enlargability can be increased if necessary. I'd compare the relationship between images with a Z50 to those with the Sony to see if you really need another lens for the Z. Years ago, I dabbled with a Nikon B700 (1,444mm equiv.) and was amazed how sharp and detailed photos I was able to get of tiny sparrows. The Sony sensor is larger, but the lens "only" goes out to 600mm equiv.

KenProspero

I have the Sigma 100-400 that I use with a Z-5. It works perfectly and I have no problems with sharpness. Tamron -- when the Z mount first came out, Nikon-Compatible Tamron Lenses did not work with them. Tamron fixed the problem, but for some lenses, you may have to buy the Tamron Tap-In console and upgrade the firmware. Not a huge deal (other than the cost of the Tap-In), but something to be aware of. Tamron's web page (and others) will tell you which lenses this is an issue for.

WCS

CHG_CANON, you always have such solid, sober, thoughtful answers. It's always refreshing to hear your perspective! Thank you!

Nickaroo

Please, chose a better Lens than the 18-300mm Nikon Lens. You are not doing your Camera, Z50 any favors for IQ. You would be better served with the 300mm PF Lens or the 70-300mm AF-S Lens. Trust me, I have a Friend that purchased that 18-300mm Lens and we decided to see exactly how it would perform for BIF Shooting. Well, he went home after we were done and I picked him up at his House. He had his backpack but there was a different Lens mounted to His D850 and a different Lens to his D500. I didn't pay much attention until we hit this one path where we can get good shots of the Eagles and Hawks. This trail had a 20 foot walk over some rocks, he asked if we could wait one minute. Well, during that moment he whipped that 18-300mm and proceeded to set it on one of the big rocks, and then he picked about a 10 pound rock and cremated that Lens as not one shot turned out. We take our Wildlife Photography very, very Serious. I asked Him what was accomplishing, He turned and told me that He just saved someone else for buying that piece of crap lens. I have seen him do worse things then that also at Michigan Football games. He can be a little touched at times and when I told Him that I was had ordered that lens, and I was jerking his chain because he had a disgusted look on his face, I told Him to remember that I told him not to buy that lens. It's always Glass, Glass, and better Glass in my book. One can take a beginners Camera but when they put a superb Lens on it, they have a look of glee the next time that you see them. Photography for me is not work because I Love it so much, and when you mLove something that much how can you say that it's work? Have Fun and Good Luck out there!

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

That's what I'm talkin' about!