I use the 70-300 G on the FTZ and have always found this lens to be fine at the long end. I did think about getting the Z100-400 but quite apart from the price its much bigger and heavier so doesn't really fit my use case. what I am waiting for is a Z S Line 70-300 f4.5-5.6 VR with the build, features and IQ of my amazing Z 24-120.
You use a Sony glas on the FTZ? I guess you mean a different adapter, or a different lens. G lenses are Sony stuff. Otherwise I am interested in which solution you use right now, I am looking for a ~300m tele for my Z6 ii
Thanks for sharing Becky and Kon. The location is very nice (how I like it). I own the AF-P 70-300mm and I am very happy with it! I don't change because I can use it on my Z6+FTZ and D850. Glad to hear that there is not so much difference to the Tamron. I hope I can visit this location one day...
Do you agree with me that the AF-P has really harsh bokeh? It's been kind of a heartbreaker for me. The AF-S version had nice bokeh but wasn't sharp at the long end; the AF-P is sharp but has bad bokeh...
@@gyozakeynsianism Yes, I agree, it could be better. But for normal use on far away objects it's fine. My AF-S 70-200 f/4 is much better, but I don't have it always in my bag. But when I really need good bokeh, I use my AF-S 85mm f1.8G or any 50mm or 35mm wide open. Means I always have an additional prime lens in my bag.
Thanks! Gray's of Westminster is an AWESOME SITE! I am probably buying the Tamron 70-300 for a Z 8 and wilderness Trekking to pair with the Z S 24-70 f 4 lens. I usually shoot some where near f 8 as I want background usually. And sometimes I use f 16 and hope diffraction compensation kicks in as two items are just far apart enough and I want BOTH as sharp as possible.
Hello Both, I must say that I loved my Nikon 70mm-300mm lens. But in a mad moment I gave it to my sister, when I convinced her to buy a Nikon camera a number of years ago. That was the last time I saw that lens. I do keep giving me Nikon kit away? Not sure why as I do love using all the Nikon kit I have. Nice review it is always good to see you both out as photographer reviewing kit. Giving your honest thoughts to. Keep well, keep safe and stay happy.
That has better windows than the last Air BnB I stayed at. I "Upgraded" to the Tamron from my well loved AFP as, for my occasional just in case use, size and weight with an FTZ mattered. I would rather have had a native Nikon. I seem to find I am more often carrying the 300PF now there is a 24-120 and 24-200. It also meant my AF-P has found a home in my god daughters bag where cast offs go to retire.
@@gyozakeynsianism Not for me. I don't have any DX Z bodies I can handhold comfortably down to 1/40 at 300mm with IBIS, which is more than I would need for my use.
This is National Trust Nymans Gardens at Handcross, RH17 6EB. We were there only yesterday. Lots of Snowdrops, Irises and Crocuses and in bloom at the moment which are great to photograph if you don’t mind crawling on the ground! There’s a restaurant there too with National Trust quality food and drinks. There’s a lovely woodland walk which you can access either directly on a path from the overflow car park or from the wide made-up path that runs from the rear of the ruins.
@@christianpetersen1782 Thank you Christian, we are NT members and we will add it to our list of places to visit (although we live in Norfolk so a bit of a journey!)
OOOH this is one comparison I've been waiting to see! I've been a huge advocate for the 70-300 4.5-5.6 AF-P, so let's see how it fares against Tamron's native one. Thanks!
I think VR + sharpness means the AF-P is better overall, but the Tamron's rendering is far superior IMHO. Just looking at the sample photos + my experience with the AF-P. What do you think?
@@gyozakeynsianism I mean for the cost difference, and my experience with the AF-P - I'd go with the Nikon IF the FTZ is already owned. If not, the Tamron looks quite nice too. I don't at all like the open USB port in the side of that lens, but for its intended demo, Tamron did a nice job here.
A very useful comparison! I think there are a lot of hobbyists like myself who would appreciate this video. Strongly agree with Becky (who is very experienced with this type of lens) that it's more about architectural details and portraits than wildlife. I've used both the old AF-S and the newer FX AF-P and I have to say I disagree *in general* that they are equally sharp (though seems like lots of lucky people got good copies of the AF-S). In my experience the AF-S is noticeably less sharp especially at 200 and longer. I found it so frustrating that I upgraded to the AF-P! But then the AF-P has a huge issue that you can see very clearly in the (very nice) sample images: very harsh bokeh. Very frustrating! The Tamron looked miles better in the out of focus areas - very nice really. I also disagree with the idea that IBIS alone is fine for a telephoto. There's a reason why the 70-200 (for Nikon Z or other systems with IBIS) has VR, and that doesn't even go to 300mm. IBIS only + 300mm is a deal breaker! So the Tamron is probably not the one for me. Hopefully Nikon's own Z replacement for the 70-300 niche fixes all these problems. Again, great video! Thankfully guys.
I to have used both afs and afp lenses, vr is important at 300mm on lens. Also only one stop difference between 70-300mm is important to me, not two stops of the Tamaron. Only problem i have with the f mount is when using ibis and vr together its a bit of a battery eater imo.
Hi, One more thought, about two years ago Grays of Westminster sold me an extension tub set for my Z cameras. Yes they work great with my Z lenses, But you are saying that the F mount 70-300mm lens does not focus that close for flowers. I have give my 70-300 away but I have just had a play with my one of my Z cameras and Z extension tub and an old 85mm f1.4 g Lens. That all works well.
“… the F-mount 70-300 lens does not focus that close for flowers.” For years I did horticultural stock shooting almost all with 70-300 mm lenses. Admittedly I used ASPC bodies (D90, 7100, 7200) which got me “closer”. Sold a lot of photos before that market dried up. Still have my AF-S 70-300. This video comparison convinces me that I’ll pass on the new Tammy and wait for a Nikkor Z with maybe even better quality than the AF-P. Bottom line: I found 70-300 to be a great lens for flower photography. Just my 2 cents Cdn.
Wow I’m late to the party, but I’m glad to have found you made this vid so I don’t have to figure out how to buy both to find out & lose a load of $. I wasn’t sure the autofocus would work with the FTZ on the Nikon, so I’m delighted it works & VR too. Nik it is!
Agreed. This review is not very good. I can tell you the Z Tamron is sharp because own it, ideal for general use and landscapes. Don't expect it to be as sharp as lenses that cost much more for detailed wildlife photography.
Thanks ! Thank you a sum ! I just bought for my Z30 this AF-P 5.3E + FTXII after a long debate with myself. What won me on the older lens was Stabilization. It will complement my Z16-50; Z18-140 giving me a 105-450 to cover birds and nature, while helping me on the Macro side with the Meike Rings. Sure, you never know if you're right until you put your hands on it. I will use it mostly at the longest focal, sharper is better.... But sure again.... your video gave me the unch that my ideas reflect yours and I will sleep better tonight. Moreover ... the final conclusion >> right on the spot!!! Z30 is a DX :-D
Nice video. I think you guys should to a subjective “ibis on a Z7ii/Z6 is effective up to...” video. My guess it is not 300mm. Each time I want to use anything longish I take a tripod. 😊
Arty-farty 😂😂 Nice video. Glad to see more affordable options. Being a hobbyist landscape photographer i usually go for the affordable options. The 40mm f2 is simply amazing. I was interested in the 26mm but the price is a bit higher than expected. Maybe i will change my mind after the image quality reviews come out 😅
I always enjoy your field tests. On a different tack, I surmise that they did not come out with an S series 70-200 f4 because it would be so close in IQ to the 70-200 f2.8 and less expensive they wouldn't sell many of the f2.8's. So, we now wait for the 70-180 non S lens. I hope it is a f4 like the 24-120 but I suspect it will be a variable like the 24-200.
Opticly the Z-System must be far better then the F-System. Can^t explaim it in english, if you accept, I write in german. Der ehemalige Optikermeister in mir weiss, dass senkrecht auf eine Fläche treffende Strahlen leichter zu korrigieren sind als schräge Randstrahlen. Durch das Wegfallen des Spiegels wird der Strahlengang verkürzt und somit werden relativ mehr Strahlen durch das optische Zentrum der Linsen fallen. Heisst.... die Abbildungsleistung verbessert sich signifikant, sofern Glasqualitäte Linsenoberfläche gleich gut sind, wie bei den F-Linsen.
Thanks so much. I have an AF-S 70-300 and use it for hiking when I need to go light. I'm going to stick with it when I go mirrorless
So which is better? The Tamron or the Nikon af-p? I've read in tests that the Tamron has very soft shooting sides....
Thank you for this real work review of this lens for the rest of us. Love your channel including the fun livestreams. Keep it up!
I use the 70-300 G on the FTZ and have always found this lens to be fine at the long end. I did think about getting the Z100-400 but quite apart from the price its much bigger and heavier so doesn't really fit my use case. what I am waiting for is a Z S Line 70-300 f4.5-5.6 VR with the build, features and IQ of my amazing Z 24-120.
You use a Sony glas on the FTZ? I guess you mean a different adapter, or a different lens. G lenses are Sony stuff.
Otherwise I am interested in which solution you use right now, I am looking for a ~300m tele for my Z6 ii
Sorry no it was the Nikkor F mount 70-300 VR G I was referring to there.@@Zummler
How would either of these compare to the 70-200f4 with ftz?
Thank you for another great video! I have the Nikon AF-P 70-300 and I love using it for a walk around lens😀😀😀
Thanks for sharing Becky and Kon. The location is very nice (how I like it). I own the AF-P 70-300mm and I am very happy with it! I don't change because I can use it on my Z6+FTZ and D850. Glad to hear that there is not so much difference to the Tamron. I hope I can visit this location one day...
Do you agree with me that the AF-P has really harsh bokeh? It's been kind of a heartbreaker for me. The AF-S version had nice bokeh but wasn't sharp at the long end; the AF-P is sharp but has bad bokeh...
@@gyozakeynsianism Yes, I agree, it could be better. But for normal use on far away objects it's fine. My AF-S 70-200 f/4 is much better, but I don't have it always in my bag. But when I really need good bokeh, I use my AF-S 85mm f1.8G or any 50mm or 35mm wide open. Means I always have an additional prime lens in my bag.
Thanks! Gray's of Westminster is an AWESOME SITE! I am probably buying the Tamron 70-300 for a Z 8 and wilderness Trekking to pair with the Z S 24-70 f 4 lens. I usually shoot some where near f 8 as I want background usually. And sometimes I use f 16 and hope diffraction compensation kicks in as two items are just far apart enough and I want BOTH as sharp as possible.
Hello Both, I must say that I loved my Nikon 70mm-300mm lens. But in a mad moment I gave it to my sister, when I convinced her to buy a Nikon camera a number of years ago. That was the last time I saw that lens. I do keep giving me Nikon kit away? Not sure why as I do love using all the Nikon kit I have. Nice review it is always good to see you both out as photographer reviewing kit. Giving your honest thoughts to. Keep well, keep safe and stay happy.
That has better windows than the last Air BnB I stayed at.
I "Upgraded" to the Tamron from my well loved AFP as, for my occasional just in case use, size and weight with an FTZ mattered. I would rather have had a native Nikon.
I seem to find I am more often carrying the 300PF now there is a 24-120 and 24-200.
It also meant my AF-P has found a home in my god daughters bag where cast offs go to retire.
Didn't you find there not being VR on the Tamron to be a big issue?
@@gyozakeynsianism Not for me. I don't have any DX Z bodies I can handhold comfortably down to 1/40 at 300mm with IBIS, which is more than I would need for my use.
Another informative piece.....except; where were you? You go to lovely places to test out equipment, it would be great to know where they are.
This is National Trust Nymans Gardens at Handcross, RH17 6EB. We were there only yesterday. Lots of Snowdrops, Irises and Crocuses and in bloom at the moment which are great to photograph if you don’t mind crawling on the ground! There’s a restaurant there too with National Trust quality food and drinks. There’s a lovely woodland walk which you can access either directly on a path from the overflow car park or from the wide made-up path that runs from the rear of the ruins.
@@christianpetersen1782 Thank you Christian, we are NT members and we will add it to our list of places to visit (although we live in Norfolk so a bit of a journey!)
@@christianpetersen1782 Thank you.
Images were fantastic! Can’t go wrong either way. Thanks for sharing this with us.
OOOH this is one comparison I've been waiting to see! I've been a huge advocate for the 70-300 4.5-5.6 AF-P, so let's see how it fares against Tamron's native one. Thanks!
I think VR + sharpness means the AF-P is better overall, but the Tamron's rendering is far superior IMHO. Just looking at the sample photos + my experience with the AF-P. What do you think?
@@gyozakeynsianism I mean for the cost difference, and my experience with the AF-P - I'd go with the Nikon IF the FTZ is already owned. If not, the Tamron looks quite nice too. I don't at all like the open USB port in the side of that lens, but for its intended demo, Tamron did a nice job here.
@@csc-photo I forgot about the USB updates. I kind of hate the idea. Another first-party advantage I guess.
I'm still torn. I have the FTZ II, looking these two lenses. They're close in price now (2024). Kinda leaning towards the Nikon.
A very useful comparison! I think there are a lot of hobbyists like myself who would appreciate this video.
Strongly agree with Becky (who is very experienced with this type of lens) that it's more about architectural details and portraits than wildlife. I've used both the old AF-S and the newer FX AF-P and I have to say I disagree *in general* that they are equally sharp (though seems like lots of lucky people got good copies of the AF-S). In my experience the AF-S is noticeably less sharp especially at 200 and longer. I found it so frustrating that I upgraded to the AF-P!
But then the AF-P has a huge issue that you can see very clearly in the (very nice) sample images: very harsh bokeh. Very frustrating! The Tamron looked miles better in the out of focus areas - very nice really.
I also disagree with the idea that IBIS alone is fine for a telephoto. There's a reason why the 70-200 (for Nikon Z or other systems with IBIS) has VR, and that doesn't even go to 300mm. IBIS only + 300mm is a deal breaker! So the Tamron is probably not the one for me.
Hopefully Nikon's own Z replacement for the 70-300 niche fixes all these problems.
Again, great video! Thankfully guys.
I to have used both afs and afp lenses, vr is important at 300mm on lens. Also only one stop difference between 70-300mm is important to me, not two stops of the Tamaron. Only problem i have with the f mount is when using ibis and vr together its a bit of a battery eater imo.
@@nigel8uk Thanks for that!
Hi, One more thought, about two years ago Grays of Westminster sold me an extension tub set for my Z cameras. Yes they work great with my Z lenses, But you are saying that the F mount 70-300mm lens does not focus that close for flowers. I have give my 70-300 away but I have just had a play with my one of my Z cameras and Z extension tub and an old 85mm f1.4 g Lens. That all works well.
“… the F-mount 70-300 lens does not focus that close for flowers.” For years I did horticultural stock shooting almost all with 70-300 mm lenses. Admittedly I used ASPC bodies (D90, 7100, 7200) which got me “closer”. Sold a lot of photos before that market dried up. Still have my AF-S 70-300. This video comparison convinces me that I’ll pass on the new Tammy and wait for a Nikkor Z with maybe even better quality than the AF-P. Bottom line: I found 70-300 to be a great lens for flower photography. Just my 2 cents Cdn.
Wow I’m late to the party, but I’m glad to have found you made this vid so I don’t have to figure out how to buy both to find out & lose a load of $. I wasn’t sure the autofocus would work with the FTZ on the Nikon, so I’m delighted it works & VR too. Nik it is!
Will it self focus as you zoom in if you are AF-C?
What was the location of your filming
Did I miss the part comparing edge sharpness?
Agreed. This review is not very good. I can tell you the Z Tamron is sharp because own it, ideal for general use and landscapes. Don't expect it to be as sharp as lenses that cost much more for detailed wildlife photography.
Thanks ! Thank you a sum !
I just bought for my Z30 this AF-P 5.3E + FTXII after a long debate with myself. What won me on the older lens was Stabilization.
It will complement my Z16-50; Z18-140 giving me a 105-450 to cover birds and nature, while helping me on the Macro side with the Meike Rings.
Sure, you never know if you're right until you put your hands on it.
I will use it mostly at the longest focal, sharper is better.... But sure again.... your video gave me the unch that my ideas reflect yours and I will sleep better tonight.
Moreover ... the final conclusion >> right on the spot!!! Z30 is a DX :-D
Nice photos, ive been there in bc before, worked in golden ears bridge and sky way as well, even in. North van
Sky train sorry
Nice video. I think you guys should to a subjective “ibis on a Z7ii/Z6 is effective up to...” video. My guess it is not 300mm. Each time I want to use anything longish I take a tripod. 😊
Totally agree. I want the bokeh of the Tamron but the sharpness at the long end and the VR of the AF-P.
I wish Sigma would update their 70-300mm Macro. It was a steal for the price.
Arty-farty 😂😂
Nice video. Glad to see more affordable options. Being a hobbyist landscape photographer i usually go for the affordable options. The 40mm f2 is simply amazing. I was interested in the 26mm but the price is a bit higher than expected. Maybe i will change my mind after the image quality reviews come out 😅
I always enjoy your field tests. On a different tack, I surmise that they did not come out with an S series 70-200 f4 because it would be so close in IQ to the 70-200 f2.8 and less expensive they wouldn't sell many of the f2.8's. So, we now wait for the 70-180 non S lens. I hope it is a f4 like the 24-120 but I suspect it will be a variable like the 24-200.
Opticly the Z-System must be far better then the F-System. Can^t explaim it in english, if you accept, I write in german. Der ehemalige Optikermeister in mir weiss, dass senkrecht auf eine Fläche treffende Strahlen leichter zu korrigieren sind als schräge Randstrahlen. Durch das Wegfallen des Spiegels wird der Strahlengang verkürzt und somit werden relativ mehr Strahlen durch das optische Zentrum der Linsen fallen. Heisst.... die Abbildungsleistung verbessert sich signifikant, sofern Glasqualitäte Linsenoberfläche gleich gut sind, wie bei den F-Linsen.
I like watching you, but when you compare lenses, it would be good if you at least compare the widest and narrowest frame 1:1 lens vs lens
Heard the steps of marching from Z 8. 😂
No VR is a big no for me on the Tamron.
Thank you. Z mount Tamron it is.