Z30 18-140 - Need Longer reach - Tamron or FTZII + Nikkor AF-P 70-300 5.3E - How I decided

<Missing the forum support I did act by myself>

Choosing from:
1) Old Nikkor AF-P 70-300 5.3E
2) New Tamrom Z 70-300 no VR

What assumptions I made for a "Theoretical confrontation" based on how I'm supposed to use it:

=< A ) both are FX so I actually get 105-450 on the Z30
1< B ) I will use it mostly at longer range and the Nikkor is a tad sharper on the mid to max range
1< C ) Z30 has no IBIS, it's more important to have stabilization. Even on the tripod, windy days are hard for a so long focals
2< D ) Nikkor's total weight with FTZII is nearly 300gr more than Tamron bringing the walking weight around 1.250gr+
1< E ) Nikkor min focus distance is a steady 1.2mt while Tamrom goes from 0.80 to 1.5 - on Nikkor Focus will not change while zooming
1< F ) Costs >> Nikkor+FTZII = 703€ >> Tamron 798€
2< G ) Nikkor is from Amazon Warehouse with no official support - Tamrom is official -> same nominal guarantee on both

Conclusion:
Yes, it's nice to have less weight to carry and in your hands to use, but the effort you will put into going out with the Camera Pack...
.... it's also important to bring back results you will be satisfied with when home on the PC.

Rage and delusion are not good for health.
On the long ranges, to get results I assume the best bet is to be on Nikkor stabilization and sharpness.

Money is never an issue
( provided you can foot the bill )

Nikkor:
www.amazon.it/gp/product/B073V6HXZZ/ref=ppx_od_dt_b_asin_title_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Tamron:
www.amazon.it/TAMRON-70-300mm-4-5-6-3-Nikon-A047/dp/B0BDD17PH5/ref=sr_1_1?__mk_it_IT=%C3%85M%C3%85%C5%BD%C3%95%C3%91&crid=1RBABAEA997WO&keywords=tamron+Z+70-300mm&qid=1679920352&s=electronics&sprefix=tamron+z+70-300mm+%2Celectronics%2C86&sr=1-1

Tuesday I will receive both FTZ & 5.3E
-Wind's Red Alert for two days -
<Can't wait for the hurricane wind to get down so I can go out>

Up !

Bump<

For a long APS-C lens that ends in f/6.3ish, why not the 50-250? Stabilised, small, light, cheap, and native Z

Note: It's a F/5.6E not a 6.5G ->FX version not DX<

About the ZDX 50-250 I had it. It cost me only 300€ I replaced it with a ZDX 18-140 that cost me some more.
Unluckily the zoom ring was stuttering out of the box, even after 3 weeks it kept not working properly. Had to return it.

I loved it. It's a fine lens, it's very light, but also a little shorter and not really fine for me on the macro side with Meike rings.

So instead of reordering another one, I started to look around.
I did some research and what pushed me to reconsider my previous choice and lean in this direction is the 450 I should get out of these two lenses.
I explained more in the starting post why I did choose the Nikkor vs the Tamron.
I can add to get clearer:
this choice was limited between this Tamron and the Nikkor because only these lenses integrate perfectly with the Z30 systems.

The hard decision came with the cost (700€). That is more than the double of a Z.50-250

To go on the cheaper side (max 400€) it would have been possible choosing another Tamron:
one of the old 70-300 Macro.

These lenses work with the FTZ but again no VR and only in manual focus:
no "focus shifting" shooting is possible using these too old lenses.

I have Z fc with 16-50 kit, 18-140 Z DX, 50-250 Z DX.
I returned 18-140 Z DX because it overlaps with 50-250 Z VR.
After a recent Caribbean trip I realized I needed lighter zoom than 50-250 Z and I will most likely re-buy 18-140 Z VR.

<thanks to confirm my first choice>

When I perceived the 50-250 issue was not going away, I ordered that 18-140 lens.
Now I'm really happy using the ZDX 18-140.
It's fast and light even if I read that the 50-250 is sharper.
While improving my indoor macro shot, it has given me room for a second longer lens better fitted for outdoor.

Having returned to 50-250 I can't wait to be able to test the 70-300 5.3E

Bad news:
Amazon didn't deliver today.... some hurdles in transit, but they hope to deliver tomorrow.

These are today's pics with the ZDX 18-140 and a video

[Tree cracking a rock]

[That's not Mars ... Who needs a hole ?]

[Sun, a lot of sun]

[A lot of flowers as well]

[Even with no flower it looks good!]

[Really sorry, but no Daffodils are available today]

[Gentle breeze and a small fly] It's a slow-motion short video
www.dropbox.com/s/zrcz1pfe7nyucj3/2023-03-28%2016.19.59.mov?dl=1

........................................

6.3ish = 5.6
It's a third of a stop, so the same difference in exposure as f/1.8 to f/2. There's no practical difference - if ISO 3200 was too high for a shot you had in mind, ISO 2500 wouldn't change much.

The 18-140 is a good lens, and definitely a better option for macro

I bought a 28-300 F3.5-5.6 to share between DSLR and Z7 so I guess that's what I voted for. Nice to see this forum fill out.

_Good to know _ Thanks !

Yes, it is. Still missing continuous focus during zoom.

Finally, I received it.
here it is !

Camera weight did a jump! 850gr > 1.350gr

SmartCalc did a mistake
not taking into account the FTZ will be always on the lens.

on the first try, It doesn't fit in existing bags bought for the 50-250!!!

Mine is bigger, and LONGER .... Hahahahaha!

First test shot: everything seems perfectly fine so far, not yet used on Meike rings for macro, I will in the evening

CONTINUOUS FOCUS CONFIRMED from 70 to 300 it'll not change once set.

Going out now for a first try !!!

( 50-250 was not like this when I took first in my hands - whattapity)

0) I did that, and happy I am .

1) a bit .... a lot more :-D
.... Walking weight from 900gr with 18-140 to 1.350gr !!! - > Left Shoulder started to complain !

2) quietly....
I got lucky mine it's very quiet > I can hear some sounds only at home with my ears near the camera

Macro shot are coming in nicely

And I finally defeated the bodies' incompenetrability laws.... all fit in one small bag :-D

Too foggy to get some good shots today.