Nikon Z 28-400mm vs Tamron 50-400mm for Landscape Photography
Introduction
How much image quality difference is there between the Nikon Z 28-400mm and Tamron 50-400mm for landscape photography?
To find out, I compared a series of side-by-side landscape RAW images captured using both lenses on the 45 megapixel Nikon Z7 II to evaluate sharpness, edge performance, contrast, and overall image quality across their overlapping focal range. Since the Nikon lens starts at 28mm while the Tamron begins at 50mm, this comparison focuses strictly on the shared 50mm to 400mm range. The big question is whether the lighter, more versatile Nikon superzoom can compete with the Tamron when maximum image quality matters.
For this comparison, all images were captured in RAW format on the Nikon Z7 II at ISO 64. Most examples were shot at f/8, with a few at f/11. Only minor white balance and exposure adjustments were applied in Lightroom, with no sharpening, clarity, or detail adjustments used during editing. Testing focused on center sharpness, edge performance, and long-range telephoto image quality from 50mm through 400mm.
Watch the Full Comparison
Watch the full side-by-side comparison below, including center sharpness comparisons, edge performance testing, overlapping focal length comparisons, and long-end telephoto performance from 50mm through 400mm.
Key Takeaways
Overall Image Quality: Both lenses produced good results overall, but a clear pattern emerged throughout the comparison. The Tamron 50-400mm generally delivered sharper images, particularly toward the longer focal lengths and near the edges of the frame.
50mm Performance: At 50mm, both lenses performed very closely. In some situations, the Nikon Z 28-400mm actually looked slightly sharper near the edges, while center sharpness between the two lenses was extremely similar. The Tamron showed slightly more contrast and vignetting.
100mm to 200mm Performance: From around 100mm onward, the Tamron began pulling ahead more consistently. Center sharpness differences remained relatively modest, but the Tamron frequently delivered noticeably better edge and corner sharpness, particularly around 185mm to 200mm.
300mm Performance: Around 300mm, the Tamron continued to produce stronger edge performance and slightly crisper center detail. The Nikon improved somewhat at f/11, but the Tamron still generally retained the advantage.
400mm Performance: At the long end, both lenses softened somewhat compared to shorter focal lengths, but the Tamron consistently remained sharper in both the center and edges, though the Nikon files were still decent and more than usable.
Practical Differences: The Nikon Z 28-400mm offers important advantages in portability, convenience, lighter weight, and a wider 28mm starting point, making it a compelling all-in-one travel and landscape lens. The Tamron sacrifices some convenience but rewards users with stronger image quality throughout much of the shared range.
Bottom Line: If maximum image quality, especially from 100mm to 400mm, is your priority, the Tamron 50-400mm is the stronger choice. If versatility, lighter weight, and convenience matter more, the Nikon Z 28-400mm remains a very good and highly practical superzoom option.
RAW Files
Download the original RAW files from this comparison to inspect the images yourself, test your own editing workflow, and evaluate image quality in Lightroom, Photoshop, or your preferred RAW editor.
Check Current Pricing
Check current pricing and availability below:
Nikon Z 28-400mm f/4-8 VR
View at B&H Photo | View at Amazon
Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD
View at B&H Photo | View at Amazon
Nikon Z7 II
View at B&H Photo | View at Amazon
Disclaimer: Some links on this page are affiliate links. If you purchase through them, I may earn a commission at no additional cost to you. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.
