Minolta AF 100-300 F4.5-5.6 APO  reviews

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: dbrummag   review date: April-14-13  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 70-200mm APO f/2.8
Tamron 70-300mm SP
Sigma 70-300mm APO

price paid:

150 USD

positive:

Light
Amazing Color
Good Sharpness
Value

negative:

Zoom Creep

comment:

I had been comparing lenses in this range for some time, especially this lens against the Tamron. I had the opportunity to pick a like new copy up at a very good price so I pulled the trigger. For a walk around lens, I liked the color of this lens better than the Tamron.

I have been taking shots in similar setups and comparing the prints against other lenses that I had in my bag before, particularly my Sigma 70-200mm APO f/2.8. With the same setup, IE the Sigma stopped down significantly more than this lens shooting f/5.6 at 135mm, I got almost identical photos. Of course, the lenses have completely different reasons to be in the bag, the Sigma I use primarily for shooting basketball action in low light. This lens I picked up because I wanted a little more reach in my walk around lens. However, the fact that it stands up in image quality to the $900+ lens I compared it to is admirable. At 300mm, my copy is just as sharp as between 100-200mm. You have to make appropriate manual adjustments to get the image as with any situation but it is still there.

APO glass is worth the money every time and in every situation. Beyond, speaking of G glass, becomes a law of diminishing returns. The difference between this lens at $150-200 and a G lens at $800+ is not worth the difference unless a) you want to spend crazy amounts of money on your bag or b) you are shooting professionally to enlarge images for huge prints. I use to own the G copy of Sony 70-200mm prior to the Sigma, last time I fork out the money for the minimal difference.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: Gradus   review date: March-04-13  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron AF 28-200 F3.8-5.6 Aspherical; Sony AF DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6 SAL1870;Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM

price paid:

EUR 150 (used)

positive:

Range in APS-C
Size and weight

negative:

Sharpness on longer ranges
Zoom creep

comment:

I bought this lens for it's range in combination with it's size and weight. Although I made some lovely pictures with it, I cannot say that there is some kind of magic between me and this lens.

When photographing moving objects (cars, planes) on longer distances, I miss something. It just isn't that sharp enough to impress. Next to that I miss a bit of color magic.

As I said, made some lovely pictures on shorter ranges but as I bought it with the range as important argument, this is not my favorite lens.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: Bahudda   review date: February-07-13  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tokina 100-300mm f4
Sony 70-200mm f2.8 G SSM
Sony 75-300mm
Tamron 70-200mm f2.8
Minolta 70-210mm f4
Minolta 100-300mm f3.5-4.5 [non APO or D]

price paid:

$110 USD

positive:

Light weight
Sharp
Color & contrast

negative:

Very little for the price paid

comment:

This lens is part of my two lens light weight Minolta color kit. It is typically paired with the MinO 28-105mm f3.4-4.5 RS. I use these two mostly for landscape and rarely use them for portraiture. The Sony & Tamron 70-200mm work much better for portraiture. It is much lighter than the metal Tokina 100-300mm f4. In image quality it is as good as the Tokina and Minoltas but just under the Sony & Tamron f2.8's. It renders images in a similar fashion to the Minolta Beercan without the luscious bokeh of the Beercan. It is not quite up to the micro-contrast of the f2.8's yet it has its own charm and character that makes it a fun and reliable lens.

This lens has all of the advantages of the non APO/D version without its drawbacks of heavy CA.

I would recommend this budget lens to anyone who wants good quality glass at a reasonable price.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: derekw   review date: November-30-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 75-300 New
Minolta 100-300 xi

price paid:

140 GBP mint

positive:

Sharpness
Minolta Colours
portable

negative:

Can't think of any

comment:

Like woodmen's review below, my copy of this lens is sharp, and I mean SHARP, at maximum aperture throughout the range.

Wonderful Minolta colours.

Build should be 4.5 because there is nothing wrong with it.

A bit pricy but you get a lot for your money.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: streets   review date: October-10-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 100-300 non apo

price paid:

200 USD used

positive:

This lens is a great buy. Works very well with my 1.4X teleconverter.

negative:

Zoom creep
Lens hood recommended at all times.

comment:

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: cev   review date: September-12-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 70-300 USD Di

positive:

Sharpness
lightweight
Great color

negative:

Range

comment:

Portraits really stand out with this lens. Shot some great pics of the moon also with a 1.7 teleconverter. It was sharper than a new Tamron 70-300 USD Di. Not as heavy as a Tamron so I would carry the Minolta instead. Maybe not as bright color as some Minolta's I've seen but very natural color.

sharpness: 3 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: chrishoek   review date: September-11-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

75-300mm big beercan
tamron 70-300 ld di macro

price paid:

135 euro used

positive:

small
well built
sharp until 200mm

negative:

Not sharp above 200mm even stopped down to f8.

zoom creep

comment:

I have owned this lens for about a year and just sold it. The lens is nicely built, has very good colors , almost no ca but my copy was not sharp from 200mm to 300mm.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: robert.pierrick   review date: February-11-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

100-300 xi
100-400 APO

price paid:

100 Euros

positive:

Very lightweight and small.
Very sharp except at widest apertures.

negative:

comment:

Optical performances seems to permit bigger resolutions than my 14Mp camera.
It's sharper than the 100-400 APO and it has not any purple fringe comparativly to the xi.
The xi just beat it wide open.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: GarryA   review date: November-18-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron SP 70 - 300 USD

price paid:

£140.00

positive:

Light and compact very sharp
lovely deep saturated colours sharp wide open

negative:

zoom creep bit noisy focusing

comment:

I think this is a great little lens that I dont think can be bettered I can only asume it would equal or better the Sony 70-300 G because it is clearly sharper than the Tamron. It is as sharp wide open as it is right up to f11 but the contrast is a tad low wide open I used it on a A580 it amazed me how clear and sharp it is and the focusing was OK. Used on my A77 the focusing is a lot faster no messing and little hunting what a shame they dont make them any more

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: tpolakov   review date: June-10-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 75-300 New
Sony 55-200
Sigma 18-200

price paid:

190 EUR (used)

positive:

Light for the focal range
Almost no CA
Sharp
Focus hold button
Outstanding price/performance ratio

negative:

Focus can hunt
Some zoom creep
Bokeh can be a bit nervous, although mostly OK
Starts at 100mm, but this allows it to be small and light

comment:

Compared to Minolta 75-300 New:
- sharper. Very good wide open, but towards the tele end needs f7.1-8
- CA negligible, no purple fringing (this was bugging me with the 75-300, so I sold it)
- more contrast on close up shots

Compared to Sigma 18-200:
- the Sigma, like most "universal" zooms, changes the focal length depending on the focus distance. It reaches 200mm only at infinity, for closer subjects, the focal length is shorter. So for closer subjects, only a "real tele" gives real closeups.
- much better CA behavior
- reach

Compared to the Sony 55-200:
- range
- as far as I recall the Sony had a bit better micro contrast (newer digital coatings I guess), but sharpness wise, they were very similar

So to sum this up, this lens is the perfect tele lens for a hobbyist on budget. It is reasonably light, but seems built better than the newer cheap Sonys.
Sharpness upto 250mm is very good wide open, and excellent stopped down 2/3 stop. At 300 you need f7.1-8 for good results.
In CA/fringing department is on par with the 70-300G (I haven't owned that one, judging on review pics).
So, if you can get one around the price of the Sony 75-300 or cheaper, it's an obvious choice.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: MrRogerBen   review date: February-25-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta AF75-300 New

price paid:

260 USD (Used)

positive:

-Not too heavy
-Solid build
-Sharp temtped to give it f6.3-7.1
-Nice Bokeh
-No distortion
-Very tiny CA after f6.3-7.1
-55mm filter size (cheap filter)

negative:

-Not sharp at longer (200-300mm) focal lengths and CA, even after f7.1-8
-CA when open snd a little bit soft at 100mm when open (f4.5-5.6)
-Focus Hold a little small

comment:

More sharpest, than Minolta AF75-300 New, but need to give it f6.3-7.1.
Accordingly, in non sunlight weather or in the evening, is not recommended

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: snajper   review date: November-18-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Beercan
Min100-200
Tam80-200
SAL55-200

price paid:

150

positive:

Range
Tiny
very sharp
good colours
great hood

negative:

for the price none.

comment:

I have been looking for smaller replacement for my beercan and I have finally found one. Range is great for its size and 300mm on APC is max I can shoot handheld. Sharpness is very good and the colours are fantastic. This lens will now allow me to sell all my zooms except beercan.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Janneman1967   review date: June-23-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

80-200 f2.8APO HS
70-400 SSM

price paid:

400 EUR (new)

positive:

Small & Light. Liked the colors

negative:

Lens creep.

comment:

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: woodmen   review date: June-05-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 70-200mm f/4 beercan
Minolta 200mm f/2.8 G HS
Minolta 28-135mm f/4-4.5

price paid:

250 CAD (used)

positive:

Small
Light
Sharp wide open at all focal lenght
great Minolta colors
Inexpensive
No CA even wide open

negative:

Focus and zoom ring a little stiff

comment:

When I bought this lens it was because I had a great deal on it and wanted to sell it later with a profit.(because I own and love a really sharp and mint copy of the beercan) I did every possible test there is on this lens and to my surprise, it is even better than my beercan (even if I stop down the beercan to f/5.6). This was a great surprise and, strangely, that botherd me. I really wanted to love and keep my beercan but now I am begining to think that I must sell it and keep this lens. The only flaw with this lens is that it's not f/4 and only start at 100mm. Everything else is perfect. The image quality is as about the same between f/8 and wide open. The only difference is some vignetting wide open. Honestly, I don't believe the 70-300mm G or the 75-300mm can be any better than this on. Truly a gem lens!

sharpness: 3 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: pcarmalt   review date: April-01-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 55-200 F4-5.6 (APS-C)
Minolta 70-210 F4
Sony 100 F2.8 Macro

price paid:

GBP 170

positive:

+ Compact and lightweight
+ Good colour
+ APO works....lack of CA

negative:

- Soft. Need to stop down to f/8, even then not as sharp as beercan
- Bokeh not as smooth as beercan
- Doesn't have the same 3d look as beercan / 28-135 etc
- VERY slow AF, slower than beercan.

comment:

I didn't really warm to this lens.

The first mistake I made was comparing it at 100mm to my 100 Macro :-)

I took this lens on two holidays and I don't think I printed a single photo taken with this lens... it just seems to be missing the beercan magic.

Then I compared my beercan + Kenko 1.4x TC to this lens and realised I could always turn my beercan in to a 100-300/5.6 with better performance, so there was no point in having this lens.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: firtha   review date: March-25-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 70-300 APO
Vivitar Series 1 70-300

price paid:

201 USD (used)

positive:

Sharp
Little CA
Bold Colours

negative:

Zoom creep
Hunts in low light

comment:

Can't add much to the previous reviews. Zoom creeps badly when lens is held 'front up' or 'front down'. Very slightly sharper than the Sigma APO, slightly sharper than the Vivitar in 'formal' tests. You probably won't see a difference in normal use. A bit soft at 300 mm f5.6, though surprisingly sharp at f11. (I didn't test at f8). As expected, almost negligible CA - only shows very slightly when wide open - not visible at f11 or f22. Colour is Minolta all the way - dramatically different than the Vivitar, which is very muted/pastel. Recommended - nothing wrong with this lens at all...

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: JeremyT   review date: March-20-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

SAL 75-300
Beercan

positive:

- Reasonably sharp
- Very small for its range
- Slightly less CA than beercan / 75-300

negative:

- Still has CA, especially wide open near 300mm
- Needs stopping down for optimal sharpness on long end

comment:

I bought this lens for fairly cheap due to the fact it was missing its hood and the filter ring was damaged.

Its performance is very similar to the SAL 75-300mm. Wide open near 300mm the 100-300mm APO has less CA than the 75-300mm, but it also seems like it's slightly softer, so it's mostly a wash. Stopping down is required for optimal performance near 300mm.

I'm a little disappointed in this lens as reviews implied it would be better than the 75-300mm. In practice there's not a lot of difference in IQ, and you're mostly just getting a smaller lens in exchange for 25mm less on the wide end.

If you aren't concerned about size, I'd go with the 75-300mm, which is wider, performs similarly, and is much cheaper. On the other hand, this lens is a good bit smaller, so it makes a great travel zoom when you don't have room to spare.

The "D" variant of this lens appears to be optically identical, so I'd probably stick with this non-D version (which is much cheaper). ADI for this sort of lens is definitely not worth a 50% premium.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: Richalf   review date: January-27-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

$550 CDN

positive:

Sharp throughout the full range, even wide open is very good
No chromatic aberation
Very light & compact for it's range.

negative:

Lens zoom creep (I think some have a lock but not sure)
Bokeh can be grainy
Can hunt a little on focus in certain situations

comment:

I wish I had a faster zoom lens i.e. 2.8 at 300 but they are very expensive for a hobbyiest like myself so I'm very pleased overall with this lens.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: derekw   review date: December-09-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 75-300 New
Sigma 70-300 Apo Macro

price paid:

L199

positive:

Aharpness
Colour
Weight

negative:

None

comment:

For the money, one of the best lenses you can get covering this range

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Shearwater   review date: November-03-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony 70-400 G
Bigma
Tamron 28-75

positive:

Extremely light and compact.

negative:

It is reasonably sharp but not as good as either the Tamron or Sony G.

comment:

I carry this lens around when I don't want to lug the Sony 70-400.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: ianb   review date: July-30-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

Surprisingly Good lens on A700
Solid build
Not too heavy
Sharp temtped to give it 5.0
Good Bokeh

negative:

Slow Focus & hunts a bit if trying to focus on a smaller object

comment:

Originally bought with Minolta 700si Film Camera. Transferred to Minolta 5D where the increase in zoom range (effective 150-450mm) gave some pretty good results on clear bright days. Putting this lens on the A700 has really brought out the best in this lens. Pictures are clear and sharp and some of edge fringing appears to have been reduced. If you can find one of these second hand grab it quick. It stands up against some of the best - for an old lens.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: Derek   review date: July-29-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 75-300 New
Minolta 100-300 f4.5-5.6

positive:

Sharp at 300
Colour
No distortion
No PF
Good bokeh
Lightweight

negative:

None

comment:

Good replacement for 'beercan' if you need the extra reach

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: OisinP   review date: June-02-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

70-210 f4
100-200 f4.5

price paid:

160 GBP

positive:

Good colour
Decently sharp for the price
Light and compact
Close focussing

negative:

comment:

I like this very much. Not the worlds sharpest (hand held) at 300 nor the fastest focussing on the 5D and the Max F4.5 doesn't extend beyond about 110mm but it is light and easy to carry. If you are all about IQ then there are some very expensive options available but this lens at this price fits my bill perfectly.

sharpness: 1 

color: 1 

build: 1 

distortion: 2 

flare control: 1 

user: dsoulsticec   review date: May-21-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 100mm Macro F2.8
Minolta 28-135mm F4.0-4.5 XX's Crossed
Minolta 135mm F2.8
Minolta 70-210mm F4.0
Minolta 50mm F1.7
Minolta 100-200mm F4.5
Minolta 35-105mm F3.5-4.5
Minolta 28-85mm F3.5-4.5
Minolta 35-70mm F4.0
Sigma 35-135mm 3.5-4.5
Minolta 100-300mm APO F4.5-5.6
Sony 18-70mm F3.5-5.6

price paid:

225 USD (used)

positive:

negative:

comment:

I may have had a bad copy of this lens, but it was terrible - easily the worst piece of glass I've come across.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: Frenske   review date: April-22-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 70-300mm DG APO (red ring)

price paid:

150GBP

positive:

A light weight lens
Compact
Sharp at shorter focal lengths

negative:

Not sharp at longer focal lengths

comment:

A nice little lens. It is slightly better in IQ than the Sigma 70-300mm DG APO (red ring). Particularly the color production of the 100-300mm APO is better, but it is still not up to level of the beercan family.
It is also smaller and feels like it is better built than the Sigma; even though it is made of plastic it feels sturdy. Both lenses don't perform stellar at longer focal lengths, which is unfortunately since amateurs are looking into these lenses for the longer focal lengths and most will care less about the 70-150mm range.
At the end this is a nice lens for traveling and because of the size and weight and color production it has the upperhand compared to bulky Sigma 70-300mm.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: nitrosyl   review date: April-03-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

- Minolta 70-210mm f/4 (Beercan)
- Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 SSM G
- Sony 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6

price paid:

240 USD (used exc)

positive:

- Small & Light
- Reasonably Priced
- Useful Range
- Focus hold button

negative:

- Mediocre Build
- Softness @ Wide Open
- AF Speed
- No longer in production

comment:

This lens and the famous beercan are both cheap alternatives to the much more expensive Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G lens. It is not as sharp wide open as the G, neither does it focus as fast. It also has a very plastic build, but that's what makes it light. The 300mm end comes handy time to time, and that should be the primary reason if you pick a Minolta 100-300mm APO over a beercan.

Bottom line: go for the new Sony G if your budget allows it, otherwise either the 100-300mm APO or a beercan will make an economical solution.

sharpness: 3 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: DonSergio   review date: February-12-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

- Beercan
- 70-300G
- 70-200G
- 85za
- 135za
- 200G

price paid:

250 USD (used)

positive:

+ small weight and size
+ 450mm on APS-C
+ resonable fast AF
+ good price

negative:

- nor sharp wide open.
- Hunts in low light.

comment:

Very good telezoom for travel, lightweight and compact. resonable sharp stopped down (but not wide open). Fast AF and good IQ (in good light conditions). I use this lens in my travel on A100 with 24-105 and 50mm primes. Ultimate travel complect IMHO. In lowlight conditions AF hunts.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: hassenpheffer   review date: January-28-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 24-235mm
Tamron 55-200mm
Sigma 70-300 APO

price paid:

270 USD

positive:

-light and compact
-good zoom range
-sharp and good flare control
-excellent cost/ performance value

negative:

for it's price, size and weight, I have nothing negative to say about this lens. Something of this price and quality in a 70-300 would be even better.

comment:

I wanted a lens with decent telephoto capability in a small and light compact package for hiking and backpacking. This particular lens fits the bill very well with excellent performance even at 300mm F6.3, so for wildlife it's also a decent lens; albeit a bit slow for that, depending upon what type of quarry you are after.
all round a nice sharp lens that's easy to keep on the camera body all day.

sharpness: 3 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: tthomsen   review date: November-29-08  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron AF70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro
Tamron AF70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro 1:2

price paid:

190 EUR (used)

positive:

Very light and compact, good for traveling
Practically no chromatic aberration or purple fringing

negative:

Lack of sharpness
Flimsy lens hood

comment:

I bought my copy in a used-camera equipment store and compared it with two other copies of the same lens. I picked the sharpest of the three and went home with it. After comparing it with my Tamron AF70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro 1:2, I came to the following conclusion:
- The Tamron is noticeably sharper in the corners
- The Minolta shows practically no sign of chromatic aberration or purple fringing (which the Tamron does quite noticeably)

So, both lenses have noticeable flaws. I do not know, if this was just bad luck or if this is characteristic for those lenses. I ended up buying the significantly more expensive Tamron AF70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro with a Kenko 1.4x Teleplus Pro 300, keep the other Tamron for traveling (because of its significantly smaller size and weight) and sold the Minolta.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: borjomi   review date: November-12-08  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 70-210/4 beercan
Minolta 75-300 new
Minolta 85/1.4G
MC APO Telezenirar 135/2.8 (M42)
Minolta 200/2.8 HS APO G

price paid:

200 EUR like new

positive:

Good color
Low CA at wide end
Compact size
Very light weight
Focus hold button
Effective hood

negative:

Slow AF
No focusing distance limiter
CA at long end
Bad bokeh
Double size when zooming

comment:

Good travel zoom for my film camera Dynax 7. On digital Sony A100 focus hunts to much at long end. Sharpness is not good enough for small birds. I had replace this lens to 200/2.8 HS APO G + 2x TC.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: fute77   review date: October-25-08  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

beercan

price paid:

cheap

positive:

light
fast AF
sharp enough at FO

negative:

start at 4.5

comment:

a nice lens to travel light
excellent for outdoor (sunny weather)

I change it because I also own a Tokina 80-200/2.8 and a Tokina 300/4

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 2 

user: pashka20   review date: September-06-08  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Beercan
minolta 28-85 f/3.5-4.5
minolta kit
minolta 28 f/2
tamron 90 f/2.8
minolta 50 f/1.7
several mf lenses

price paid:

260 used

positive:

Small, convenient range.

negative:

Not that sharp wide open at 300mm
Very poor flare control
Extends when camera points down

comment:

I had high hopes for this lens due to positive reviews here. I was very disappointed when it came to reality.
The lens I had was not as sharp as beercan I own, with not greatest resolution in 300 range wide open. It has to be stopped down to f8 to be any good and it makes it usable only in good lightning.
The other flaw that I found was poor flare control. In fact, this was the worst of all my lenses. The hood didn't help much. Flare control was, probably, the reason why I sold it shortly after I bought.

Sorry for the bad review. I only tried to pinpoint negative features of the lens.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: Wedge   review date: September-02-08  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tammy 200-400 F5.6
Minolta RS 50 F1.7
Minolta 35-70 F4
Konica Minolta 17-35 F2.8-4.
Minolta 135 F2.8.
Minolta AF 70-210 F4 APO
Sigma 70-200 F2.8 EX APO IF

price paid:

550 AUD

positive:

Sharp
Size
Great Colours
Great Build

negative:

Focus Hold a little small
Not so sharp at 300mm

comment:

Sharp at Min Aperture throughout the range upto around 250mm. if you can get this lens at a good price get it! Quick focusing.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: kusa   review date: April-04-08  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

- Sigma - 70-300 F4-5.6 DG APO Macro
- Tamron 90 F2.8 SP macro

price paid:

220 € (used)

positive:

- light and small
- good picture quality on the entire range

negative:

- not very fast (f4.5 is only until ~120mm)
- zoom creep

comment:

The AF speed is OK, some hunts with my 7D though.
The sharpness is still good on the longer end of the range unlike many competitors.
I gave build a 3 for the annoyinh zoom creeping problem.
A very good and small telezoom that always finds a place in your bag.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: alanfrombangor   review date: March-03-08  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

70-200 F4
200 2.8 HS G

price paid:

around L140 used

positive:

Light weight
Price

negative:

Slow
Not especially sharp

comment:

I was a little disappointed with this lens, sharpness was below my expectations and my copy (now sold) only went out to 280mm. Reasonable value for money at current used prices.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: Fecuska   review date: July-31-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

- Minolta 2.8/100 D macro
- Tamron 3.5/180 macro
- Beercan

positive:

- small & lightweight
- nice colors
- 55mm filter size, like most of my lenses

negative:

- a little bit soft

comment:

The problems is that my eyes are adjusted to macro lenses (50mm, 100mm, 180mm, see above), and all other lenses seem to be soft compared to these guys...
Anyway, previously i had a beercan that produced cca the same quality as the 100-300 APO, but had never fitted into my bag, so it was spending its time mainly at home... Regarding the maximum apertures, the 100-300 is worse, but its reach is better. In a nutshell, regarding the tradeoffs i think it is a correct lens for tourist and walkaround purposes - i like it...

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: keith_h   review date: June-13-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

75-300

price paid:

270 usd (sh)

positive:

Better CA performance compared to 75-300.
Compact, light.
Nice and sharp from f8.
Fast focus and focus hold button

negative:

Needs a lot of light to take decent shots at the long end.

comment:

I mostly use for sports shooting and bought this to replace my 75-300 which suffers badly from CA. I get good results in strong light and struggle to make a decent picture when the weather is overcast. I find f8 at least is required to acquire a sharp image which at the long end means this lens is not fast enough for less than ideal light. Difficult to beat at the price though.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: camfan   review date: May-28-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

$200

positive:

Lightweight
Wonderful color
CA well controlled

negative:

A little soft at 250-300mm
Barrel extends when tilted

comment:

A great tele-zoom lens especially for travelling. I really like its color and bokeh, full of Minolta characteristics. The build quality is good although the lens barrel extends when tilted. The sharpness is good while a little soft at the tele-end. I used to combine it with my 24-105 for travel. But recently I plan to buy CZ16-80 to replace my 24-105, for wide angle and the sharpness with the aperture wide open. Yet I can't figure out the upgrade replacement for 100-300APO. It seems that, optically, 80-200G or 70-200G is the only choice for me, but they are heavy and the costs are much too high. :(

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: brettania   review date: April-23-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

70-200 SSM
100-300 non Apo

price paid:

NZ$280

positive:

Very sharp at f8 and on.
Believe this is underated. Very good performer, light and easy to use.

negative:

Some pople find zoom creep, but not me as my lens was cleaned, colimated and tightened.
f4.5-5.6 can be too slow.

comment:

Highly commended, and if you can find one at a good price, don't hesitate.

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Station53   review date: April-23-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

Light.
Very sharp.

negative:

Zoom creep

comment:

This lens was a gift so I don't know what it cost.
It is very sharp. The anti-shake makes this lens sharper than my film camera.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: hotwire   review date: February-07-07  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

$300 CAD

positive:

Lightweight
Great Image Quality

negative:

Zoom Creep
So light, i'm afraid I'll break it.

comment:

Overall a fine lens, but I didn't seem to use it enough, especially with the 70-200G added to my camera bag.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: mudslinger   review date: December-12-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 75-300/4.5-5.6 II
Minolta 100-200/4.5
Minolta 80-200/2.8 HS

price paid:

$320 (used)

positive:

- Compact and Lightweight
- Excellent colors
- Sharp Outdoors

negative:

- AF hunts in low light when using zoom at 250-300mm.

comment:

I combine this lens with my 24-105/3.5-4.5 (D) for my ultimate outdoor/travel kit. At F5.6, this zoom is sharp from 100-175mm and 225-300mm and REALLY sharp from 175-225mm. I've used this lens at air shows, boat races and outdoor tennis events with outstanding results. The colors from this lens are beautiful! The 100-200/4.5 at F5.6 is comparable to this lens in sharpness from 100-150mm; however, it does not provide the colors or the zoom range that the 100-300 APO provides. Indoors or under low light situations, the 100-200/4.5 seems to focus faster than the 100-300.

I highly recommend the 100-300 APO, even if you already own the 100-200/4.5. In my opinion, if you are going to be using this lens mostly outdoors, then don't even bother with the "D" version.

** 8/12/08 Update: Having used the Minolta 80-200/2.8 and seeing the higher quality pics a G grade zoom can provide, I reduced the sharpness rating on this lens from 5 to 4.5. However, for non G glass, I concluded the 100-300 APO was the best zoom in the 100-300 range. Having the 80-200/2.8, I found I rarely used the 100-300 anymore; therefore, I no longer own this lens but still highly recommend it.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: napo   review date: November-26-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

Sharpness , Color, Compact

negative:

hunts lot in low light

comment:

Nice lens , sharp, beautiful color , compact. Good lens for traveller. Have this lens nearly 8 years and it really has been a good friend on my trips. Can produce excellent images.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: pedrocr   review date: October-11-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

100 Macro
70-210 f/4

price paid:

90 EUR(used)

positive:

- Compact
- Light
- Good reach

negative:

- Not too sharp
- Not particularly well built

comment:

I got a real bargain on this lens on eBay and I probably didn't get a very good version of it. I rarely use it since the 70-210/4 seems so much contrasty and sharp. I only use it when I need the range and I haven't been very impressed with the results. It's probably a bellow-par one.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: alphadog   review date: October-08-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

70-210 4 beercan
100-200 4.5
Sigma 400 5.6 APO

positive:

compact
lightweight
sharp

negative:

slow AF

comment:

I think this is a great compact tele zoom. It is much smaller and lighter than the beercan, and to my eye sharper too at around 200mm and f5.6. This lens is also much sharper than the Sigma 400 APO at f5.6. No, it probably isn't as sharp as the minolta 200 or 300, or even the G zoom (I haven't actually used any), but it is a lot more portable (not to mention affordable). I hope to pair it with a CZ 16-80 (assuming good reviews) to give big zoom range in an easily carried, compact, two lens package.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Thesian   review date: September-20-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

85/1.4G(D), 135/2.8, 70-210/4, Sigma 500/7.2 and others

price paid:

210 Euro (used)

positive:

- sharp
- compact
- free of chromatic aberations/purple fringes
- autofocus quite fast

negative:

- extending lens barrel
- hood a little short, attachement to extendium barrel makes transport tedious
- autofocus hunts, especially in low light

comment:

I like this lens for the great image quality it produces and it's small size and little weight. It's sharp enough to be used with a cheap Kenko 1,5x tele-converter and still produce sharp images. With converter autofocus is limited to center focus point with areas of strong contrast and is also quite slow. It does work, however, and stopped down to about 8 (11 with converter), the images are still surprisingly sharp. Not G quality, but perfectly usable.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: DavidBo   review date: August-30-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

Sharp from f/5,6

negative:

comment:

Compared to 70-200G it has no chance. The 70-200G are just classes bettter. But i guess they are not comparable.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Jose de Luna   review date: July-08-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

A very compact tele-zoom lens, doesn't really add much weight and space in your bag. Very good sharpness and color rendition across the focal range.

negative:

Build quality not as sturdy compared to Minolta's older generation lenses. Tends to focus-hunt at the 300mm setting in difficult lighting and low-contrast scenes.

comment:

This compact tele-zoom lens proves to be an excellent substitute for the G-category Minolta lenses; if you know how to control your exposure and shooting techniques, you will be rewarded well in using this lens. At f5.6 300mm ISO400 1/250s anti-shake on and pre-focussing technique applied, I can perfectly capture horses/horseriders in their best jumps.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Janvb   review date: June-29-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

beercan, 100/f2, 70 - 300

positive:

sharpness, weight

negative:

speed

comment:

Excellent zoom, very sharp, very light for it's quality, although I don't use the range very often when I do I'm always pleasantly surprised with it's performance. for me it beats the beercan, except for speed (and sometimes for colours)

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: oliphoto   review date: June-08-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

negative:

comment:

[Note: Performance judged on usage with a full frame camera]

This is a slightly above average, consumer-grade lens. It performs well at 200mm at f5.6 and above. But its performance outside this sweet spot is a bit disappointing.

sharpness: 3 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Aleq   review date: June-05-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

- 50/1.7
- 18-70 kit
- 100/3.5 Vivitar

price paid:

220 EUR

positive:

- 300mm
- Weight and size

negative:

- 100-250mm
- Not that sharp as I expected
- The barrel extends itself when tilted

comment:

This lens haven't convinced me - not yet maybe?
I think I'll update this review when I get more experience, don't judge this lens with this review only.
Update: It performs quite good at 300mm (even when open), but not at any lower focal lengths - there you need significant stopping to get acceptable results. Maybe stillborn unit...

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: lifephoto.it   review date: March-04-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

Sharpnes and colour

negative:

Distortion at 300 mm above average

comment:

Perhaps I like wide angle photography, in fact on my 35 mm film camera (the 700 si) I have always my 20mm fitted in, so... this lens is not the best, but I think that's only my opinion...

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: RacingManiac   review date: February-05-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

70-210 f4, 300 f4 G

positive:

Compact
Lightweight
Excellent Reach
Good Image quality

negative:

Plastic Body
Slow AF
No constant aparture with max of only 4.5

comment:

Good traveling telephoto lens. Sharp image and good color rendition. It is lighter than the 70-210 f4 with better reach and MUCH easier to pack than the 300 G lens. Downside is that it does not have the f4 at the tele end and it hunts for focus a bit in low light(good MF ring though). Definitely going to be a often use lens in my collection when I am on long trip.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: pmviana   review date: January-22-06  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

Very well built
Crisp image

negative:

f4.5-5.6
no zoom lock

comment:

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: jstartin   review date: December-24-05  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Nothing in this range

positive:

Sharp
Light and compact for range
Focus lock button

negative:

Rotating front element
Of course, not very fast
AF can be slow
Extends while carrying etc

comment:

I love using this lens and get good sharp results at all focal lengths, right up to 300mm, even close to full aperture. It balances really well on the 5D. AF can be reasonably fast, but with a big change in subject distance and spot focus I find it difficult to get a suitable detail under the focus point; then it hunts off to a world of it's own and takes a while to bring back! But highly recommended.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 2 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: mikethelaserman   review date: November-24-05  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Replaced a Sigma 75-300 which had soft focus and a magenta colour cast.

positive:

Good sharp lens with good colour rendition

negative:

Lens barel extends under its own weight when hanging on the strap

comment:

I'll definately be using this lens on my 5D

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: Montago   review date: May-26-05  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 75-300 that i skipped because i found this one

positive:

+compact enough to bring along most of the time
+sharpness, contrast, colour
+very litle if any distortion (havent noticed any)
+build quality
+looks good on 7D

negative:

-front rotates when focusing
-could be faster

comment:

From the film days (dynax4) i wanted 2 lenses that could optimize my photography, i quickly came across the 75-300, that would have looked nice on the Dynax4.

however i felt that the 100-300 APO would be a better choice, hence the price was only 1/3'rd more then the 75-300. so i bought it.

Glad i did! The images i get from this lense, used either on film or my Dynax 7D, all have the same touch, seen from this lense - they are sharp, clear and bright, colours are a bit de-saturated but this is easily compensated by +1.SAT on the 7D or on the computer afterwords... i don't

The angle is very narrow however, 150-450mm when used on the 7D, which is best for children, party (wedding and alike), animal, nature and other long distance shooting.

with the 7D, its extreemly easy to use the lense though, shooting at speed about 1/100'th second is often enough!

i bought this lense along the 24-105, which is a really-really nice DUO, i do however want a wideangle lense to make a TRIO, and this will be the Sigma 12-24, unless Minolta makes a better one, before i can affort one :)

I also use this lense for macro, using tubes, and it's very good at this. however the 100/2,8 would be prefered

The Distance (D) isn't needed on a 150-450, hence flashes can't be of much use, unless used on film camera. so if you come across this lense (Non-D), at a good price, then get it ! you won't regret