Minolta AF 28-105 F3.5-4.5  reviews

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Guy   review date: May-11-13  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

KM 28-75/2.8
Sigma 28-70/2.8
Sigma 28-105/3.8-5.6 UC-III

price paid:

40 EUR

positive:

+ good range
+ small weight
+ nice build

negative:

- IQ

comment:

I like this lens on FF, but the IQ is not there.
Sadly, wide open the lens can only be used for web sized images or small prints. For cropping or anything larger it needs stopping down by about 1-2 stops.
Maybe I have a lemon, but I really am not all that impressed as I hoped I would be.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: derekw   review date: March-11-13  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 24-85 original
Minolta 35-105 original
Minolta 28-105 RS
Minolta 28-135

price paid:

25 GBP

positive:

Very sharp even wide open
Minolta colours
Good range
Inexpensive

negative:

Needs hood

comment:

The ratings don't lie and there is nothing to add to the reviews below. This is a very, very good lens and IMHO better value than the 28-135

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: cev   review date: November-28-12  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 35-105
Minolta 50mm 1.7

price paid:

120.00

positive:

Sharp
decent range
well built

negative:

range short for APS-C

comment:

Received this from Ebay and was not impressed at first. Resolution compared to the 35-105 is a bit less sharp but most shots stopped down can even rival that lens. It has a bit more range too. Colors are excellent and it responds well to an alpha A35. No discernible CA or flare at least by eye.
This is the last of the well built Minolta era and it shows for a 1994 lens. I'll continue to include this lens on most of my photo shoots.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: JimmyMelbourne   review date: July-07-12  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

MN 35 - 70 F4
MN 70 - 210 F4
Sony 18 - 250

price paid:

120 AUS

positive:

Sharp
Nice range on APS-C
Great for portraits
Minolta Colur

negative:

comment:

I took this lens for a run today and am very impressed with the versatility, great colour, sharp wide open, decent zoom range. I will never sell this lens. I do not have any faults. I know it is not so wide, but knew that when i bought it and wanted it for touring and portraits, and it excels at this.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: AlexSwitch   review date: February-14-12  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

150 Euro

positive:

Good color, pretty sharp, fast AF, nice bokeh

negative:

Heavy, 28mm on APS-C is not a wide angle focal, AF hangs in poor light conditions

comment:

This lens is a good ( very good considering the price I've paid ) walk around piece of glass. Sharp with good color and contrast, this Minolta lens is build like a panzer, and the heavy weight reflects this fact.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: dechan81   review date: December-28-11  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

minolta 24-50rs
minolta 35-70/4
minolta 35-105(beercan ver)
minolta 50/1.7
sigma 75-200/3.8

positive:

internal focus
sharp wide open
nice bokeh
close focus

negative:

heavy..
slow af @105mm on digital

comment:

my favorite lens realy sharp for a zoom lens..nice bokeh but a little heavy when i use with my km 7d,modern design nice handling event heavy,slow af @105mm on digital but no problem in film cameras..

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Johnc   review date: July-29-11  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 35-105
Tamron 17-50 2.8

price paid:

120 USD

positive:

Well built
sharp
colour
price

negative:

Heavy
a bit wider would be better

comment:

I was looking for a FF wider lens than the 35-105 and whilst not that much wider, I am exceedingly happy with this lens.
It is built like a tank, image quality is sharp and clear.
Distortion and flaring is minimal.
A hidden gem and now my walk around lens.
Love it!

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: nicols   review date: April-19-11  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

149 GBP (used)

positive:

Rock solid build quality.
Sharp stopped down.
Good IQ overall

negative:

On an aps c, 28 is not really wide enough for this to be a general purpose lens for my use.
A little zoom creep.

comment:

A really nice old lens, built like a tank but with modern style. Great image quality, pictures can be very sharp in the right conditions. On my a55, the 28mm end isn't particularly wide so have now switched to the sony 18-250mm superzoom for convenience. However, this is a good lens that can be a great step up from a kit zoom. Note, that when your carrying this around, i have noticed a little zoom creep.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: famatta127   review date: February-26-11  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

tamron 17-50mm 2.8f
minolta 35-105mm old
sony 35mm 1.8 sam

price paid:

$100

positive:

pretty sharp at f4.5 and razor sharp at 8
great Minolta color
light compared to Minolta 35-105 old

negative:

none yet

comment:

I have the macro option lens and find its a great piece of glass. Light, smooth and somewhat compact. The color of the Minny 35-105 seems a bit deeper but it beats out the Tamron for the 3D effect. I also own the Sony SAM 35mm 1.8 which is a great lens but the color isn't as nice as this one...Its got me thinking I may not need the 35-105 any more

update. Sold this. After using the 35-105 Minny more I sold the 28-105...not as sharp.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: HKWA444   review date: February-22-11  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony 18-70 kit
Tamron A16
KM 35-70

price paid:

80USD

positive:

Good price
Sharpness
Well Built
Solid

negative:

Heavy
Not wide enough

comment:

A very good walk around lens. 85% on my camera.
Love the color & contrast of this lens

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: CLICKPIC   review date: February-14-11  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 28-85
Minolta 70-210 4.5-
Minolta 70-210 Beercan
Minolta 75-300

positive:

Love this lens! Great color. very sharp. well built.

negative:

Slight zoom creep. common issue with zooms though. Nothing else.

comment:

Great lens. Always good IQ. Great color and sharpness. If it was a constant 2.8 it would be perfect. for the money it can't be beat. Kinda rare. If you can find it, get it.

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Velectron   review date: December-25-10  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

35-105mm F3.4-4.5 RS
70-210mm F3.4-4.5
Beercan
50mm F1.7
Tamron 28-200 XR Aspherical

price paid:

86

positive:

Surprisingly good sharpness wide open at all focal lengths, build, non-rotating front element

negative:

bokeh, a bit heavy, hood seems fragile, zoom creep

comment:

I was rather surprised at the sharpness of this lens wide open at all focal lengths. Had expected it to be softer but no....its very sharp! The DOF seems to be quite generous too, so sometimes it may be difficult to get a good bokeh. The lens looks pretty well-built, and weighs quite a fair bit, perhaps an indication of good quality glass and parts? I don't see any CA or flares with this lens, even without the hood. My copy had zoom creep so it tends to extend by itself while walking, but otherwise, this is a great walk-around lens! Not quite wide enough for APS-C but still manageable.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: ghmcs   review date: September-23-10  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony 16-105 (APSC only)
Minolta 28-135 (APSC+full frame)
Tamron 28-75 (APSC+full frame)

price paid:

$120USD (used)

positive:

very useful range on full frame, sharp,reasonable cost, and small/light enough to carry everywhere

negative:

none for the price

comment:

I was pleasantly surprised at the performance of this lens; I think it is under rated on this site. I was looking for an everyday replacement for the much larger, heavier Minolta 28-135 and I think I've found it.
APSC - given it's focal range I don't know why you'd use it with an APSC sensor, but IQ is every bit as good as the Sony 16-105 and this lens is 1 stop faster.
FILM - at 100mm and longer you can't beat the real telephoto lenses but, considering this lens below 100mm, it is an excellent performer. Slightly better than the Minolta 28-135 and just as good as the Tamron 28-75. In fact, better sharpness than the Tamron at the edges of the frame. Color and exposure are what we like, and expect, from Minolta. Sure, it's not f/2.8 and it's not 24mm but pair this with the Minolta 20mm prime and the Minolta 100-200mm telephoto and you've got a low cost, high performing solution for full frame.
UPDATE for full frame digital - I was curious if performance on film would carry over to full frame digital, and it does. No micro focus adjustment needed up to 70mm; a small negative adjustment would help the long end.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Zeeke   review date: September-13-10  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta af 35-70mm f4
Minolta af 35-105mm(old)
Minolta af 28-135mm
Minolta af 24-85mm RS
Minolta af 24-105mm

positive:

Light
Sharp wide open
Fast focus
Non-rotating front element
price
colour

negative:

None given the price of these lenses

comment:

I think this is the best compromise for the 850(I've tried all the Minolta old`s),with a great range and fast af.The lens has ok center sharpness wide open at 105mm, which provides fine portraits.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: F-man   review date: August-11-10  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

18-70 Kit Lens

price paid:

USD 100

positive:

Pretty Sharp Wide open.
Cheap.
Nice Colour & bokeh

negative:

Zoom Creep.
Lens Hood prone to crack.
Not wide enough for APS-C

comment:

Nice walkaround lens, especially for FF

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: derekw   review date: May-07-10  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 35-105 F3.5-4.5 N

price paid:

L25 GBP

positive:

Sharpness
Colour
Weight and build
Inexpensive

negative:

None for the price

comment:

Great walkaround lens

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: jmmmerwill   review date: March-31-10  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 24-85 3.5-4.5

price paid:

60 EUR used

positive:

sharp - even wide open
nice colors and saturation

negative:

zoom creep

comment:

My favorite walk-around-lens, even after I bought a Minolta 24-85 3.5-4.5 and compared both. The 24-85 is a nice standard zoom lens when stopped down to at least f5.6/f8. Wide open the 24-85 is too soft! The 28-105 is much better for portaits and street pics wide open. I would recommend the 28-105 to everyone who is looking for a walk-around-lens from standard focal lenght to short tele and the opportunity of shooting wide open. Unfortunately the focal lenght is not wide enough. You shoud be aware of this lack and should enjoy this really nice lens. For me it's a keeper. The 24-85 might be sold again.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: derekw   review date: March-14-10  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 24-85 RS
Minolta 28-85

price paid:

L30 GBP

positive:

Exsellen all round lens
Sharp
Great Minolta colour

negative:

Nothing serious

comment:

Quality lens at a reasonable price

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: lowcost4dslr   review date: January-02-10  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 35-105 old
Tamron 17-50 2.5
KM 18-70 (kit lens)
sigma 24 wide II 2.8
beercan

price paid:

75€

positive:

Sharp on sensor < 12mpix
minolta colors
build quality

negative:

need to be stopped down on sensor >=12 mpix
28mm is not wide enough on APC-C

comment:

I was so pleased with the minolta 35-105 old that I seeked for a wider zoom => 28-105
I realised that 28 mm is not wide enough for indoor. There is a big differnce with 24mm which is OK for indoor IMO
The sharpness was very good even wide open on the 6mpix sensor but now with the 12 mpix sensor, it must be sopped down

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: bigoars   review date: December-03-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony 18-250

price paid:

nz$ 150

positive:

sharpness
price
colour

negative:

Would be nice if it were a bit wider

comment:

Have had this lens for a while but only just started using it.Very surprised by its sharpness when stopped down a bit.
I really like this lens

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Brendon   review date: September-14-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

18-70mm SAL
50mm f1.7
Tamron 70-300mm LD Di Telemacro

price paid:

120 USD

positive:

Color
Sharpness
Build quality
Bokeh !
Compact and not too heavy
No distortion
No CA !!!!

negative:

Zoom ring is a bit small
Manual focusing ring very small
28mm on digital is not wide

comment:

I have only the kit lens and the prime 50mm lens to compare this too so its not the best of comparisons.

That said, the 28-105 is a pretty darn good lens. Its sharpness is lesser than the 50mm but not by a lot and its much sharper than the 18-70. It does not suffer from any of aberrations like distortions, CA or flare so that's a lot of points in this lens favor.

Oh and since its a full frame lens no soft corners like my 18-70mm seems to suffer from.

However its 28mm starting is not wide and indoors I struggle at times to use this lens. But all in all I am never going to sell this lens and ill get a 10-24mm to complement this lens.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: bill_bly_ca   review date: July-28-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 24-70 2.8 DG DF
SAL1680CZ
1870 Kit

price paid:

94

positive:

Light
Sharp wide open.
Fast focus
Pleasing OOF

negative:

Some CA and flare

comment:

Bought this lens in Tokyo Sept 08 and spends most of its time on the 5D.

The pair is almost feather light and good for all but the widest of shots. I find it much more versatile than the Kit lens (Gave that to my sister for her a350).

The first photo in the examples page is one I took with this combo in Nicaragua.

This lens and a 5D are (aghast that I would say such a thing) a good disposable pair for areas you would be concerned about loosing your gear (Jungles, beach, possible theft etc etc)

Also use it for time to time on my 700si

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: Darrell52   review date: May-20-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 28-70G
Sigma 28-70 EX DG

positive:

Sharp, light weight, small, easy carry around lens

negative:

A little long on the short end

comment:

Bought this lens on a bit of a whim and although I can't recall exactly what I paid for it it wasn't much. I'm very impressed with the sharpness and versatility of this lens. If you are looking for a good walkaround zoom for a reasonable cost, this one should be considered. I feel this lens is a real bargain and has been generally under rated and over looked.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Pedorstroika   review date: March-08-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

minolta AF 35-70 F3.5-4.5
Sigma 100-300

price paid:

85 Euro (looks mint)

positive:

- Colors
- AF speed
- build

negative:

- It's quite heavy

comment:

I bought this lens over the inernet. Included in the price was a B/W uv-filter.
I only got my a300 very recently, but I allready like this lens.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: Derek   review date: August-31-08  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 28-85
Minolta 28-105 RS
Minolta 35-105

price paid:

L39

positive:

Sharpness
Colour
Build

negative:

None

comment:

Very simiar to 28-105 RS (see review) but seems a touch sharper.

Better Bokeh.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: chrishurley   review date: May-24-08  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

28-85, 28-85RS, 28-135, 18-250, 18-70, 25-105mm

price paid:

100USD (used)

positive:

Comfortable, fast focusing, smooth MF, pleasant images, close focusing

negative:

Zoom grip may be a little loose. 28mm isn't so wide on APS-C

comment:

This may be my first review. The only real "high end" glass I've ever used wasn't really- the 28-135mm.

I rate the color very solid because I keep coming back to it from other lenses for this reason. Build is solid. Not G-quality. I can't select "no rating" for distortion, so I can only say that I've never noticed anything objectionable, but I've never done tests. Same with flare control.

This lens DOES seem to exhibit sensor reflection if you combine a VERY bright, blown out section and a dark section in the same image. I've seen it one time in a year of use.

I initially had the 28-85, which I really liked, but the long end seemed a little short for me, so I got the 28-105, which focuses much faster and smoother. I initially thought that it wasn't as sharp as the 28-85, but having bought 4 more 28-85 trying to get one sharper, this doesn't seem to be the case. Indeed, the 24-105mm doesn't seem sharper either. All of them get pretty sharp at f/8. The upside of that is that when you step to 6 or 8, you're pretty sharp and have a generous DOF.

I've debated reviewing this for a while, having had it for a year or so and I'm finally inclined to do so. I like this lens, and its my day-to-day lens.

I use the beercan when I need to reach longer, but the 28-105 is a good lens for cheap guys like me.

I've since tried to get a good 28-85, having sold my original when I got this one and can't seem to get a good one again. My first copy must have been a gem. Either that or the 28-105 has just started working harder for me.

I've also picked up a 24-105mm which is a little smaller but seems very similar for IQ. I will say that there is a bigger difference between 24 and 28mm than I thought. The Tamron lens chooser website helps to illustrate this.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: wross   review date: April-28-08  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

18-70 kit
38-105 (original)
28-135
70-210 (beercan)

price paid:

$65 USD

positive:

Sharpness
Size/Weight

negative:

Could be sharper.
There are better lenses cheaper.
Would be nice if the zoom range was little greater on the wide end, the long end, or ideally... both.

comment:

For the money, (average around $115 USD) this is a pretty good lens, but there are better ones available for less money.

At one point I had this lens and the 4 listed in the "compared to" section above, and ran a series of tests to see which would be the keeper. Results were very consistent at both the wide and long ends of the zoom and at varying apertures: This lens was slightly sharper than the 18-70 at all settings, and slightly softer than the three older Minolta lenses at all settings. The 18-70 is a somewhat underrated lens, so being better than that says this is a very good lens. It's just not quite on a par w/ the other three listed.

Color is rather cool and less saturated than the classic Minolta colors of the 3 M's above.

For weight, zoom range, build quality, and image quality, this is a very good lens. Unfortunately for it, this lens almost duplicates the focal lengths and speed of the earlier Minolta original 35-105/3.5-4.5, which in my opinion is a better lens and sells at a cheaper price.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: MDuclow   review date: March-19-08  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

28-85
35-105
Sigma 17-70
various others

price paid:

42 USD USED

positive:

Sharp, colours, contrast, price
Very usable

negative:

28mm is not really wide enough, but it is still a very usable walkaround lens

comment:

This really is an underrated lens. First off, let me say that I paid a very low price for this because it has 2 very small nicks on the front element. One is at the very edge, and the other is just inside of the edge. I haven't noticed anything from this yet, but I also don't recall ever shooting directly into the sun, which is probably where it would show if it was going to at all. Otherwise, save a scratch in the distance scale window (which doesn't even cover the part you want to see!), I got this lens in very good condition.

This lens has a non-rotating front element, so polarizers are easy. The colours, especially with a polarizer on it, are really, very Minolta. Good contrast, too. Build is very good, it's a solid feeling lens.
Although 28mm on APS-C isn't really wide enough, this lens does allow you to be a bit creative with it, and never disappoints me.

I shot a few Lamborghinis at a dealership, alone, with a tripod and shutter release. I had this lens only, on my A100, and the lighting was horrible (think big windows with huge amounts of sunlight, at 1pm, flooding in). I still got some very nice shots, and enlarged one to 20" x 30". Big prints razor sharp? No. But it looks like it from 5 or 6 feet away (just under 2m to 2m). It's sharpness always makes me smile, it's always a bit more than I expected.

I pp everything with Lightroom (I don't go into PS much for USM'ing, I like the Lightroom sharpening) and always find photos from this lens easy to pp.

One thing to point out about it, it's bokeh is not the greatest. Give it a bit of a challenging backround, and it will have that busy, tense feel to it. It is not bad enough to detract from it too much, though. It's just not a 50/1.7 (If you don't have one, get yourself one of these as well, NOW).

I'm at a point where I have way too many lens' with overlap, and will be selling some of them off, but I really don't ever see myself selling this one.

If you can score one under a $100 US, I really think you'd be a fool not to buy it.

Just my 2 cents worth.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: nabreu   review date: December-14-07  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony 18-70
Minolta 75-300

price paid:

55€ Used

positive:

Fast AF
Well built
Front Element does not rotate

negative:

Some CA (barelly)

comment:

For the price i paid it was a very good deal and i don´t regreat it.
I like it better than the 18-70 and will be using as my walkaround lens.
If can get one, do it.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: eccles   review date: December-12-07  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

18-70 Sony kit lens

price paid:

L33 UK (used)

positive:

Good sharpness and colour.
Solid build.
Nice range for walkaround.
Better max aperture than kit lens.
Non rotating front element.

negative:

A little CA at 28mm.
Sharpness off a touch at 28mm.
Heavy for a short lens.
Barrel extends when zooming.

comment:

I bid on this ebay sale on a whim, not expecting to win it, snapping it up for L33UK including postage.
My kit lens is a far better sample than most judging by comments in this forum and compared to a couple of other lenses that have passed through my hands, so I'm using it as a yardstick for comparison.
Simple tests were taken at f8 over the zoom range.
It shows a little CA at 28mm, but this is much better controlled than the kit lens. It's only moderately sharp at 28mm, less sharp at the centre than the kit lens, but by no means bad, and a little PP sharpening can still bring out plenty of detail. At 70mm, it holds up well against the kit and it's difficult to decide which is better. At 105mm it mantains decent sharpness, making a pretty good all rounder considering the 3.75x zoom range.
Maximum aperture is better than the kit with f3.5 at 28mm, slipping to f4 at about 35mm and f4.5 at 60mm on up to 105mm. There's no zoom creep on this copy.
This lens is pretty substantial, weighing over a pound and the filter size is 62mm, so it's quite an impressive looking piece of glass.
Manual focus feels a bit odd on this sample because there seems to be a bit of lateral play in the focus ring, although focussing seems precise enough. It will focus beyond infinity but I don't know if that's normal or not.
I need to purchase a rear cap as this sale didn't include one, but the petal hood and front cap were there. Mine was a bargain at L33UK, and well worth looking out for if you need a cheap short zoom.

Edit: 28/04/09 I hadn't done much with this lens since my initial review, and I almost put it up for sale on ebay, but thoughts of shooting milky waterfalls with a CPL filter and the non-rotating front element had me hesitating, after all, it didn't cost me much. Then I used it at an outdoor social event as a semi-official photographer, which meant wandering around snapping people involved in various wildlife/craft type pursuits. Shooting mainly at F8, I was very impressed with the results. I got some very nice backlit subjects with no flare, and pretty sharp too. I still haven't shot my milky waterfalls with it, but I found that it's a very nice lens for candids with a useful zoom range, decent aperture and quick autofocus. Worth looking out for at the right price.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: Yemble   review date: November-17-07  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 18-70mm f3.5-5.6
Minolta 50mm f1.7

price paid:

L40

positive:

Great optics, sharp and colourful.
Non-rotating front element.
Looks fantastic on the D5D!

negative:

Maybe not wide enough at the short end

comment:

I was looking for an inexpensive short range Minolta zoom to cover the distance between my 18-70mm D5D kit lens and my 100-300mm zoom. This particular lens was not an obvious candidate, but I came across it quite by chance as a BIN on eBay. There do not appear to be that many of them around, hence they are not particularly popular and reviews are hard to find.

However, I concur with with the conclusion below, that this is a seriously under-rated lens!

Although it has a second generation Minolta body, the zoom optics are not typical of that generation, as the 62mm front glass does not rotate. The build quality is typically solid Minolta Gen.2 (plastic body, metal mount) and it weighs in just short of 500g.

Picture IQ is consistantly excellent across the full zoom range without any loss of clarity at either end. The colours are more saturated than kit lens, which suits me just fine. Maybe the bokeh is not as good as the 50mm f1.7, but I would still rate it highly.

Under extreme circumstances a tiny amount of CA may sometimes be apparent, however, unless you are looking for it you would never know.

This lens does have its quirks though. Difficult to explain, but it does not quite have the point and click characteristics of the kit lens. It requires a little more "intellectual effort", but ultimately it delivers far better results.

This lens also looks fantastic on the D5D! It looks pretty good on my new A700 as well and has become established as my default choice for walk-about.

Buying this lens was probably the best L40 I have ever spent!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: reiner.ulrich   review date: November-25-06  

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 28-135/4-4.5
Sigma 28-105/2.8-4
Sigma 75-300 DL (quite old)
Minolta 70-210/4.5-5.6

price paid:

150 USD (like new)

positive:

Sharp wide open
Good build quality

negative:

Not really wide in digital

comment:

I consider this lens to be the most overlooked one since start of the digital age. I use it as the walk-around on my 7D. Acquired a 28-135 in good condition recently but after test shooting I'll stick with the 28-105.

My model (SN 38401584) does not show the problems of the other reviewers, no zoom creep, good to very good sharpness wide open. In Photoshop at 200% Zoom for unsharped RAW pictures I couldn't tell which picture was taken with F4.5 and which is F8.0.

I took direct test shots against the "Compared to" lenses, all of them set to 105mm. The beercan looks very similar wide open (4.0) and needs to be stopped down to at least 4.5 to outperform the 28-105 a bit. On my test pictures there was an almost unnoticable touch of CA for the beercan while there was nothing for the 28-105.

My piece of the 28-135 at 4.5 is definitely softer than my 28-105 at 4.5. The 28-135 needs to be stopped down to look a tick better than the 28-105 - not enough difference though to carry the extra weight and thats why I will sell my 28-135 soon.

Both Sigmas looked terribly soft at 4.5, improved a lot at F8.0 but still were much softer than any of the Minoltas. The Minolta 70-210/4.5-5.6 is a real "cheapy" - as expected soft wide open (means F5.0 at 105mm) but very usable at F8.0, somewhere between the Sigmas and the other Minoltas (all of them at 105mm as mentioned). Time to get rid of all this cheap glass and save some space on the cupboard.

Yes, as a contribution to the crop factor the 28-105 is not really wide on the short end but gives you more range at the tele end. Very solid build, fast AF, good hood. Heavy.
All of the mentioned lenses were bought in used condition so there may be great differences to another piece of the same model - depending on the individual history of the lens.

Reiner U. from Switzerland

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: inthehills   review date: June-28-06  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Various nikkors, medium format mamiya's, minolta 28-135.

positive:

Sharper, when stopped down 1-2 stops (like all lens) it is a dependable performer.

negative:

Zoom creep when stored with lens pointed down.

comment:

Plenty good for landscapes, portraits and weddings. Durable metal construction. Renders nice colors. There is no perfect lens, but this model works well.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Wayne   review date: May-10-06  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

28-100 Minolta

positive:

Faster AF than 28-100
Relatively low cost
Compact
Focus to 0.5m in macro
Good build, metal mount

negative:

Stop down to f5.6 for sharp images
28mm is hardly wide on 5D

comment:

Great walk about lens at a low cost. Not as common as the inexpensive 28-100, but much better build quality. Flare is a problem if not using the hood. It is heavier than the 18-70 or 28-100, but is very solid and has a fast AF. One of the must have lenses for light travel.