Minolta AF 28-135 F4-4.5 reviews

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Titticec 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:
price paid:	120
positive:	colori e nitidezza unici
negative:	pesante e poco controllo flare
comment:	veramente un obiettivo particolare,forse perchè ha delle affinità con leica!i nuovi zeiss sono più plastici,più leggeri, hanno una tridimensionalità maggiore e un più buono controllo del flare ma ora che ho provato quest'obiettivo non voglio più toglierlo dalla fotocamera!!è come avere un mattone attaccato davanti, ma i colori, la nitidezza e il fascino che ha ne fanno un oggetto speciale!!da provare assolutamente!!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: TimarIuveo review date: January-26-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 50mm 1.7 Minolta 70-210mm 3.5-4.5 Minolta 35-70mm 4.0 Sigma 28mm 1.8
price paid:	285€ Mint
positive:	Versatile Range even on APSC Colors, Sharpness and Contrast Bokeh and F4-4.5 Good autofocus
negative:	MFD Nothing else.
comment:	Hard to find in good Condition. There is really no alternative to this lens which is why it's a very nice lens for travel and portraits.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 2	user: halloj151 review date: January-17-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	35-105/3,5-4,5 Original 24-85/3,5-4,5 35-70/4
price paid:	150 Euro (used)
positive:	Sharpness Colors Bokeh
negative:	Flare No lens shade Heavy!! A bit fragile with big, unprotected front element.
comment:	This has been my favorite lens since I bought it 5 or 6 years ago. Loved it on my 7D and love it even more on my a850! It has its limitations with flare and does not like to be directed straight into the sun and the MFD can be annoying but use it with awareness of its limitations and you will be greatly rewarded! Ill keep this lens as long as Im still with Sony. I have resently bought the 35-105 Original version and this gives very similar image quality. The range of the 28-135 is more useful though so for this reason the 28-135 will probably be my most used lens further on also. But as a travelling lens or on days when I want a little less weight to carry, the 35-105 might be used instead. When I want to be sure of quality though, the 28-135 will rule (together with my 85/1.4).

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: derekw review date: December-15-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 16-80 Sony 16-105 Sony 18-250 Minolta 28-105 RS
price paid:	197 GBP mint
positive:	Very sharp Colours IQ Build Bokeh
negative:	Flare - No hood MFD - 1.50m Weight
comment:	Great lens - but not sure it is worth double the price of the 28-105 RS.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Ome Kees 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:
price paid:	€200,--
positive:	Color, focusspeed, macro, range
negative:	No original hood available MFD
comment:	Superlens !

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 1	user: Vois review date: November-01-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-135 Sony 24-105 Sony 24-70 ZA
price paid:	300
positive:	none really except there is no modern day focal length equivalent for FF
negative:	BAD Flare, MFD, no lens hood available
comment:	This lens just doesn't work well with modern SLT cameras and shows its age, not much choice for FF in this range, but if you have APSC and especially SLT just get the wonderful new little 18-135 Sony. i also have the Sony 24-105 which is a better all-around lens for me on FF and more enjoyable to use when going lightweight. It would be nice if Sony would make a modern day SSM 24-135 G rated f4 lens. Until then, I stick with the 24-70ZA for FF for anything where IQ is a concern. I enjoy using old primes, but never felt the "love" for this lens. Unfortunately the good does not outweigh the bad with this lens for me.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: rockrom review date: July-09-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
positive:	great lens, good range good macro setting
negative:	quite heavy but i do not mind
comment:	i was looking for this lens for a long time. I hear great things and they are all true. My copy is very good. have not noticed too much flare.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: Bill73 review date: May-23-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony CZ 16-80 Sony 50/1.4 Minolta 50/1.7 Sigma 10-20/3.5 Tamron 90/2.8 MACRO Minolta 100/2.8 MACRO Tamron 18-200 Sony 75-300 Sigma 170-500 Sony 18-55 Sony 18-70
price paid:	$300 AUS$
positive:	Love the Build It's very sharp Colors are beautiful I just love the 'look' of this lens; there's something very reassuring about it Macro is actually pretty awesome (even if it is at the wide end)
negative:	It's very heavy Flare is hard to control Strange balance to camera with this lens fitted Autofocus, though fast, is strange. It seems to 'snap' into focus .... it's a little disconcerting.
comment:	Big, heavy, old-school lens. Love it. First time I used it I thought ... WOW. I know folk yabba on all the time about 'Minolta colors this and that', I must confess I was extremely skeptical, but this lens ... WOW. Colors really do come through much more saturated. Flare really is a shocker though and, apart from sheer heft, it's the only major issue with this lens. That said, it's easy enough to control as long as you factor it in when shooting. All-in-all a wonderful lens. Nice work Minolta!!

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 2	user: godsakes review date: April-14-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 24-135mm CZ 16-80mm
positive:	Sharp Minolta colours Decent AF speed
negative:	Bad flare Restrictive MFD Wish it started at 24mm Heavy
comment:	First of all this lens is sharp but I'm not convinced it's quite as legendary as some people claim. None the less the combination of sharpness, colour and bokeh means this lens produces a very pleasing image (more than the sum of it's parts, I suppose). The main downsides of this lens is it's extremely prone to flare made worse by the fact it doesn't come with a hood, it's actually has worse flare control than most wide angle lenses. The long MFD is restrictive and means this lens is really for outdoor use. Despite what some have said, I find the AF speed to be pretty decent (the tamron 24-135mm is far slower and if you want to know what slow is try lenses like the minolta 85mm). AF accuracy could be better however. The nearest FF rival is the tamron 24-135mm it has far fewer of the drawbacks, i.e. starts at 24mm has a much more usable MFD and isn't as prone to flare. However it's image quality isn't as good as the minolta and it's AF speed is annoyingly slow for a non-macro lens. There's no clear winner between the 2 IMHO both are flawed. APS-C users with the carl zeiss 16-80mm can be smug as the carl zeiss produces a sharper image than both lenses with none of the drawbacks (fast AF, flare resistant, good distortion control), maybe you would still prefer the minolta colours and build but it's no real contest the zeiss is easily the better lens.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: JD Hoang review date: February-03-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Min 70-210 F4 SAL 50F1.8
price paid:	250 USD (Used)
positive:	Very good built Nice Colours Sharp
negative:	Flare could be a problem Heavy Min focus distance
comment:	I have big problem with its Min focus distance. It's too long to take a picture, and sometimes I must to stand away more than its Min focus distance to take a picture with right focus. Quite quick AF. Macro mode is very useful.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: jcoffin review date: December-06-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28/2.8 35/1.4 50/1.7 100/2.8 Macro 135/2.8 Tamron 70-210/2.8
price paid:	350 USD (used)
positive:	Sharpness. Resolution. Detail. Color.
negative:	Definitely flare-prone. The minimum focusing distance is sometimes annoying. Physically somewhat fragile, so some copies apparently aren't the best.
comment:	It's hard to say much that hasn't been said many times already. Yes, it would be nice if it was smaller, lighter, faster, would focus closer, and never flared or showed any distortion. At the same time, it's already barely short of violating the laws of physics for a zoom with this range to be this sharp, especially one this old. On the other hand, the age barely matters -- if it was brand new today, this would still qualify as an unusually good lens.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: olegoo review date: November-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:	125 € (used)
positive:	Very sharp Contrast Good zoom range Well built Quite quick AF Looks nice on 7D Cheap for a very good Lens
negative:	No hood
comment:	It's perfect. Without a hood, it can show some flare, but I love the way it flares. " The price and quality of this great vintage Minolta lens makes it a must have for the cheap lineup " --> I do agree. Highly Recommend. PS: in Internet I've seen that the focal length to Max Aperture figures - f4-28-40mm, and f4.5-41mm to 135mm, but in my copy, i still have f4 28 - 60mm, from 70 - 135 f4.5.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: piano0047 review date: September-11-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 28-85, 35-105, Sony 50mm, Sony 135 STF, CZ 85mm 1,4
price paid:	200USD
positive:	Excellent colours, sharp at almost all settings,nice bouquet. Steadily built. Put it easy:gives stunning pictures...Not quite the results that the fixed focal length lenses gives, but not too far away, if you have enough available light.Balances perfect with a 850. Got mine cheap compared to quality it gives. Love this lens!!...but read the negative too..
negative:	Focuses not close enough!! Especially at wide settings this often disturbs and demands backup lenses. Irritating!!!!And then the point with a widespanning,all-in-one 28-135mm lens is somewhat reduced...
comment:	My standard lens on my a 850. But more lenses have to follow,unfortunately. From time to time also on a500. Would have been even more frequently used if it had better close focus limit at all focal settings. Nice colours! Recommend this. Not perfect, but so near for me...At 135 mm the sharpness is somewhat reduced, unfortunately. At 5,6 it is excellent at all focus lenght except 135, where it is still good.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3	user: MichaelMeyer review date: September-09-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 50mm f1.4 Nikon 50mm f1.8 Nikon 55mm f2.8 Nikon 20-35mm f2.8
positive:	Wide zoom range Sharp throughout range Non-rotating filter ring during focus Well balanced on larger camera
negative:	Long minimum focusing distance Weight
comment:	This a great lens that I constantly find frustrating. It could be everything that I need except that it isn't. The range covers ever focal length that I use in a package larger and heavier than every other lens that I own. Sharpness is good throughout the range, though under 50mm the minimum focusing distance limits its usefulness for me. Great lens unless you need to get close.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: jr7135 review date: July-25-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Big Beercan 75-300 and 50 prime
price paid:	380.00
positive:	Picture quality, good range,
negative:	Somewhat heavy
comment:	Took this lens to hawaii this summer and kept it on most of the time. Finished product is incredible. Not being a professional photographer and wondering what the pics would look like concern me. This lens beat out my 50 prime for sharpness. I will keep this lens and when it needs to be worked on, I will have a professional fix it. Great lens for the price.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Misiek review date: July-10-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony AF 28-75 F2.8 SAM SAL2875
positive:	Sharpness, Bokeh, Universal focal length, Macro lens
negative:	Weight, focus ring, Long min. focus distance
comment:	Extremly sharp, beutiful bokeh. I use it often for photographying flowers at the Botanical garden. Slow focus is not so important as I use it on manual. Slightky too heavy but rigid construction makes it stable. I had some mechanical problems but short visit to the service makes it working perfect.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: milan33 review date: June-23-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	MAF 24-105/3,5-4,5 MAF 28-105/4.0-4,5 Sony 18-55, Sony 18-70,
price paid:	151 EUR (used)
positive:	metal solid build, very stabile in your hands, produce good sharp image, sub-Macro is very useful, IF almost solid light
negative:	a bit too heavy, no lens hood dedicated or built in, CA could be a problem, 72mm filer size rare, not produced anymore, expensive,
comment:	I love this lens, its a great walk around lens,. almost solid light, very good solid lens, well kept in my hands makes possible to be used in low light and stabile without tripod, . I've tested up to now 3 examples, and the most sharp is a third one, I keep it for daily use. Quite fast AF, Internal focusing, have focusing ring closely to camera, if you find it buy it, its worth to have it, very stable lens, good legendary lens, easy to sold, beercan generation, quite

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 2	user: lakrids review date: June-13-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	270 euro
positive:	Sharp (for a zoom) when stopped down a little Heavy, nice build Good range on ff Intersting colors, not neutral as such Good focus speed
negative:	Heavy Some distortion Visible vignette fully open No lens hood Watch out for the sun ligth direction, flares Slight soft cornes fully open. Bokeh not better than ok. A little low in contrasr
comment:	Nice lens, for the price. Far from perfect, but if you can live with its weaknesses, is it a good lens with colors that I myself like.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3	user: alolio review date: May-15-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	MAF 50mm f1.4 MAF Beercan Sony Kit 18-55
price paid:	250usd
positive:	Sharp Bokeh Colors! Build
negative:	Flare (I suppose) AF Hunts
comment:	I was lucky enough to find a mint copy of this lens (with the "Passed" inspection sticker, love that) at a local camera shop. After many recommendations (and a few warnings) for this lens on Dyxum, I picked it up. First off, great purchase. I've ditched the kit lens, since this essentially fills that gap with a color profile more similar to my other lenses. MFD is long, as others have commented, but indoors, this has allowed me to get some great candids of my kids, as I've stepped back and zoomed in. It's heavy, but that isn't much of a concern for me. The colors are beautiful. Warm, detailed, distinct. Its ability to separate subjects from background, and the bokeh of that background are exceptional as well. For negatives: Chromatic abberration is significant, and my a330 has had difficulty finding and focusing on the correct subject with it.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 2	user: Amateur Sony Shooter review date: April-25-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 18-250
price paid:	CAD $200
positive:	Colour, AF speed, built, CA control
negative:	soft edge, weight,
comment:	I recently bought a used Minolta 28-135/4.0-4.5 lens, the famous almost-G "secrete handshake" lens. This lens has been extensively reviewed and praised (artaphot and dyxum here). I am using the lens on A55, with intension to go FF one day. My initial impression is very positive: big (72mm), heavy and well built, zoom ring is very smooth, AF is really fast, outdoor test shots (at f8) is really sharp, colour is so richly rendered, CA (PF) is surprised well controlled - it's still there but not worse than many modern lenses, correctible in PP. Upon further test (compare with my Sigma 18-250 travel zoom), its weakness revealed: 1) at 28mm, the edge softness at wider aperture is very noticeable, to achieve good edge sharpness I need to stop down to f8-11; 2) at 135mm end, center image is also very soft, again I need to stop down to f8-11. I also tested it on A850, the softness still there, actually more so at 28mm. Maybe I didn't get a great copy but even at f11, image is still not as sharp as my Sigma travel zoom. Likely I will sell it.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: MikeRG 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:	17-35 f2.8-4 24-85 f2.8-4 35-105 f4-4.5 Beercan Tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro
price paid:	200 GBP
positive:	Sharp Colour Build Secret Handshake 'look'
negative:	MFD
comment:	My copy of this lens has a few minor marks on the front element but nothing serious enough to adversely impact image quality. It's heavy, has a minimum focussing distance longer than a football field, noticeable distortion, dark corners and a comedy macro mode. But I love it more than any other lens in my collection. On my A900 I 'get it' now. In terms of sharpness it knocks the 35-105 and 24-85 into a cocked hat (my 35-105 has never been especially sharp but my 24-85 is stellar). The distortion and vignetting are easily corrected in LightRoom with a suitable lens profile. The colours are wonderful and the secret handshake magic is there in abundance, it's impossible to describe exactly what it is but it's there. I can't think of better walk around lens for full frame, my 35-105 is totally redundant now and will soon be heading for eBay.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: Mortenmb review date: April-03-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	CZ 16-80 Tokina 28-70 f2.6-2.8
positive:	Build quality! Sharpness! Focus
negative:	MFD Flare No hood Weight
comment:	This minolta lens is truly a "secret handhake". Though I have only tried it on APSC bodies, it gives amazing sharpness (detail), but contrast is lagging compared to the CZ. The MFD is not good, it's sort of deal breaker since you cannot you it freely indoors, at partys and so on. but for walkaround it's great, and it gives really nice colours. Did I mention that it's build from pure metal? it's quite heavy, but it's one af the best handling lenses I have tried. everything is smooth, and focus is fast, i just really like it. The bad: No hood.. this lens can definately flare, a hood would help tremendously here. there are workarounds though. Great lens, one i would love to try on FF, and one I also recommend!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3	user: blek review date: March-30-11
	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 F4 Baby Beercan Minolta AF 75-300 F4.5-5.6 Big Beercan
price paid:	IDR 2.750.000 (used)
positive:	Sharp!!! Minolta Colors! Build like a tank Fast and accurate focus Nice odd range Macro switch No hood
negative:	Flare, but it is normal CA, easy, no big deal Macro @28mm No Hood
comment:	The Minolta "Secret Handshake" is the honorary name known internationally for this epic lens. In Indonesia and few other south east asia, people call this lens "Zeiss Killer". Both deserve its name. Sharp all range, Definitely Minolta Colors, fast focus, good for low light, and built like a tank. You can kill a person with it. :D F*ck the flare and CA. Flare is normal in all lenses, and you can sometimes include it in your composition. CA is easily avoided using good filter. The range is perfect for travelling. Heavy? Well, compare this to the Big Beercan, it is not a big deal. The tank build paid off. Talk about the macro mode, this lens sure have one like the baby beercan, but @28mm, thus, make the area wide. For me, it fits more to close up human portrait and other large object with nice bokeh than shooting ant. And about the hood, well, the only thing about hood is, it boost the appearance of a lens, make it looks more beautiful. Sure, it help fighting flaring sometimes, but your hands are better flare wall. Oh, and about the appearance btw, this lens doesn't need it. Its shape is manly enough. No need to bother mount and unmount hood anymore when you want to shoot. Few people dislike it. I dunno why, but you can use a rubber hood if you want. It flaws, yes. But the combination somehow make the pictures produced from this lens almost looks like magic. Believe me. Leave your creative style at 0 0 0 and feel the "From the mind of Minolta".

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 2	user: incatatus review date: March-29-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 28-75 f2.8 Sigma 105 f2.8 Macro Beercan
price paid:	200 sterling
positive:	Colours Sharpness Focusing Speed
negative:	Noisy No hood, so lots of flare Some distortion (but not as much as my Tammy)
comment:	Bought a great example of this lens from a fellow Dyxumer and am absolutely astonished by the pictures I am getting. As a walk around lens it is the business, the quick rear focusing has let me get some shots that would have been impossible with any of my other lenses, and it is oh so sharp. It is also heavy and built like a tank, but I do not find this a problem as it is easier than carrying 3 primes around and it gets as good results. If you have full frame and can find a good example then do not hesitate to get it, there is nothing else like it. Now I just need to find a decent hood!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: rtuss review date: March-26-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
positive:	Fast and accurate AF Colors Great range Solid build Macro mode
negative:	No hood
comment:	Flare isnt a problem once you are experienced with the lens and given the conditions flaring in a picture can add character.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: DanXM review date: March-09-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 28mm f2.8 Minolta 35mm f2 Minolta 50mm Macro 2.8 Sony/Zeiss 85mm f1.4 Sony/Zeiss 16-35mm f2.8
price paid:	450 NZD (used)
positive:	Beautiful minolta colours Fast focussing Great focal range Quality materials Good price
negative:	AF clicks on A900 Minimum focus distance
comment:	Totally impressive lens. I bought this lens for travel but it has slowly been taking over some of my other lenses. Have even started using if for gigs & it focuses like a champ in low light, and with improvement in ISO technology f4 actually works. Technically this lens has a lot of 'faults': vignetting, corner softness, distortion... especially when compared to lenses like the CZ85 & 35mm f2. But I've been continually blown away with the unique shots that come out of this lens, the downsides seem to just add to the character and when you look at the whole shot, not just the pixels, it's awesome.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: anakin2178 review date: March-08-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	300
positive:	Build Sharpness Colors
negative:	No Lens Hood
comment:	I recently found this lens in EXCELLENT condition from a local seller. It focuses quickly, and takes some amazingly sharp photos. The lens is what I would consider in almost new condition. It doesn't look as if it has been used much. i LOVE the weight, feel and overall performance. To me the only major flaw was it's design to not have a lens hood, other than that I feel I got a wonderful deal on a superb lens.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: dumbasadoorknob review date: March-07-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Min 24105 Min 35105o Min 70210 Sony 70300G Tamron 28300
price paid:	USD 269 used
positive:	Minolta colors Clarity Internal focus
negative:	Heavy No lens shade Old, hard used
comment:	My copy of this lens is perfect at both ends, but quite unreliable in the middle. It clunks when it is put on the camera and the screwdrive is engaged -- and I suspect that is an indication of the internal focus slide being loose or worn. I have also found this to a lesser extent with my beercan. So I suspect that all older Minolta zooms that clunk will have a similar outcome. When it is good, it is as good as the other reviewers report -- but it is inconsistent. I dropped my 35/2 and camera on hard stone this winter -- and the lens shade smashed, and saved the lens -- so I'll never buy another lens without a hard plastic lens shade. This lens doesn't have a hard shade, a defect, and it would've smashed -- or worse, my camera would've died. My Min 35105o is better overall. My 24105, an attempted replacement, is a weak lens -- and here I suspect plastic parts. My Sony 70300G is better in almost every way -- except that it does not focus internally. Even with its problems, the 28135 is a far better lens than my son's Tamron 28-300. It would indeed be wonderful if there were a modern replacement for the length and f-stop of the 28135, since it is a perfect tourist lens. Extra thoughts: I had forgotten to mention that, in using the 35105o and the 28135, I have really come to dislike the position of the focus ring on the 28135. My little finger ( and sometimes my thumb) naturally fits at the intersection of lens and body -- and every time I move for a new focus, the ring twists and crimps my finger, or jiggles the lens, and it is really annoying. This means that the 28135 (even if my copy were perfect) is unattractive to me. Can I take it all back?? I've just discovered that my 28135 was set (and not, I think, by me) at -7 microadjust. Now that it's at +3, the lens produces edible results. I still don't like the focus ring or the lack of a lens shade, but oh, do I like the images now. It and my 100400 are now inseparable.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: speedlite review date: February-21-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 24-105 3.5-4-5 D
price paid:	230 € (used)
positive:	Excellent sharpness
negative:	Minimum distance focus Flare control
comment:	Exceptional definition. A little and heavy marvel.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: JVPsights review date: February-02-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 50mm f1.4 Minolta 70-210mm f4 "beercan" Sigma 10-20mm f3.5 EX HSM Sony DT 17-80mm
price paid:	325
positive:	Sharp Very rich colors Great range Macro is very cool Solid as a tank
negative:	Heavy as a tank! MFD (but very very worth it!!!!)
comment:	They call this lens "the secret handshake" for a reason. It's a diamond in the rough. The price/quality factor is really high on this lens. It has a great balance of sharpness and background bokeh. Colors absolutely pop out of the screen when I load them onto my computer. No color correction needed ever!! It difinately has that minolta saturated 3D effect. It's also built to last. Made of mostly metal and glass, it difinately feels sturdy in your hand. It has a military grade feel if that makes sense. It is quite heavy though. After a long shoot, you'll really notice it. Also it is very prone to lens flare. No stock hood is made for this lens. The macro feature is cool. Dispite the normal MFD, when switched into macro, the MFD is quite close. I've taken some very cool shots in this setting. There is no auto focus in macro, but come on guys, it's fun to manual focus every now and then. Plus I prefer manual in macro anyway Yeah, the 50mm is a bit sharper, but the shots I get from the 28-135mm are always more dramatic and larger than life when I'm at the 50mm range (for comparative reasons to the Sony prime). The beercan has a similar color effet (not as good though) and better bokeh, but the 28-135mm has a vibe that I can't put into words. Of course the beercan is a different range, I'm just compairing characteristics. The beercan is a great compliment to this lens.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: andrewlamwc review date: January-30-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tokina 270Pro 28-70 F2.6-2.8 Sigma 24-70 F2.8 DG HSM
price paid:	295 USD (Used)
positive:	Range, Fast focus, Great colours, Sharp at wide open
negative:	28mm not wide enough Flare
comment:	Become my camera cover. I can't found any FF lens in the system can out perform it with similar range. Sigma 24-70, 24-70ZA and 28-75G will won it in picture quality. But look at the price, it got the greatest QP score.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: JeffB95 review date: January-26-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Haven't owned anything to compare it with!
price paid:	250 GBP
positive:	Beautiful lens in all respects. Wonderful feel, with fast focus. Knock out colours. Deserves it's nickname!
negative:	Remember to keep your fingers away from the rear focus ring! No hood - use the Hand!
comment:	Most of the time it lived on my Dynax 7, and produced fantastic results, some were simply blistering! Range not that good on the A700, although I used it to good effect at my son's wedding. One bride & groom shot in late afternoon suffered the dreaded flare. However, it turned out to be their favourite shot, since the flare was crescent shaped & followed the curved sweep of the dress!

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: kaisar_didit review date: December-22-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	Rp 2,400,000.00
positive:	Fast Nice color Solid sturdy body
negative:	Heavy (But understandable)
comment:	It is hard for me to find this "Legend" lens, after searching trough many forums in my country. The moment I grab it, I realize that this lens will often calling me to take an adventure. AF very fast, in body focus sounding very soft, and I really like the way it produce sharp at aperture 5.6 and above (I found it softer below 5.6). It makes me more happ at 135mm when I take a picture of my friend at my office...I really love the details in it (please take a look at sample image, I name it "Remembering")

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: vaughaag review date: December-11-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 28mm f/2.8 Minolta 50mm f/1.7 Minolta 17-35 Minolta Beercan CZ 16-80
price paid:	£122 GPB Used
positive:	Superb IQ Super Sharpness Bokeh Superb Build Good Focus Colours Good Range
negative:	Weight Large
comment:	Superb Lens, I won this lens on eBay after reading several reviews and listening to some friends bigging it up. I now know why it is held is high regard. Its a great walk around lens even on APS-C, I would love to see how it performs on FF.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: glina review date: December-09-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	17-35 24-85 24-105 28-75 35/2 50/1.4
positive:	perfect range for FF it takes great photos if the conditions are right
negative:	it's hard to find a more flawed lens in this system ;-)
comment:	How do I rate this lens? For as long as I had it (5 years and counting), I really wanted to hate it. The flaring is a joke and no matter what you do, you will fall a victim of it sooner or later. The MFD of 1.5 meters makes you pull your hair out on lost opportunities. Then the colors and contrast are not really up to the level of 17-35G or Minolta primes if used on a gloomy day. But then from time to time I put it on, and in good conditions the photos it takes become instant classics. Everything seems just right about them, and for some reasons I cannot reproduce that effect with any other lens. The depth, bokeh, contrast and colors (actually natural and not overdone as with many other lenses) are truly unique. It's the combination that's right, not any feature on its own - this is pretty much what defines this lens. It’s like the 35/1.4G which compared to 35/2 is clearly inferior in any photographic test. It’s only when you look at the photos you know what’s it all about. 28-135 is a perfect range for FF and the lens is sharp and usable throughout at all apertures (blah blah soft corners at 28mm/f4, who cares!). The long end is great for portraits, where once again the weaknesses become strengths (reduced micro-contrast). I don’t think Minolta actually planned this lens to be what it is. It just came out right and we are lucky to have it in your system. The 28-135 cannot be easily recommended, as it’s not that versatile and has its obvious flaws. Even though, I think everybody should at least try it. I rated it 5/5 in all categories, but that’s only because the categories are wrong. Look at the photos not at the numbers, and then make your decision!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: jdkeck review date: September-14-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	tamron 28-75
price paid:	160 usd
positive:	color, sharpness wide open
negative:	mfd
comment:	picked this lens up from a small camera shop for 160 usd, i normally keep my a700 on "deep" setting, when i first started shooting with it, i looked at the pictures and thought, "what is going on with my camera", then i took it off deep and put it on neutral and realized the depth of the colors from this lens, also it handles high iso's very well. this has become my main lens on my camera, yes, the mfd is something to get used to, but not impossible to work around. I now have the a850 and this lens is a good range for ful frame, did some iniitial tests, the images look great.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: crimemastergogo review date: September-08-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 17-50 Minolta 70-210
price paid:	200 USD (used)
positive:	Range Colors Build
negative:	No hood hence poor flare control Hunts, useless indoors Needs at least 1.5 meters plus to focus correctly
comment:	Let's start with the positives. This unit is built like a tank. Sure it's weighty but feel wonderful and steeped in japanese craftsmanship. Has beautiful and warm colors, typical to minolta. It starts to get sharp when stopped down and focus is further from 1.5 mts. Great range for a walkaround lens. Negatives for me were; auto focus is a bit slow. Flare control is rubbish. Overall it is a great lens when managed correctly. Not something you can just pick up, shoot and expect great results.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 2	user: spada review date: September-06-10
	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 Sony 24-105/3.5-4.5 Sigma 24-70/2.8 Tamron 17-50/2.8
price paid:	100.00 (used)
positive:	Color Color Color Sharpness Fast focus! minimal CA (not as bad as others make it out to be)
negative:	excessive Flare rotating front element on zooming 1.5m MFD
comment:	I don't really know where to start with this lens, but it is becoming my favorite zoom lens ever. I picked it up for $100 at a local camera shop that definitely did not know what they had. Once you get past the fact that there is a 1.5 meter minimum focus distance (when not in macro mode) you will be amazed by this lens' sharpness, colors, and overall look of the image. It produces a very special feel to images that cannot be explained. People can call "3D" but it creates images that are instant classics. Whoever first came up with the name 'secret handshake' described it perfectly in those two words. Sharpness from wide open is superb, and it might need to be stopped down to f/5.6 at 135mm. I never hesitate to use this lens wide open on my A850. Distortion can be a slight issue, but it can be easily corrected, and if you can correct it with your software, this lens is a great landscape lens for a FF camera because of the sharpness and colors that it produces. Blue skies stay DEEP, green grass is FRESH, and red bricks explode out of the screen and paper. The macro switch is fun. You can zoom really close at 28mm and it creates a unique perspective. I think the lens gets even sharper in macro mode, as you can leave it at f/4 if you want a really shallow DOF. I have learned how to manipulate it to where I don't use it for macro shots, but I've gotten portraits out of it in macro mode. More on the negatives now. The front element rotates when zooming, which is very odd, and makes it impossible to use a petal shaped hood. This lens doesn't even come with a circular hood, and I think I know why. Even if you used a hood, the flare from this lens can simply ruin a picture. I think even an LED flashlight could make this lens flare. Surprisingly, the flare doesn't completely ruin the contrast of the picture, but the multiple rainbows across the image render it useless. I feel bad that I had to rate the flare control so low because it made my average score for the lens a 4.0, and it really deserves better. Zoom creep is only bad in the middle of the zoom range. But when you are zoomed to 28mm or 135mm, it stays locked in place. The focus makes a loud SLAP at both ends of the focus range, which is slarming. With all that I have said (probably too much) I would recommend this lens to anyone with a full frame camera, film or digital. Ignore the claims that it is too soft or has too much CA in the corners because what this lens delivers across the entire frame is impossible to beat at around $250.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: JamesAlpha850 review date: September-03-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta AF24mm f2.8 Minolta AF50mm F1.4 Sony AF100mm f2.8 macro Minolta AF28-85 f3.5-4.5 Minolta AF35-105 f3.5-4.5 Minolta AF70-210 f4-4.5 Tamron AF28-300mm XR f3.5-6.3
price paid:	425.00 USD
positive:	IQ is superior Classic Minolta Sharpness Classic Minolta colors Fast automatic focus Great range for FF walk-around Macro is useful Bokeh is smooth Great optics and build Minimum CA
negative:	My copy has slight lens creep. Considering its age and weight, I think that minimal creep is acceptable. The MFD limits its use in close proximities.
comment:	The Secret Handshake of the old Minolta lenses, it is rumored to be a precursor to the G lenses of the mid-eighties. What is certain is that the Minolta AF 28-135 performs color magic on command. This objective is all about IQ. In spite of its age, my copy is in great condition and functions as a precision optic should. Truly, it is an ideal walk-around zoom for events, such as outdoor jazz concerts. The rear automatic focusing ring is especially snappy, a bit strange to my fingers at first, but totally fast. I love the S.H.'s saturated colors and the nearly creamy bokeh. Stopped to f5.6, this zoom is a worthy competitor for sharpness with the 100mm macro and 50mm 1.4, two lenses I consider as benchmark optics. Compared to my zooms, the Handshake is sharper than the Beercan and nearly the same as the 35-105. Well-balanced on the full-frame Alpha, the combination of the 28-135 and the A850 make it a heavy-weight contender, especially in light of its performance in reviews paired with the much coveted CZ24-70. To be fair, I can only make comparisons with my personal array of A-mount lenses. It is comparable in sharpness to the 35-105. IQ appears to be quite similar to the 35-105, which I am finding to be a stellar walk-around zoom with great range on the FF. Lots lighter, too. The 28-135 has a greater zoom range and weighs less than the CZ. On a full-frame camera, 28mm is a wide enough focal length for most compositions. This lens renders razor-sharp 3D-like images across the frame. The zoom-macro feature creates usable images at close MFD. While flare can be present when directing toward the sun, I tend to avoid this angle as with all the old Minolta lenses. A rubber screw-down hood would serve to shield this lens from the sun, although I seldom use mine. The S.Handshake deserves every consideration in its class as it's purchase makes perfect sense for FF Sony Alpha photography.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: terenz review date: August-29-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 28-85mm Minolta 135mm f2.8
price paid:	320 CAD (used)
positive:	Good walkaeound lense sturdy built
negative:	Weight zoom creep bit dark lense rotates on zoom
comment:	Good range coverage. Used it as a sole lense (had a fisheye too but that's a different creature) on a European trip and it covered everything I needed it for. Only problem is it is a bit dark, and very heavy! Just about the same weight as an A850 body and combined weight for both is just about 4 lbs.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: DaveJonT review date: August-25-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 28-70f2.7 EX DF
price paid:	USD179.00 (used)
positive:	Very sharp from f4. excellent contrast, especially for a zoom.
negative:	Both of mine exhibited some zoom creep. Often, when the camera hung from my neck, the lens would zoom to 135, on its own.
comment:	To date, the lenses I owned (2, 1 for me, 1 for my brother), produced some of the cleanest images I have ever shot. Sharpness is excellent at f4; the point of buying faster than 4.5 lenses, is the speed. If the lens is not good wide open, why have it, or pay the extra for it? Were I to buy another zoom, it would either be one of these again, the Contax 35-70f3.4, or maybe one of the ZA zooms. No other zooms even cross my mind. Update 2012 - Years after owning it, I would have to say I would likely not buy one again. It is a decent, but very large lens, that doesn't focus close enough, and is actually pretty slow. I know compared to a lot of the f5.6 or f6.3 zooms it is faster, but it really isn't. I have owned previously and own now Minolta, Zeiss and Leica lenses ranging from f1.2 to f2.8, all of which were designed to actually be used wide-open, and be at their best 2 stops down. That means they are at their best at f2.8 or f4, not at f8 like most of the zoom lenses you will find available today. That difference means lower ISO's, faster shutter speeds, and a decrease in camera-shake worries. This lens was good in its day, but don't buy it because you think you will be getting something you are not. I think its status as the "Secret Handshake" needs to be left in the past.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: Jose review date: August-08-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 35-105nn (New) Minolta 50mm 1.7 (New) Minolta 28-80mm Xi Minolta 24-50mm (old) Minolta 70-210mm F 3.5-4.5 Sony 18-70mm Kit Sigma 135-400mm Apo
price paid:	USD $ 70 (used)
positive:	Sharp! Sharp! F 4-4.5 excellent in F4 Filter 72mm
negative:	Need a Hood Flare Weight
comment:	Is a excellent lens. I bought in aution for argentine pesos 270.. bargain!!.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: minolta_mutley review date: August-01-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	sigma 12-24, k-m 28-75 f2.8, 28-105 f3.5-4.5, 35-70f4, 80-200 2.8, sony 70-300G
price paid:	175€ (2nd)
positive:	Minolta colours,long range, sharp
negative:	weight
comment:	If you find one - test it out - if it's a good one - buy it! I got lucky - i had to do some minor cleaning inside myself - now it's a perfect lens to me - (tested on A700/minolta 5D - so only cropped factor!). If you want it - you'll have to kill me. It's always in the bag when i'm going out for landscape & building photographing together with the 12-24 + the 70-300G.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: SChurchill review date: July-30-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta AF 35-105 F3.5-4.5 Beercan Big Beercan
price paid:	265 GBP used
positive:	Build Range
negative:	Bad CA Ghosting Flare even with after market lens hood. MFD Focus ring location Macro at wrong end of range
comment:	I've really tried to like this lens but I just can't get a decent image out of it. I assume I have a duff copy. In my experience the sharpness is rather average and flare control is non-existent. Even with a lens hood and shading the front element images appear washed out and halation is apparent. I tried using it to take photos of Brighton pier at night only to find the most horrendous ghosting when viewing the downloaded images. The macro feature being it the wide end is also frustrating. it makes the minimum focus distance much more noticeable than with the 35-105 where it is at the other end and seems more natural to me. My 35-105 seems to out perform the 28-135 on every level being much sharper, less prone to flare and CA and I tend to use it much more. I've not given up completely on it and think that getting it serviced may improve performance. I've also noticed it performs better with film, but then that is what it was designed for.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: leung0323 review date: July-24-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	260 USD
positive:
negative:
comment:

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Janneman1967 review date: June-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:	175 EUR (used)
positive:	Color, sharp
negative:	Heavy
comment:

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Cauldfield review date: June-10-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- Minolta "Beercan" 70-210mm - Minolta 100-200 f4.5 - Sigma 18-125 - Nikon 18-105 - Canon 70-200 L Usn f4
positive:	- The Best Minolta lens I ever tried. - Sharpest zoom lens what I have ever tried. (better than classic Beercan 70-210) - Excellent build quality. - Awesome IQ.
negative:	- I can't mention anything, okay it HAS a weight, but it's not for little girls - that's all.
comment:	An old dream of mine to have this lens. I bought it on the net, and it's in PERFECT condition. If You want a REAL quality zoom lens, with outstanding IQ, than don't need to search for other. Here is Your "body", here is Your choice :) First of all, It's "built like tank", but (okay it's relative) in my opinion it looks like good. Well.. It has a size and weight.. But in my opinion, every quality lens has a weight, so You have to carry it. So? If it's too much (about 700g) than don't buy it :) It's so simple. But when You start to use it... You will absolutly forget the weight. I promise You.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: paso144 review date: May-26-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	24-105D 35-105 org. beercan big beercan 135 prime
price paid:	50 euro incl B&W CPF
positive:	Sharpness 3D feeling to pictures Build quality Charisma (72mm of glass)
negative:	MFD F/4-F/4.5
comment:	Loving the beercan range this was a must have for me and I got it for a steel. Perfect outside walk around lens. Less useful inside because of the MFD and F/4. Sharpness is excellent and IQ is really special with that typical 3D quality I also get from my 135mm prime.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Cool daddy review date: May-18-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Min 35-70 Min 50/F1.7 Sig 18-200
price paid:	150 euro
positive:	Pictures have 3D look warm colors
negative:	focus ring close to cam body MFD to big Only F4 as biggest aperture
comment:	What can i say more about this lens... it's a 72 mm big window to bring the light to my sensor and i love how it gets there!! Only thing is that with 1,5 meter minimal focus distance it's not so good for indoor shooting, and it also only F4.... the tube is soooo BIG , why is this not F 2.8 or even 1.7 ??! [edit] i have compared it to my new minolta 28/F2.8 , and i must say that the 28 mm is waaaay better than this one.... i have a very bad copy of the 28-135.......

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: terenz review date: April-30-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28-85mm F3.5-4.5 16-80mm CZ
price paid:	320 USD
positive:	Build Range coverage
negative:	long minimum focus (compared to 28-85) when not in macro weight!
comment:	Just got this lense and still testing it out. Did some close-up shots of tulips and peonies. The shots seem as sharp as the CZ 16-80 with nice colour too. Very similar to the 28-85. Weight is heavy but it nicely balances the weight of a A850 So far, haven't had flare issues but I've had the sun to my back. Review revision will probably follow

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: Yugus review date: April-18-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Carl Zeiss 24-70mm F2.8
price paid:	350 CAD (Used)
positive:	Very sharp at the centre Covers a good range (Very good walk around lens) Useful macro mode to counter act the long MFD F4-4.5 (Other brand 28-135mm lenses are F3.5-5.6)
negative:	Corners are quite soft even stopped down on the wide end Noticeable distortion on FF Macro mode only works on the wide end (Not really a negative as all minolta lens with a macro mode is like this and better to have it then not) Bokeh quite harsh in my opinion No dedicated lens hood
comment:	This is a very solid lens that was first introduced back when Minolta introduced the A mount. Even by today's standards this lens preforms quite well. This pretty much a one of a kind lens as even today no other company makes a 28-135mm lens at F4-4.5 as all other companies use F3.5-5.6... For the price this lens normally sells at and how it performs this is one of the must have lenses for people looking to just carry around one lens. On a APS-C body the lens is a great all around performer even on full frame bodies. It even has a fun to play with and useful macro mode with turn the MFD from 1500mm to 246mm. Though the corners on this lens is quite soft even stopped down to F11 on the wide end when using a FF body camera. Also barrel distortion is quite noticeable when using it on a FF body. And one thing this lens has been known for is its poor flare control and even so it has such problems it does not come with its own dedicated lens hood. And in my opinion the bokeh is a little to harsh for my tastes. Also people complain about the lens suffering from zoom creep though it does come with it own "zoom lock" just switch the lens over to macro mode and it will not creep. A very good performer that is well worth the money if you do not need the extra stop of light. that the CZ 24-70mm F2.8 or Minolta 28-70mm F2.8 provides. As this lens preforms just as well.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: cruiser review date: April-07-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 28-70 2.8 EX DG Minolta 35-105 RS Minolta 35-200 xi Minolta 135 2.8 Minolta 100 2.0
price paid:	220
positive:	feels solid center sharpness
negative:	not sharp off-center zoom creep
comment:	I'm not impressed. Because of the good reviews I bought this lens in good shape. I have tested it indoors open and at f8 and compared it to the other lenses. While sharpness was good in the middle it was a lot worse off-center. I was positively surprised by the Minolta 35-200 xi in this shoot-out concerning colors and sharpness. I have sold the 28-135 again.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 2	user: acemclynch review date: April-07-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 50mm f1.4 Beercan 70-210mm
price paid:	L160
positive:	Amazing walkabout lens on FF Wide angle plus a decent zoom Super Sharp Nice Colours Very little CA
negative:	Zoom Creep MFD F4 minimum
comment:	I must say I love this lens on FF. It's a great walkabout lens. I have been wondering if I should go for a f2.8 and sell this but I have thought about it and there is no way I am doing it. 100% zoom in the image reveals how sharp it is. Cant beat it. Was using my beercan recently and my 28-135mm really beats it hands down. Much sharper and very little CA if any. Only prob is flare which can be sorted with your hand or a hood. In low light situations I just use my nifty 50... sorted! I had this lens on my A350 but it makes much more sense on my A900. Love it!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: hooni review date: April-06-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	$325 USD (used)
positive:	Range Colors Bokeh Fast AF
negative:	No lense hood Zoom creep if not fully retracted
comment:	I love this lense but it does not get to stay on my camera often as I have fallen in love with primes. I keep my Sigma 70 2.8 on alot and when it is not on my 70-200 is. The colors are perfect and my copy seems sharp across the whole frame at max aperture. No complaints here and would recomend.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 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:	Sigma 17-35 F2.8-4 EX DG Sony 20 F2.8 CZ 24-70 F2.8 Sony 24-105 F3.5-4.5 Tamron 28-75 F2.8 Minolta 35-70 F4 Minolta 35-105 F3.5-4.5 Old Minolta 50 F1.7 RS Sony 50 F1.4 Minolta 70-210 F4 CZ 85 F1.4 Sony 100 F2.8 Macro Minolta 100-300 F4.5-5.6 APO Minolta 135 F2.8
price paid:	GBP 230 I think
positive:	- Images have a special look...really lovely colour - Probably the best "walkabout" lens for full frame - Fast AF - Bokeh is smooth
negative:	- Wide open, not great sharpness on full frame. Especially corners at 28mm very soft - Worst lens I have for CA - MFD 1.5m - Visible barrel distortion at 28mm
comment:	This is quite a unique lens. It was not love at first sight. It took a while for me to warm to this lens, but now I love it. Makes a great walkaround lens on full frame with almost 5x zoom range, the only one of its kind with good enough quality. At first, comparing to my Tamron 28-75/2.8 I disliked the not great sharpness below F.6, awful CA especially with tree branches, limiting MFD, distortion, and low contrast. However, the images produced by this lens have a kind of special sometimes 3D quality, with really great colour. When I started shooting RAW, low contrast became a non-issue as it's easily tweaked. And when taking landscapes, I stop down to F8 or F11. However, the special look of this lens is NOT easy to replicate, i.e. I can't make my images taken with the Tamron look like this lens. I think a lot of hype for this lens was created by the comparisons on Artaphot.ch where it outperformed CZ24-70 etc, however I think Stephen has an freakishly good copy. I have compared with CZ24-70 and it blows away the 28-135 for sharpness. Looking at sample images other people have taken using the 28-135 on dyxum/flickr they do not look any sharper than my copy. Therefore, do not expect your 28-135 to equal the sharp across entire frame wide open on full frame that Stephen's copy seems to exhibit. I think anyone who rated this lens a 5 for sharpness has not used a CZ prime 85 or 135 :-) AF is faster than all my other lenses except 135/2.8, this is very welcome... Compared to the much cheaper 35-105 Old, there is very little in it in terms of IQ. However, the 28-135 range is much more convenient. Compared to the beercan, there is very little in it in IQ except at 135mm where beercan is sharper. However, 28-135 has much faster AF.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: dominik review date: March-29-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	zeiss 24-70/2.8
price paid:	about $300
positive:	Quite good optically, very fast, solid build
negative:	minimal focus distance flare control noisy no lens hood
comment:	Quite nice, cheap lens. Not so good flare control, also focus distance could be better. On the other hand it's quite good lens on full frame cameras.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 3 build: 2 distortion: 3 flare control: 2	user: Romeo333 review date: March-23-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	50/1,4 24-70HSM
price paid:	$150
positive:	-Decent Range -Sharp images -Made of Metal(Heavy)
negative:	-Clunky -Zoom Creep -20+ years -Rear focusing is a little getting used to -No Hood -Hunts in low light -Slow focus
comment:	Very overrated. It's a decent lens to have, maybe to travel (If its lost or stolen, no problem). I bought it because of the hype, it does produce decent sharp images but not G quality. I Much rather use a 50/1,4.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: rabbit review date: March-21-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 Vario-Sonnar T* Minolta 100-200mm F4.5 Minolta 35-105mm F3.5-4.5 Minolta 28-85mm F3.5-4.5 rs Minolta 35-70mm F4.0 Beercan
price paid:	250
positive:	good image quality, quick autofocus, very sharp
negative:	no original hood
comment:	I have been using this lens since last year. The optics, glasses are superb.The colors are very vivid, saturated and contrasty.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3	user: brororn review date: March-13-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 28-70/2.8 G K-M 17-35/2.8-4 Sony Zeiss 24-70/2.8
price paid:	280 EUR (used)
positive:	Extremely sharp at smaller apertures, build is xtremely good
negative:	Heavy, close focusing distance, corners very soft at 28 mm wide open (field curvature)
comment:	A heavy walk-around lens, gives very good results when stopped down to at least F/5.6. Has a strong field curvature at 28 mm so cornes become soft, but in good light you get nice results when stopped down to F/8. In mid range you do not need to stop down so much to get razor sharp pictures.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Sean21 review date: March-09-10
	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 EX DG
price paid:	349 USD used
positive:	Very sharp Nice colors Good bokeh Macro mode
negative:	MFD Focusing ring too close to body
comment:	After reading all the reviews (especially Kurt Munger's), I started looking for this lens. Shortly after using it I put my Sigma 24-70 2.8 EX DG Macro on ebay. It is 50g heavier than the Sigma, so not a big change really. I do loose 1 stop but it makes up for it with it's longer range (I dont mind the 4 mm loss on the low end). It is sharp at f4, nice bokeh and colors on my 7D. I bought a 3 stage rubber hood for $7 to take care of the no hood issue. Was my walk around on my a700. I tried it on the a77 and it was fast to lock focus even in video mode. I think it was faster than the 16-50 (in video) but the mic pics up the noise when it focuses.Love this lens on my a900.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: snajper review date: March-05-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minoltas Beercan 35-70 F4 100-200
price paid:	USD200
positive:	Very sharp Excellent colour
negative:	Heavy no lens hood
comment:	I bought this lens few months ago but didn't have a chance to test it out until now. and WOW it is magnificent. It produces very rich contrasty colours. Just Amazing. Every photo comes out really impressive. My 6 primes are staying home lately bcs this is very sharp zoom lens.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: Glynk review date: February-21-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 24-85mm F3.5-4.5 Minolta 28-85mm F3.5-4.5 Minolta 70-210mm F4
price paid:	L170 eBay
positive:	Edge to edge sharp Life and colours Solid
negative:
comment:	This lens is everything they say it is. Yes is is heavy, yes it is prone to flare, yes it does not focus that close. Yes it is one of the best lenses ever produced. Sharp and that Minolta first generation lens life and colour. Get one fast, the prices are rising due to the A850 and A900. I found a lens hood that fits, a Mandee 72mm metal wide angle lens hood. Sometimes a very slight shadowing in the corner.

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: woodmen review date: February-10-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 50mm f/1.7 Sony 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 Minolta 200mm f/2.8 G APO
price paid:	220 USD (used)
positive:	Sharp!! low distortion build Quality Low CA Good Contrast
negative:	Focus ring at the wrong place Long MFD Prone to flare Balance on a a100 (front heavy) Stiff zoom ring (could be a bad copy) No dedicated lens hood
comment:	When I recieved this lens 1 week ago, I was a little dissapointed by it's performance. I did all my tests indoor with bad lighting because it's soooo cold outside here (Canada). The images where soft mostly because of long shutter speed and because flare from the windows. One thing that bugged me too was the location of the focus ring. I am used to hold the lens near the camera mount (especially with a heavy lens). I have to be cautious because if I continu to hold the lens near the camera mount (on the focus ring), I will eventually break the focus mechanism. BUT... When I decided to go outside to test it, it blew my mind. Sharpness is very very good for a zoom especially at that price. The contrast is also on the high side. If you plan on using it outside (or inside with a decent flash), you can't go wrong with this lens.

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: PeteMag review date: February-09-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tokina 20-35 AFII Beercan Big beercan Kit lens 18-70 Minolta 100mm f2 Tamron 28-75 f2.8 Minolta 50mm f1.7 Minolta 50mm f1.4 Minolta 80mm-200mm HS G
positive:	Sharp when open Great range on FF Build Quality Colours Macro added value Internal focus in rear
negative:	Flare Soft corners FF at 28mm f4 sometimes not enough No hood Minimum focus distance Rear focus can get in the way
comment:	There is plenty to love about this lens, but before you buy you should consider the negatives. The Minimum focus of 1.5m is too long and often causes a hinderance. If you want a zoom to cover low light then any 2.8 might be a better option. There's flare thats sometimes difficult to control - especially as it came without a hood. The rubber hood I have shows in the corners of the image on FF up to around 35/40mm. Rear focus although quick can get in the way of how I hold the lens. On FF I have noticed two versions of the lens exhibiting soft corners at 28mm wide open. This is unlikely to pose a problem in real life use - when do you use it at 28mm and f4 and want sharp corners? Thats the faults out of the way, but the positives are well documented. Sharpness of a G lens is a fair comment, build quality and engineering is amazing - just look at the way the zoom moves for a start! Focusing is quick due to the rear focus. At 28mm its sharp wide open in the middle, getting sharp in the corners from f8/11, from 40/50mm up its sharp all over at f4/4.5, the macro is useful (including to focus shorter than 1.5m!). The range is brilliant on the a900, a true perfect lens in good light for what people call walkabout (or I call don't want to bother switching lenses all the time). Colour is good, although not quite up to the 100mm f2 or 80-200 HS G. Its a bargain at todays prices, if Sony released this now they'd call it a G and my guess would be L600-800.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: lumajr review date: January-29-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	MINOLTA AF 24-85 MINOLTA AF 24-105D MINOLTA AF 28-105 MINOLTA AF 28-85 TOKINA 28-70/2.6-2.8 .......
price paid:	about USD 200
positive:	REALLY SHARP! VERY quickly focusing on a900 BEAUTIFULL saturated colors
negative:	FLARE - but you can use your hand like sun hood :) MFD 1.5m - but the macro switch is really nice - 25cm nothing else - weight is acceptable for the zoom 28-135 and the aperture 4-4.5
comment:	This is perfect standart zoom for full frame cameras, practical focal lenght range 28-135, very good aperature f4-4.5, beautifull "old minolta" saturated color, SHARP across the frame at all focal lengths, even at f4 or f4.5. and even in corner! IMHO for the price USD 200-400 you can´t get better standart zoom lens for a900/a850. Recommended!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 2	user: zoidberg review date: January-22-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 28-75/2.8 Sigma 24-70/2.8
price paid:	350 USD
positive:	Sharpness Bokeh Awesomeness
negative:	Some CA Long MFD, obnoxious macro mode No hood, flare sensitive
comment:	This lens is every bit as awesome as everyone says. If the opportunity to get one ever comes up, take it. To start with the bad things: it can flare badly, but not in all situations. I've taken some remarkably useful shots even with the sun in the frame, whereas some other shots have been completely ruined. My guess is that it is dependent on the angle of light, or something like that. The lack of a hood isn't exactly helping either. It also exhibits slight CA, but it is sharp enough to be easily removed if needed. The 1.5 m MFD can be a real problem sometimes, especially for indoor shots at the wide end. Since the MFD stays (almost) the same throughout the zoom range, the only way to get real closeups (e.g. close headshots) is to use a longer focal length. The macro mode helps, but it is of limited use as it only covers distances between approximately 15 and 30 cm. Unless the macro mode hack is applied, MF is the only way to go, but the big and comfortable zoom ring can (sort of) be used for focussing in macro mode since the lens isn't parfocal. Now to the good things: This lens is freakishly sharp. Wide open it is only sharp, but stopped down it is nothing short of stunning. Most notably, the corner sharpness is quite unlike anything I've seen in a standard zoom. The colours are of classic Minolta character, giving very pleasant results. And the bokeh is lovely, not as good as on my Sigma 50/1.4 but definitely on a par with many other really good primes I've used - and it outshines most of the zooms. Focussing is very fast, haven't been timing it, but it feels about as fast as my 28/2.8. The focus ring is weirdly placed, but I got accustomed to it quickly. To sum things up, this would probably be the best lens in the whole wide world if it had better MFD, a hood and better flare control. Instead, it is a fun and quirky lens capable of awesome results under the right circumstances. Which is more than enough reason to get one, but any expectations should be kept on a realistic level.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: rohit review date: January-21-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	250 USD (used)
positive:
negative:
comment:

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: rpmpics review date: January-15-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	minolta 50mm f1.7 minolta 35-70mm minolta 35-80mm
price paid:	L10 gbp
positive:	price luck shone on me found for ten pounds in a charity shop build. built like a tank colour.lovely minolta colours
negative:	none. stunning lens for price
comment:

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: Shootist review date: January-15-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	I think I've owned ALL (then perhaps sold some) of the Minolta Consumer lenses by now!
price paid:	$270
positive:	Well, I guess it's solid...and also it sold for more than I bought it for! yea!
negative:	Price Not as sharp as 35-105 older version Over-hyped
comment:	I’ll probably be accused of trying to bring the incredible prices these lenses are getting these days DOWN by saying this but: what IS the big deal about this lens guys?! I found it heavy, not so sharp, and the zoom creep nearly broke my lens mount! Truth is, this lens was about 25th out of perhaps 40 Minolta lenses that I went through as I built my collection last spring and summer (2009) And what a fun build is WAS! As many of you now know; Minolta consumer lenses are WAY undervalued and if you’re like me – you never really loose any money buying them. I sold 90% of the ones I bought for more money…. I WANTED to like this lens but it failed all my tests shooting on a tripod at f5.6 and 250 shutter on a new Alpha 350,with IS off Now, maybe it was unfair to test it versus the 35-105 1985 old version but – THAT was the lens I was thinking this one could REPLACE in my bag…. Heck based on your combined reviews HERE I thought I was going to be replacing my 3 (20,24,28) Wide angle primes and my 2.8 135 prime too! Shoo wee! It wasn’t to be, and now someone else has the copy of this lens that I tested…and yes I got the BIG money you all are paying…made a few bucks on it. I guess that’s my main positive – it made me $45… Could have been a bad copy but I don’t think so…it was ok, not ugly, just not in a league with the lenses above. !!!2/2/2010 Update!!! WOW….wow. Wow. I just got my next copy of this lens. It’s totally unmolested unlike the last one; nice tight zoom -and- NO FUGGING ZOOM CREAP - it’s sitting on my desk right now, upright, fully extended, and just waiting for me to put it back to 35mm or whatever! Plus, this one is nice to look at. This one still had it’s virgin filter on the front (a Tiffen 812, no less!) and I almost hated to ‘break it’s cherry’ when I took that light stealing artifact off it for the first time since 1986....but, it was REAL good ; ) I almost thought there was water floating on the front element...literally perfect ; ) What about SHARPNESS?! All that you need to know is that it had identical center sharpness and some SHARPER corners than my Minolta f1.4 50mm prime at f4.5 in very scientific testing!!!! But….oh please…don‘t drive up the prices…sigh. My only very weak gripe is the rear focus...we've been conditioned all our lives to brace our cameras by holding the rear of the lens for stability (and lower shake/shutter speeds) and....someone at Minolta back in the day decided to CHANGE that?! It's all good ; 0 I’ve changed my scores…. -Shootist

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: derekw review date: January-12-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 28-85, 28-105s, 35-105s
price paid:	L112 GBP
positive:	Sharp across the frame at all focal lengths Colour Versatility
negative:	No lens hood
comment:	Super lens. Doesn't even feel excessively heavy. Recommended

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: ghmcs review date: January-05-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 16-105 f/3.5 (APSC only) Minolta 28-105 f/3.5 Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 Tamron 24-135 f/3.5
price paid:	330 USD (used)
positive:	extremely good image quality, quick autofocus for this zoom range, high performance-to-cost ratio
negative:	size and weight, oddball filter size, zoom creep, long 'minimum' focus distance
comment:	I wasn't quite prepared for the large size and weight of this lens. I'd much rather carry the smaller, lighter Sony 16-105 around all day. That said, for a 25 year old lens, the performance is extremely good even by today's standards. The camera's view TTL is very bright and clear. And, for full frame, what other choices are there in this very useful zoon range, especially at this price? Minor annoyances - the odd 72mm filter diameter, and zoom creep. In fact 'creep' doesn't quite describe it; let the lens dip much below horizontal and the zoom just takes off. UPDATE for full frame digital. After using this lens for a year, I'm still impressed by it's optical performance. Sharpness across the entire image, resolution and color are superior to both of the Tamron lenses listed above. It's not, however, better than Minolta's own 28-105. So, I'm ready to give this lens up for something smaller, lighter, closer minimum focus and just accept the fact that I have to switch to a telephoto lens a little more often.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: Nygaard review date: January-01-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28-85 F3,5-4,5 18-70 3,5-4,5 35-70 F4
positive:	Build quality Weight Range Color Sharp wide open Very sharp closed down a bit Fast AF
negative:	Flare Front element is way out there No original hood Could be faster
comment:	I bought this lens a few days ago, after reading all the raving reviews on this wonderful page. The price wasn´t a bargain, and the front element had a few dings and scratches but this doesn´t affect my view on tis lens. This lens is a gem! I must say that I agree with all the positive reviews, this lens is awesome. It is very reasonable sharp wide open, and closed down a stop it is on par with my 50mm. The range is perfect for me since I got the wide end covered with my Sigma 10-20. This lens is the perfect walk around lens, and though many might find it a bit on the heavy side, it balances great on my A700 with grip. The large front element is sitting right there in the very front of the lens, which makes it very prone to scratches and such, so a UV filter or an after market hood might help protecting it. Its negatives put aside, this is a lens you shouldn´t hesitate to buy if you can find a decent copy. You are not going to buy mine, cause this one is definately a keeper!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: berlin steve review date: January-01-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony DT 3.5-5.6/18-70, Minolta:Beercans 35-70, 70-210mm & 75-300mm; 50mm f1.7; 135mm f2.8; Minolta 28-135; Tokina 28-70 2.8 AT-X; Tokina SD 70-210
price paid:	eur 130
positive:	sharp minolta colours good build quality
negative:	heavy rear focus ring spin catches me out every time... not 2.8, but you can't have everything...
comment:	Like all good Minolta lenses, this one comes with an orthopedic warning. Heavy! It doesn't look as heavy as it is, considering its size. But it is. It has a nice range, and for a (heavy) walk around can prove quite useful as a result. The focus ring at rear catches me the first couple of shots I take whenever I shoot with this lens on. The torque generated feels like it is about to draw you into the innards of the lens when your supporting hand is holding the lens. This has to be my bigger gripe with this glass. I'm sure if I used it for longer periods of time, I would become accustomed to it. What can I say that hasn't already been said. This is a lens that deserves its reputation. It covers a useful range with good IQ all the way. Nice for portraits, and with my Soligor 1.7 teleconverter means I can get Beercan like zoom results without needing to take the Beercan with me when traveling. Without teleconverter IQ is of course slightly better than the good ol' Beercan. I have to admit though, within a day or so of getting this lens I also got a first generation Tokina 28-70 2.8 A-TX lens (for which I'll be writing the review once this model is posted) which IMO is in some ways better than the Minolta. Both are sharp, both have great Minolta colours (even though only one is a Minolta) and only one is 2.8. And that is not this lens, and makes me wish it was... because otherwise this lens would be perfect. If you don't need a 2.8 zoom and want all the other great features like built like a tank, and the ability to sever fingers with the focus ring coupled with great colours and super IQ, then this is one to get. I would like this lens far more if I hadn't got that 'pesky' 28-70 Tokina which is in some ways just as good, but with 2.8 to boot. And not quite as heavy.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: linearamp review date: December-31-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	minolta 35 - 105 mm minolta 70 - 210mm f4 minolta 50mm f 1.7 sigma 90mm macro carl zeiss flektogon 35mm carl zeiss sonnar 135mm pentacon 135mm f2.8 vivitar 28mm manual f2.8 minolta rokkor 58mm pg f1.2
price paid:	L77.00
positive:	well built very sharp contrasty
negative:	heavy some flare
comment:	i got this lens cheap off ebay ,and its definaltly staying in my bag. ive been looking for this lens for a while after reading the comments and reviews posted here. It hasnt dissapointed one iota . Very Very sharp typical minolta colours .and contrasty. Focus seems very quick on my sony A700 .others have said its slow ,but i havent noticed it been slow. i have the minolta 35-105mm also ,i thought this lens was my favourite lens in my bag ,but now i have changed my mind its got to be the minolta 28-135mm .. negaitve points its rather heavy and is prone to flare ,but this isnt a problem for me

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Glass review date: December-15-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
positive:	Fantastic walk around lens for FF Great Color Excellent range
negative:	Poor in low light and short focus distance
comment:	This is the very first lens I ever used. My father purchased it for me with a Maxxum 7000 from one of his tennis buddies in the early 90s. If one can deal with the weight and limitations of the lens, I think they'll find that this monster produces GREAT images. The build quality is 1st class and above anything I've seen in current production. Metal and glass, just like a lens is supposed to be. My copy is still in great shape after over 20 years of use. This is the one lens I would never part with.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: derekw review date: December-07-09
	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 (original) sigma 24-135 Tamron 24-135
price paid:	L122
positive:	Very sharp across the range Colour Build
negative:	No lens hood
comment:	Best zoom you can buy if you can live with the flare and slow maxinum aperture. Different quality but 35-105 runs it very close and my 100-300 APO lens hood works a treat on the 35-105

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: nitrosyl review date: November-24-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- Sony Carl Zeiss 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 Vario-Sonnar T* - Sony Carl Zeiss 24-70mm f/2.8 Vario-Sonnar T* - Minolta 28-70mm f/2.8 G
positive:	- Very nice range. - Fairly sharp across the frame. - Built like a tank. - "Macro" mode is useful in some situation.
negative:	- Rare, hard to find a nice copy. - CA - No OEM lens hood - Flare - MFD - Rotating front element when zooming - "Macro" mode is manual focus only.
comment:	This lens is built like a tank and performs well across the whole frame (FF sensor) once stopped down a bit. Holding it I felt it's gonna outlive me by a large margin ;-) It would be the ideal lens for outdoor/landscape A-mount photographers. Indoor/congested area could be a bit of problematic due to its long MFD, but that's when you will appreciate the "Macro" mode (MF only though) at 28mm!! IMHO that's a very thoughtful design. By the way, focus confirmation is still active in macro mode and definitely helps when manual focusing. CA is a problem (though can be corrected in post-processing) in high-contrast scenes. And you gotta be careful with strong light source to avoid excessive flare. The lens works very well on APSC (lacks wide angle though), and its FL range definitely shines on a FF dSLR! Stopping down to f/5.6 and beyond its image quality is quite solid on my A850.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: shinka review date: November-23-09
	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 EX DG MinO 70-210/4 MinO 28/2 MinO 50/1.4 MinO 85/1.4 MinO 135/2.8
price paid:	400 USD (used)
positive:	Wonderful colors Nice and sharp Love the build quality
negative:	Crappy minimum focus distance terrible flare control
comment:	Not much unique to add to what has already been said about this lens. It definitely has its quirks/disadvantages (minimum focus distance, flare control) but I really like this lens. The first thing I noticed was the fantastic build-quality of this lens. Each end of the (very smooth) zoom range has wonderfully dampened stops that prevent lens creep and just feel very solid. The flare control is kind of a problem. Not only is the front element right up to the front of the lens barrel, there is no provision for attaching a lens hood. I bought a shallow lens hood (about 1-inch deep) to help with flare, but it vignettes very badly at 28mm (on Full Frame), so that's not a very good option either. Until I find a better option, I'll just have to use my hand. My favorite part of this lens, however it the colors. I think it's the best example of 'classic' Minolta colors I've seen (and I have lots of Minolta glass). Overall image quality is superb, but if you're going to purchase this lens, make sure you're aware of its drawbacks as well as its positive attributes before buying.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: REVENGE review date: November-16-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	35-70mm f4 50mm Macro
price paid:	266 USD
positive:	Acceptably sharp wide open Good colors Built like a tank Useful Macro MFD
negative:	CA until f8 Average flare control No standard hood Annoying creep from 50mm onward Long MFD
comment:	Another old lens that seems somewhat over-hyped nowadays (similar to the Beercan IMHO). For full frame users this lens does indeed offer great walk-around coverage and performs admirably despite its aged design. However, on APS-C that range is less ideal, and on digital in general the design faults start to show up. This lens is NOT super sharp wide open, and I expect any comparisons being made to some of the higher end primes are superlative. What IS remarkable is the level of corner sharpness. Stopping this lens down to f8 gives an incredibly sharp picture throughout the frame, and CA disappears by then too. Shoot in fair weather to truly appreciate the IQ of this lens. Kurt Munger remarked that Sony could toss digital glass, SSM and a G badge on this lens and it would sell sell sell. I beg to differ, seeing as this lens is both heavy and not very fast. At this price, full frame users aren't going to find anything better, and APS-C users won't complain too much either. Personally, I would like a see a new Sony lens based on this design and zoom range, with the same center and edge sharpness at a constant f2.8 apeture, with SSM and a reduced MFD. Then Sony could justifying putting on the G badge, and jacking the price way up to the $1000 level.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: raisiner review date: November-11-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Beercan Min 35-105 G's & CZ's
price paid:	Approx $350
positive:	Build (if you like weight) Range of focal length
negative:	Overall less than expected
comment:	I'm on my third copy of this lens and I'm giving up. The first two were not bad but not great in color and sharpness. Of course they had flare problems under the right conditions and I did find some distortion but not bad. The current copy is in the best shape cosmetically and the glass is clean. However, its not as sharp as one of my previous copies and the colors lean toward simply dull.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3	user: Jojakim review date: November-10-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- Sigma 28-70/2.8 - Tamron 17-50/2.8 - Minolta 24-105/3.5-4.5
positive:	- Sharp! - Build like a tank
negative:	- Weight like a tank - Slow - Pronounced distortion
comment:	It's heavy!! It's massive! I might not have the best copy, the zoom is not very smooth anymore and macro mode is sticky. Also I discovered the distortion is quite big, but maybe unfairly compared to my macro's. I was amazed by some sdamples I saw on the web and bought it quickly. Now I hardly use it because I grab my macro when I need sharpness and use my Minolta for better speed and ADI flash.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: nvc789 review date: October-22-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	minolta 28-85mm tamron 17-50mm
price paid:	250 USD
positive:	great build great colours Sharp
negative:	horrible flare minimum focus distance 28mm is not wide on APS-C
comment:	I bought this lens over a year ago and love what it does. Sure it has it's warts like the size, weight and minimum focus distance of about 6-7 feet. Pictures, especially portraits come out beautiful, there is something magical about the pictures it produces, especially between the 90-135mm. It is one of the few lenses I will never sell. I find the focus is a bit off when I stop it down past f5.6 (ie back focus). buy it if you can.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 2	user: ckone review date: October-19-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28 - 85
price paid:	gift with M.9000
positive:	Colour Bokeh Distorsion
negative:	Flare Issue Weight
comment:	One of the Minolta classics and my first lens that came with the Minolta 9000 :) Okay, getting over sentimentals, back to business: It's a heavy lens and you may get the imperession, that it's a rigid lens, but the interior mechanics is sensitive, especially the diaphragm. You may get used to the focusing ring, which always scratched my finger, but in the 20 using years I got used to it and knew, where to place my hand... Distorsion is great from 35 to 50 and 70 to 135 mm, in the other parts I observed pincushion distorsion, but not bad ones. Which was difficult to handle (with the usage of several rolls of film...) was the flare, which tended to ruin some pictures; golden rule: Turn away from the sun... I liked the range better than the 28-85, which was short some times, it's an ideal walkaround lens, especially if you work on fullframe, diital and/or film.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: jakoblochowich review date: October-08-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tokina AT-X pro 28-70 f2.6-2.8 Minolta 70-210 f4 (beercan) minolta 20 f2.8 minolta 50 f1.7 minolta 100 f2
price paid:	200 Euro (used)
positive:	Sharpness Colors Build All-round-qualities quite good macro function
negative:	minimum distance indoor abilities no hood: flare weight (if that's an issue)
comment:	If a perfect out-door all-round lens exists - this one gets close... I just came back from one month of traveling in japan and this lens did such a great job, that I have to celebrate it here. I used it practically every day for such different things as portrait, buildings, landscapes, street life, and close up macro-shots. No matter what I capture with this lens, it comes out razor sharp and with great colors - both wide open and stopped down. Even the macro function is surprisingly good - far better than just usable. It's a heavy and well-build lens. Iron and glass - nothing else! But it is born without a hood, which can create flare in some direct-sun situations. Apart from that, the only weak point of this lens is its indoor abilities. With its minimum distance of 1.5 meter, combined with f4-4.5, indoor shooting is clearly not what it is meant for. But the minute you step out the door it creates miracles! Get it if you can!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: tuanle review date: October-08-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	400 (used)
positive:
negative:	Flare
comment:	If you use the full frame camera or film camera, the flare is your biggest challenge!!! At 28mm, the big ruber hoods on ebay can not help you at all (IMO). On my A350, the hood is very useful for this lens.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: TxllxT review date: October-03-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	none
price paid:	525 NGL
positive:	Very reliable overall wide-zoom-macro, quickly sharp, fine color, renders stunningly back the live atmosphere in which a photo was taken.
negative:	Some flare
comment:	Twenty years ago I bought this lens secondhand for half the new price (525 guilders = about 240 EURO) from my student allowance. Ever since it remained my steady life-companion, being joined with two Minolta filmcamerabodies, the Sony a100 and since a few days the Sony a900. I may confess here, it is this lens that has made a photography-enthusiast out of me. In my studentdays I acquired the AF 28-135 with hardly any backgroundknowledge, just following the judgment of my own eyes (& the available money in my pocket). I wanted to have once and for all an allround zoomlens of high quality. (- I'm delighted to read the confirmations of this in this forum -). Well, this wish for sure has come true. With my a900 I'm entering complete new fields of photography (having switched from JPG to cRAW), but with each picture taken the real credits go to the Minolta AF 28-135. Reading all the complaints about heavy weight etc., I can only comment that I've never known otherwise. When I get a DSLR from friends in my hands, it's the lack of weight that begins to bother me... Probably I am the second owner of this lens, carrying it through Europe on countless travels. With the a900 the wonderful days of wideviewing Full Frame will be coming back. Just cannot wait to go out on holiday again! At the beginning of 2010 I added a Hoya HD Filter CIR-PL 72 in front of the lens: much better contrast and much less flare&glare. With this unscratchable, undustable & unbreakable pola filter you can jump 25 years ahead in one leap. Before I tried out a rubber hood, which caused vignetting...

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: madecov review date: September-27-09
	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 24-85 Minolta 35-105 Tamron 17-50
price paid:	Stole it (used)
positive:	Sharp, good colors, low distortion. Fast AF, Non rotating front in AF, moderate apertures
negative:	Front rotates when zooming, large heavy, Long minimum focus distance, no factory hood, large filter diameter. reversed focus and zoom rings
comment:	Picked this lens up at a local camera shop. My copy has a bit stiff zoom from 70mm through 100mm and then is smooth again, but I've read on line that this lens may have some internal build issues. I've not really wrung this lens out in high contrast shooting but indications are it's sharp. Colors are typical of Minolta lenses. Not a lens that I want to carry around all day due to weight. It does make my A-700 with grip look huge. I couldn't see someone using it with the A-230 series bodies. The zoom range is nice but I'm not all that sure it's so far ahead of the 24-85RS / 28-85 / and 35-105 originals to justify the huge price difference (other than extended tele end) and the other lenses focus closer. If you can find one at a reasonable price it's another tool in the arsenal but I don't see were it's head and shoulders above other quality Minolta lenses of the same era, maybe I just need to work with it more as I just got it and did some quick Jpg shots around the yard. I have not tried macro with this lens and typically don't use macro in zooms since I have dedicated macro lenses. Might be a good two lens set with the 100-300 series Edit: I'm going to leave flare control rating were it is. This lens exhibits a bit more flare than I like. I will be looking to pick up a rubber collapsing hood

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: Tetraodon review date: September-20-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 100-300 APO D KoMi 28-75 2.8 D
positive:	- Sharp - Colours - Build
negative:	- MFD (1,5 m) - Prone to flare (no Hood included) - Chunky
comment:	I bought this lens 20 years ago and it costed me an arm and a leg. Since then it travelled with me around the world and there was never any glitch. It's build like a tank - IQ always has been top. I now use it on my A700 - IQ is still tremendous. It' prone to flare, because Minolta never provided a hood for this gem. Focussing is up to date Annoying is the MFD of 1.5 m. Nevertheless: Sony should reanimate this legendary lens to digital standards (coating and MFD) - ok: it wont happen ...

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: Blair7 review date: September-19-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Min 28-85, Min 50, Min 35-105, Tam 17-50, Beercan
price paid:	$225 CDN
positive:	Sharp (I mean really sharp)
negative:	Heavy flare
comment:	I bought this lens a few months ago as a result of reviews I read here. The first copy had a little spot that did not effect performance. I was able to acquire this lens, a Min 50 1.7 and a 7000 for $225 CDN. I sold the other copy. I used it a little on my 7D but it was too heavy for what I was doing at the time. I used it on my A700 this week while doing some hiking and photography of some different rivers and waterfalls. I really see what this lens can do. I am really happy with the results. The weight meant that at times I was choosing other options. I will now choose this lens whenever I can.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: zeroone review date: September-17-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	35-70 Minolta f4, 28-85 Minolta f3.5, 17-210 Minolta f4, 50-f3.5 macro Minolta, 24-50 f4 Minolta, 50 mm 1.4 Minolta, and a few others as well.
price paid:	$300 USD
positive:	Very sharp Great range Fast Focus Balances well on A900 Could be used wide open on APSC
negative:	A touch bulky Flare prone Low contrast Minimum focus distance is very limiting
comment:	Up front I must make a point, all my lens testing is done in RAW, tripod mounted with precise exposures set using uni WB, and converted in Raw Developer, this method extracts every last bit of detail from an image file and shows up any problems quite obviously. Make no mistake here unless you are using RAW and a decent convertor you will never know just how good this or pretty much any of the above lenses really are. So how does this classic perform. It is an utterly amazing lens, it is sometimes bettered at certain settings by some of the above but the key to this lens is consistency across the entire range. If the lens were used on APSC one could truly shoot wide open at pretty much any focal length, full frame needs a bit of stopping down to get edges really sharp. At 28 mm the full frame is critically sharp at f13, the edges get softer with each stop wider, diffraction is a minor issue at this aperture but things can easily be re-sharpened if needed. Of the above lenses the 24-50 may look just a little bit sharper at 28 mm but it is very very close. 35 mm performance is quite stellar, at at f8-11 is pretty much as sharp as one could hope for, it is better than all of the above lenses at this setting. At 50 mm is performance is sharp across the entire frame even at fairly wide apertures, but its central resolution is not as tack sharp as the 35-70 or the 50 mm f3.5 macro. It should be noted though that at 50 mm the 35-70 is quite incredible and beats all other lenses bar the 50 mm f3.5 (but it comes very very close) I have said it before, if you need a 50 mm lens for your Sony bypass the fixed 50s and buy the 35-70 it is a better performer unless you really need wide apertures. At 70 mm the 28-135 rocks, it creams the alternatives easily. Above 85 mm it is a close call between the 70-210 and the 28-135, either will do the business and it should be noted that the 70-135 mm range is the optimum for the 70-210. I could not use this a general purpose lens, it is a bit too heavy and the MFD is just too limiting, but that is what I have the 35-70 or 28-85 is for. But for landcsape work, and a whole array of jobs where close focusing is a non- issue the 28-135 is a very fine tool indeed. Strangely I think it would make a better option for those who would other wise buy a 28 f2.8 or either of the 35 mm Minoltas as it seems to out-resolve them by a margin and as said the 50 mm setting is better than the f1.4 and way better than the f1.7. And the 70 mm setting rocks, so if you wanted to just cover the 28-70 mm range this is likely the optimum tool. Contrast is low, but I feel this is a benefit as the files are very easy to tweak as a result, but out of the camera they can look a little flat. You definitely can not point it into the sun and expect anything reasonable. The price for the lens seems high to many folk, but my feeling is that it is a bargain for what it can do. If a new lens were available that resolved across the range like this one the price would be sky high (like over $2500.00) and of course it would have higher contrast and better flare control.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: northernfarmer review date: September-15-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SAl 50 F/1.4 minolta Beercan 70-210 F/4 Sigma 18-125 3.5-5.6
price paid:	300 Euro
positive:	Build and performance Sharp True like reproduction Natural color
negative:	A little bit flare
comment:	Fantastic build and IQ! It is a legend lens. Also an example of human innovation and quality control. Many thanks to everybody here for your strong recommendations. It is proved to be much flexible compared with the major primes with decent IQ. The macro is usable esp in 28mm range.It produced natural color than that of warm classic minolta such as beercan.The optical design philosophy of 1st generation of minolta lens is something different from modern one. I like the taste but can't tell in words. My copy is surprisingly new. Maybe what I paid is more expensive than guys here. I am still happy with the my decision after use of half year. I would like to keep it as my 7D daily lens. Were it possible for you to find one in decent price, don't miss it.

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: chad review date: September-10-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	minolta 50 f;1/7 28:28 34-70 f:4 28-85,24-105,beercan, big beercan,sigma 24-135, tamron 1 7-50, tamron 28-300
price paid:	300 usd
positive:	very sharp even at 135 mm
negative:	contrast is not as good as my tamron 17-50, but what a sharp and colorful lens it is.
comment:	This lens is incredible. For the first time i was sastified almost totally with a lens. But minolta has produce others "secret handshake": marvelous 28-85,35-70 f:4,50 f;1/7,beercan and big beercan.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: karchon review date: August-30-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 17-50mm Sony 70-300G
positive:	Sharp all around
negative:	MFD Not for low light
comment:	When i bought this, I was completely skeptical of the hype. It felt cumbersome when i took it out of the box. What i did love when i took it out of the box was its huge front element. Absolutely sexy IMO. I took it to a graduation shoot a few months back, and I was not impressed with the image quality. The graduation was obviously in poor light but I expected more due to the hype. I defaulted back on the Tamron for the f2.8. Not having touched it for a few months (other than keeping it clean), I decided to put it through the tests yesterday to see if i should just sell this heavy glass for a hefty profit or keep for FF a8/9xx. I tested this against the Tamron and my Sony G 70-300mm, as i feel these lens give a good standard of my minimum sharpness requirements. With an a700, I tested f4, f5.6, f8 from ranges of 28, 50, 70, 135mm during sunset and after sunset (to test low light) handheld & tripod, against a high contrast object at infinity. Results blew me away. The Minolta 28-135mm had sharper images all around with better color saturation. However, it was not sensitive to light contrast as the Tamron was through out the range. With the Tamron, areas of low light had better illumination in the final product. The Minolta yielded more "dark" areas. This explained why the graduation pictures from the 28-135 did not look good. However, the colors from this lens reminded me of my 35-105 Orig - was so saturated wonderful colors! I will keep this lens for the rest of my life simply because it really is prime sharp stopped down. It was sharper than the 70300G and the Tamron 17-50mm. My only grip is the MFD. I love the weight even though it throws my a700 off balance. This will definitely be used on my FF when i get it. I still need to test flare control as i have not had a good chance to do so. (Remains at 3 rating)

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: rvonner review date: August-25-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-70mm (kit lens) Minolta 50mm Minolta 70-210mm (beer can)
price paid:	40 USD
positive:	Sharp pictures Good detail Excellent colors Well built
negative:	Heavy Light flair om lens. Some hunting in low light.
comment:	I had an opportunity to use this lens at a Weeding this past weekend. I used this lens for almost all the pictures I took. The range 28 - 135mm was the perfect range that I needed that day. I tried to start out with the kit lens. I was not pleased with the results. The lens did some hunting in low light, but other than that I was pretty pleased with the results. When I purchased this lens it came with 50mm and 70-210mm (beercan). All lens were in good condition. I thank God for the opportunity to get these three lens at that price.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: JeremyT review date: August-19-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	* Sony 18-70 F3.5-5.6 (kit) * Minolta AF 28-75 F2.8 D * Minolta 50mm F1.7 * Sigma 18-50 F2.8 EX DC
positive:	* Impressive build quality * Long range * Very sharp wide open < 100mm * Odd but fun 1:4 "macro" mode at 28mm
negative:	* CA * Flare (and no hood) * Poor minimum focal distance (1.5m) * Hype has driven the price too high (over 300 USD) * Not as sharp wide open > 100mm * Heavier and bulkier than modern lenses
comment:	I bought this lens (in well-used condition) by accident on ebay. Despite an ugly exterior, the optics seem to be nearly flawless. I hear that this lens can have build quality issues, but my copy doesn't. A better body might need stopping down throughout the range for optimal sharpness, but under 100mm it out-resolves the A200 sensor. Beyond that some softness is visible, but stopped down 1 stop it beats the A200 sensor again. Colors are "classic Minolta." Images have the same "feel" as those taken with the 50mm prime (similar bokeh, similar colors). The lens can flare, and it didn't have a hood. CA is problematic - I commonly see purple fringing in high contrast areas. Stopping down just a little helps. Dedicated macro at 28mm is odd, but I've found it surprisingly useful. It allows for some creative shots, and in some cases it can be used to work around the nasty 1.5m MFD. The filter ring rotates on zoom, but not on focus (the focus ring is near the body). AF is as fast and accurate as any on my A200, though I hear a "knocking" sound when it operates (could be my copy). If you get a good copy for $200 or less, it's a great value and worth every penny. But if you're looking at $300 or more, the choice is less clear to me. "Like a G" claims aside, this lens has some drawbacks compared to modern lenses. It's got a great range for full-frame, but it's heavy and slow relative to modern glass. I think the market for this lens is somewhat limited - the range is problematic on APS/C, and I have to think that anybody who can afford a 2000 USD+ full frame body will be willing to spend more on a modern replacement that will perform better. ** Update 5/2010: I recently sold this lens after realizing I almost never used it any more. It's a great performer, but its limitations add up, and on APS-C I just prefer smaller lenses with wider FOVs

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: vitaly review date: July-17-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	370 USD
positive:	Razor sharp Excellent color Build quality Weight
negative:
comment:	with Hoya digital filter and hood no flare and CA

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: beppe61 review date: July-16-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	C.Z. 24-70 f2.8 SSN
price paid:	250 EURO (used)
positive:	Very very sharp, fantastic "Minolta colors", great buid.
negative:	minimum focus distance
comment:	This is a great lens, perfect for my A900! It's very sharp, even wide open, and has the best "Minolta colors" I've ever seen! Flare is not a problem. The only little problem is the minimum focus distance: 1,5m

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 1	user: Paul07 review date: July-12-09
	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 D KM 24-105/3.5-4.5 D Minolta 85/1.4 CZ 85/1.4
price paid:	EUR 250
positive:	Build qualitiy Sharpness center to edge Minolta colours Nice long range
negative:	Prone to flare and no dedicated hood Rather long minimal focus distance Very heavy
comment:	I got really interested in the lens after reading a review at www.artaphot.ch (see links page for this lens), comparing this 28-135 with a few G- and CZ-lenses. I must say I can only confirm the very positive results as reflected in above review. I does not have an f/1.4 or 2.8 available, but it does perform extremely well when used wide open througout the range. Never needs to be stopped down to provide nicely sharp images, and always giving the known Minolta colours. Also, build quality is superior to the newer 28-75, 24-105, 16-105 and 18-250. Hardly anything but metal and glass has been used. On the downside, and as obvious consequence of the above, the lens is heavier and less compact than the more recent "standard allrounds"... In addition, the minimal focus distance is long, contrast is low and there is a high risk of flare. Its range suits me very well. I was used to having the 28-75 as standard zoom, and the additional 75-135 range is very usefull. I personally prefer that over a 16-80 alternative. This type of lens obviously was known very well by Minolta users and it seems a lot of copies have been used extensively. It also took me two tries to get a good copy. In meantime, I have replaced this one by a Tamron 24-135 for use on my a900

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: cassious review date: June-29-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	The entire minolta line...
price paid:	150.00
positive:	Nice all around lens
negative:	CA!!!! FLARE!! Minimum Focus Distance
comment:	For some reason I seem to find this lens on my camera quite a bit..It works fairly well in most applications and offers a nice zoom range on the "C" sensor. The colors are true to Minolta and thats probably the best feature of the lens. The purple fringing is almost unbearable. Also prone to flare like everyone says...if your aware of it while shooting its usually not an issue.. Descent all around lens...

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	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:	390 USD (used)
positive:
negative:
comment:

sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: DonSergio review date: May-14-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- 16-80/3.5-4.5za - 24-105/3.5-4.5 (Minolta and Sony) - 24-70/2.8za - 35-70/4
price paid:	400$ (used)
positive:	+ Great resolution from 28 to 100mm. + Very good colors an bokeh. + Great range for outdoor. + fast AF
negative:	- Softness from 100 to 135mm. Flare. - Bad edge sharpness on A900. - Rotating front element on zooming (so hard to use CPL and gradient filters). - No hood. - Hard to find in good conditions.
comment:	i think that minolta 28-135/4-4.5 is the best full frame travel zoom suitable for A-mount at this moment. Because it have great image quality from wide open at the range 28-~100mm (colors, contrast, bokeh) all in one except edges of full frame images (no noticeable on APS-C cameras). In most of aspects of image quality it's better than 24-85/3.5-4.5, 24-105/3.5-4.5, 35-70/4. But for me on APS-C 16-80za is much more versatile lens. 28-135/4-4.5 is not ideal lens. Lens is big such 24-70za (except filter diameters 72mm vs 77mm). Lens does not have original hood and flare are noticeable often. Front element rotates on zooming (not focusing) but use CPL and gradient filters is not ideal. Focusing ring rotates than AF works. At 100-135mm visible softness and contrast loosing, but this range usable for portrait from wide open. If you can live with this issues 28-135/4-4.5 is great choice and pick pick up it if You find it in MINT conditions.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: Mr_Canuck review date: May-13-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 16-105 Sigma 17-70 Min 135/2.8 Min 100/2 Min 50/1.7 Min 35/2
positive:	Range at long end. Sharpness, colour. Smooth Minolta look of images. Quick focussing. Price.
negative:	Min focus distance. Flare.
comment:	This is a nice alternative to newer lenses, including more expensive ones. It stands up quite well against my Minolta primes at similar apertures on apsc. On full-frame, it gets challenged and the corners start to reveal some softness. (Sharpness is 4 on FF, and 4.5 on apsc). I've had two copies and used it on apsc and full-frame. Nice bokeh at long end. The autofocus is really quick on a700 and a850. The best general purpose range for full-frame out there. It really has a nice, natural, smooth look to the images, but you do need to manage how you shoot it. It is very prone to flare, and needs to be carefully managed when shooting towards the sun, unless you want flare look, then you've got your baby. The minimum focus distance is long, so it's better suited to outdoor shooting; and it has an interesting macro mode if you need it in a pinch. It is a bit loud as it snaps into focus, which might be an issue at an event where noise was a concern; but no more obtrusive than an SLR shutter snap. It is also a heavy lens and I do feel the weight of it over time – I think particularly because it is front heavy. I don't know why Sony doesn't pick up this formula and modernize it. They'd kill in the full-frame arena.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: RuneDK review date: April-20-09
	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 Minolta 100mm f/2.8 Macro Minolta 50mm f/1.4
price paid:	250 CHF
positive:	Sharpness Color Bokeh Focal Range Zoom ring Fast AF
negative:	Heavy MFD Filter size Back focus
comment:	This is a great all-round lens in my opinion. It focuses fast, although i think that the back-focus is inconvenient even though it allows use of special filters since the front element doesn't rotate. Sharpness and color are classical Minolta, and I like how the zoom ring locks at both ends of the range. The macro function I rarely use. I find it better to use a dedicated macro lens. In all, a recommended all-round lens if you can live with the weight and MFD. In my opinion the IQ easily overcomes those "problems".

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Strider25 review date: April-14-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Big Beercan Sony 55-200
price paid:	$330
positive:	-Great Minolta Color -Very well built -Fast rear focusing
negative:	-None really. I guess its perfomance in low-light. Not too good, but, then again, not what it was made for
comment:	Best lens i own, bar none. I just love the color and sharpness of the images this lens produces. This lens is easily worth more than what i paid for. Long live Minolta's legacy

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: jordo7 review date: April-14-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Beercan Big Beercan 18-70 Sony 100mm Macro Sony
price paid:	$350
positive:	Hard to take a bad picture with it. Of my favorite 100 pictures, 90% taken with this lens. 3-D quality to the pics. Nice weight, great build quality. Update. Use it less and less after obtaining 85 mm prime and 35 f2
negative:	About 6 ft. minimum focusing distance is the only drawback that I've found.
comment:	Used to think this was as good as it gets. Still a great lens but rarely gets used any more. Perfect range for ff

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: villykl review date: April-07-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	minolta 35-105 f 3.3-4.5 LBC sony 70300 G SSM minolta 70-210 f 4 BC minolta 75-300 f4.5-5.6 BBC
price paid:	357 USD
positive:	sharp color 3-D look fast
negative:	need hood
comment:	I glad to have legendary lens now. Buy it!!!!!!!!!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: solomonXX review date: April-04-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Beercan
price paid:	400 USD (used)
positive:	Sharp sharp sharp! 3-D effect; fast AF focusing; build quality
negative:	flare; MFD - 5';
comment:	This is a truly amazing lens. I got a used but very rare cross XX copy. It is in mint condition. I have to say it is a non-G-label G lens. Actually the weight is well balanced on my A700, and the MF focus ring is very easily controlled. I compared the lens to Beercan and it outperformed Beercan in every aspect. I only keep two zoom lenses and this is one of them.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: captmolo review date: April-01-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 18-50 f 3,5-5,6 Tamron 55-200 Tokina 20-35 KM 70-210 KM 50 f 1,4
price paid:	1200 NOK
positive:	Very good build Very good image quality
negative:	Some say it is heavy :)
comment:	Got this lens used a couple of months ago, and could not be happier. The zoom action is nice and tight. The focus ring is kind of loose on my copy and it makes a kind of "snap" noise when it starts or stops focusing but that was normal. Focusing is fast and spot on. I dont mind the minimum focusing distance of this lens. Dont mind the weight either by the way, just adds to the quality feel i guess. I really do like the range 28-135 on my a200.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: wahgongzai review date: March-29-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 70-210 F4 Minolta 35-105 F3.5-4.5
price paid:	US$280-US$320
positive:	Sharpness Color macro (1:4) Build
negative:	rare
comment:	This is one of my "must get" lens in my collection now the list is finally complete for the 1:4 minolta seriers. Minolta 35-70, 28-85, 35-105, 28-135.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: fmajor review date: March-20-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 24mm f2.8 Minolta 50mm f1.7 Minolta 28-85mm f3.5-4.5 Minolta 35-70mm f4 Minolta 70-210mm f4 "Beercan" Multiple Minolta Rokkor Manual Focus lenses
price paid:	$310 (mint cond.)
positive:	Superb colors!!! Sharp!!! Fast focusing Very good contrast
negative:	Slight CA present A bit flare-prone
comment:	INITIAL REVIEW: The 28-135mm is very sharp in the center while losing very little in the corners - exceptional in this regard. While maximum 'sharpness' is from f5.6 through f11. This is not an empirically-derived understanding; rather that i tend to notice the 'sharpest' photos in most all lighting conditions tend toward these 'middle' apertures. Unlike some lenses which render "cartoon-like", overly-saturated colors these 1st Generation Minolta Maxxum lenses, such as this 28-135mm, render colors which are neither overly saturated/rich or flat. The lens also exhibits excellent bokeh. The Minolta Legend lives up to the name!!! The 28-135mm feels like what ALL lenses should feel like - in a word - SOLID. I would appreciate an OEM lens hood, but none exist. I found a nice all-metal hood that works quite well. This lens is very fast focusing and I also like where the MF ring is placed (close to the body), but when auto-focusing i am careful not to have my finger on it as it spins quite rapidly. This is not because it's painful; rather that i don't want to impede the lens' functioning. I have also noticed this lens does not "hunt" as frequently for a focus lock in lower light/contrast situations as my other "classic Minolta" lenses. The MFD is on the long end at ~5ft. This is more of a design limitation and not necessarily a build flaw. The "Build Quality" is superb, it is only the design that is compromised in this one area - small matter given the other strengths. The lens is susceptible to flare. This can be managed, but it's occasionally present all the same. While the 28-135mm lens also does not have the official Minolta G-Series designation (with attributes such as constant f2.8 (or wider) aperture, etc., it delivers superb results with a very attractive focal range. It also delivers these results for a very reasonable price. IMHO, this lens (with the 1st 300mm f2.8 and possibly the 70-210mm f4 "Beercan") is among the 1st G series Minolta AF lens - before the G designation was officially implemented. See the image of the 1st Generation Minolta camera/lenses/flashes brochure in my flickr page (found in my signature) for clarity on this. Sharp, contrasty images with rich colors are the norm with this incredible lens and it is my go-everywhere lens for travel/work/home use. This lens is HIGHLY recommended!!!! Don't wait - get one while there are still good samples available.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Raimios review date: March-20-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Whatever....
price paid:	can't remember
positive:	Built, bokeh, sharp!!!!
negative:
comment:	Stop down a little bit and you get synonym for word SHARP!!! Why the heck they don't build lenses like this anymore. This lens belongs to every Minolta lens collection, it's a living legend!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: vangio review date: March-12-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	AF 17-35mm 2,8-4 (D) AF 24mm 2,8 AF 28-75mm 2,8 (D) AF 28-85mm 3,5-4,5 AF 28-135mm 4-4,5 AF 35-105mm 3,5-4,5 AF 50mm 1,7 AF 70-210mm 4 AF 75-300mm 4,5-5,6 1st Tamron AF 11-18 4,5-5,6 Beroflex 400mm 6,3 1st
price paid:	100 € (used)
positive:	very sharp range very fast AF solid build
negative:	solid build weight size only f4-4,5 min. focus distance
comment:	A very sharp lens with a really versatile zoom-range and a good addition to the 17-35mm 2,8-4 (D). The very fast AF, only very little CA and the warm colors make fun. But only outside... Because of the min. focus distance of 1,5m and the slow f4-4,5 I use this lens only outdoor. There it is a very good performer when you stop down to f5,6. In my opinion this isn't a „must have“ lens, but a really nice, very good performing, luxury solid one. And this is one of his biggest disadvantages too. The weight is high and it is not really compact. I've bought this lens for low money in good condition with a little axial play at the zoom-ring and I decide to repair this (Thanks to Pete Ganzel). Wow... what an impressing lens construction! The build quality is exceptional. A fine example of a high-quality-full-heavy-metal-lens.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: perese review date: February-22-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Cosina 19-35/3.5-4.5 Minolta 50/1.7 Minolta 70-300/4.5-5.6 Sony 18-70/3.5-5.6 Sigma 70-300/4-5.6 APO II Macro
price paid:	150 EUR Used
positive:	The build, solid. sharp, color, bokeh. Fast AF - very fast.
negative:	It is a little heavy, but I like the balance with my a700. AF ring could burn your hand.
comment:	I've had this not for so long. But I do really like it. The colors, bokeh, build - you name it. It is worth every cent I bought it for. My copy is not so sharp at wide open, that's why only 4.5. The flare control is due to the lack of hood, but with a hood mounted it will be a 4. I tend to use it often and I have mounted on my a700, as my everyday lens. It is a keeper, unless I get a hold on a better copy. Updated: I've two copies now, and I can say that the sharpness is quite impressing. And with the metal hood bought from ebay, the flare control is good.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: Sulde review date: February-13-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SAL 18-70, Tamron 18-250, 50/1.4, 100-300 APO
price paid:	250 USD (used)
positive:	Fantastic Colors and contrast! Decent AF speed Rather fast Good zoom range Build quality is good
negative:	Big and heavy No hood, prone to flare No wide angle on a crop camera Hard to use in dark conditions Focus distance
comment:	This is a legendary lens and if used wisely, it produces magic! I used it a lot during my travels, despite it doesn't have a wide end on A200. I think this lens gives the best color and "athmosphere", it is just fantastic! Good for both landscapes and portraits. There are some negative points, of course - no hood, very heavy, etc. But why should I care? This is a legend, and I am proud to have it!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: tommyrider 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:	DT 18-70 CZ 16-80 DT 18-250 Sony 70-300 G ssm 70-210 F4
price paid:	235 (used)
positive:	-Dramatic sharpness and color -Good focal range,specially on FF -Reasonably fast @135mm (f4.5)for its price,range and IQ -Decent AF speed both in a200&a700 -Macro feature -Stunning bokeh (best seen in all the lens i owned) -Superb built quality
negative:	-Weight -but its all metal!!- -Flare issues -Contrast could be better -Minimal focus distance is painfull for small rooms indoors. -No lens hood (strongly reccomended to atach one) -Flare issues
comment:	I owned this lens for several months.I was really excited with my first impression, having tried till that momment only dt 18-70 and 50 1.7. Sharpness is very good, but most impressive, is the real -life looking images than this piece of glass can deliver. Bokeh is simply outstanding. NOt as sharp as CZ 16-80. But there are two different kind o "sharpness" here. CZ`s is more "clinical" and resolves -according with the samples I tried both zeiss and Minolta - micro contrast detail.AF 28-135 has a special touch of magic plus neutral yet pretty accurate colors and drama to the pictures, Relly m theres no much stuff to compare to Af 28-135.Its unique. As CZ 16-80 is ,even people compare it with sony 16-105, another nice lens but different in some points than cz 16-80. I sold 28-135 to buy 16-80,wich find it useful because the wider end an focus distance.But if i didnt need to sell it i would keep it. Nothing compares to this lens,i overall features.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: hemigossipol 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:	18-70 Minolta 28-70 Tokina 2.8 AT-X
price paid:	$275
positive:	sharp built like tank contrast
negative:	no hood heavy
comment:	Lens is very sharp. Has a near 3 dimensional quality with sun behind you. Color is excellent, built like a mortar shell. Wonderful lens. Rubber hood works well on it.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: tgx78 review date: February-11-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	CZ 16-80mm minolta 28mm f/2.0 Sony 50mm f/1.4 Minolta 200mm HS G Minolta 80-200 HS G
price paid:	340 USD Mint-
positive:	Sharp! built like a tank good focal length on a900 fast focus speed.
negative:	flare min. focus distance little heavy
comment:	Wow Wow and wow. This lens is indeed very sharp between 28 - 100mm range. Color is very good but I find contrast is little too much. amazing on full frame body. around f/8 everything is sharp corner to corner.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: perslucht review date: February-08-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5 Minolta 35-70mm f/4 Minolta 70-210mm f/4 Sony DT 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6
price paid:	110 €
positive:	Sharpness Build Range
negative:	Weight/Build Flare No dedicated lens hood Chromatic aberration
comment:	This lens seems to be, just like the beercan, a minolta-legend. I think it's a bit overhyped, but that doesn't mean this is a bad lens. Not at all, it has a good range (except there's no wide angle on aps-c). The colours are beautiful, nice contrast. The macro-mode on 28mm can be very useful. Bokeh is very nice, especially at 135mm. The sharpness is oke, at least a aps-c. On full frame it seems the corners are a bit soft. In good light conditions the lens performs stopped down t 5.6/8 very good! But in less light I don't find this lens useful. Don't forget this lens is very heavy! The focus is pretty fast on my A200. Never tested it on other cams. Because there is no dedicated lens hood there is a lot of flare visible at 28mm! So get yourself also a lens hood when you buy this lens!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Ome_Joop review date: January-10-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 70-210 F4 Minolta 35-105 F3.5-4.5 Minolta 35-70 F4
price paid:	125
positive:	Sharp Fast AF Build
negative:	No Lenshood Noisy AF Strange MF Macro at 28mm!
comment:	WHat is to ssay about to say about this lense?! It performs great that is for sure. Drawbacks for me is the backfocus design wich makes it strange/hard to manual focus. Mine is very noisy when AF but it's AF speed is very fatst (Warning: don't touch the focus ring as it moves at great speed!) I bought a cheap flowerpad hood for it wich helps a bit against flare (don't know if there is a normal minolta style hood for it...is there a Hood database? Wich hood fits wich lens?) Macro switch is useless as it's at 28mm and the strange focus ring position doesn't help either!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Kayzer review date: December-16-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	minolta 50 f1,7
positive:	28-135mm range is outstanding on a quality glass like this.
negative:	Need service. I can of course complain because there is no hood, on the other hand it's up to me to utilize the potential this tools gives me.
comment:	I used this lens on A-100 and A-700 and she never gave me any whoo experience. On the A-900 it is a total different ballgame. She outperform the Minolta 50 1,7 by far, and the picture she gives me is so sharp that it hurts. Actually all Minolta glass shines on the A-900 which is logically because a full frame is what they where built for.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3	user: Dynaton-DK review date: December-01-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta AF24-85 F3.5-4.5 Minolta AF24-105D F3.5-4.5 Minolta AF28-85 F3.5-4.5 Minolta AF35-105N F3.5-4.5 Sigma AF18-200 F3.5-6.3 Sigma AF17-70 F2.8-4.5
price paid:	Bought used
positive:	Razor sharp Fast autofocus
negative:	Heavy Long minimum focús distance
comment:	This lens made me reconsider previously made reviews of fairly good lenses for a simple man like myself. Lenses that I used to think were very sharp are now degraded a notch in my book. I had to edit all other reviews setting the Minolta AF28-135 F4-4.5 as the reference in regard to sharpness, color and build quality. This lens is extremely sharp - and has surprisingly fast autofocus that easily outperform the focus speed of my new lenses. Pictures in general come out better with this lens than virtually all other lenses that I've have or used to have. This lens is simply superb - it's a keeper for all times to come. Flare is not a big problem as you easily can see them in the lens. It does have some drawbacks - be careful with distortion in some cases as well as slightly reduzed contrast, but when looking at these razor-sharp images and the colors I completely ignore the fact that it's very heavy and that you must take a step backwards to focus.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: kojben review date: October-28-08
	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 Minolta 24/2.8
positive:	Build quality Good colours Fast AF
negative:	Heavy! Minimum focus distance!
comment:	I manage to get hold on a good lens on Ebay. The only thing with the lens is that when it is at 28mm position it kind of "wiggles". This disappears as soon as I move the zoom just a milimeter or two. This is the lens I use most.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: tobyjay review date: October-11-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	18-70 100-200 f/4.5 Beercan Minolta primes - 24, 35, 50, 100, 135. Various tamron/sigma zooms
price paid:	L200 near mint
positive:	Great walkabout range Mega quality build Amazing colours Quick (rear) Autofocus Sharp!
negative:	Too slow for indoors - without flash Minimum focus distance is poor.
comment:	I didn't expect this to be so good. I just sold my 100-200 Minolta because the range was less than ideal and bought this instead. As an outdoor zoom it is ideal. Not that big and heavy - just properly made! Sharp enough throught the zoom range wide open. CA not a problem. Distortion not a problem. Colours are outstanding - as good as the 85 1.4 and better than the 100-200 or beercan I think. What a unit this lens is! Worth a lot more than I paid. p.s. It is a little slow for lowlight but the onboard flash (A700) seems to work very well with this lens. It does not cast big shadows and the colours come up well using flash. Highly recommended!!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: 5thElefant review date: October-09-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 28-105 F4-5.6 IF, Minolta 70-210 F4
price paid:	L190 (mint)
positive:	Great performance right through range, built like a tank
negative:	Flare, built like a tank
comment:	Great quality, great results but very heavy. I didn't use this lens much on aps-c, I had shorter and longer options and 28-135 didn't really cut it in utility terms. On full-frame it becomes genuinely useful.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: superx2won review date: September-18-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	M50/1.7 & 2.8 Beercan T17-50/2.8 M20/2.8
price paid:	200 USD (used)
positive:	Heavy ...i like it Build is great, all metal optic is great, all glass great range - 28-135 Fast rear AF IF..i like it Sharp image Standard 72mm ring
negative:	minimum focus distance is 1.5m????? Loud AF sound
comment:	Build like a tank and heavy... some may dislike it but i like it. It give you more steady holding the len. Image produced is sharp and the AF is fast. Wish that Sony build more len with rear focusing. Good for outdoor walk around len but not good for indoor as minimum focus distance is 1.5m. If the MFD is 0.5m Then this is a great len. if you found 1 is decent price , go and grab it. Good len.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 2	user: GOG review date: September-05-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Beercan 70-210/4 Minolta 50/1.7 Minolta 24/2.8
price paid:	300 USD (mint)
positive:	+ Sharp + Minolta Colors + Build Quality + Fast AF + Bokeh
negative:	- Flare - CA even if stopped down to f11
comment:	I found a practically unused lens. The flare control and CA is a joke for a lens with this reputation. Flares can be tamed with an aftermarket hood but this stops you from using a filter to protect that delicate glass. However, in the right conditions, this is probably one of the best lenses ever made.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: LECHER review date: July-17-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	MinO 28 f/2.8 MinO 35-70 f/4 MinO 50 f/1.7 MinO 70-210 f/4
price paid:	275 USD (used
positive:	Sharpness Bokeh Color Heft Glass
negative:	I didn't get one sooner
comment:	I just got this lens and I must say, I am excited with the results. Definately sharper than any of the Primes and pretty close to the Beercan @ f/4.5. Though the 135 f/2.8 was alot sharper at f/8 and beyond, I was surprised that the bokeh was a little bit harsher than the 28-135. Since this is the DAY 1 TEST MODE, I will update as I get more familiar with this glass. I am very happy with this lens and am surprised that I was able to pick up a Crossed x version for so little money.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: soter review date: July-15-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	35-105 28-85 80-200
price paid:	300€
positive:	built quality control (focus, zoom, macro)
negative:	autofocus speed no hood usable
comment:	*I'm still working on the review* I'm not sotisfied as others from this lens and I will do much more tests in the future. This review will reflect the development of my ideas 1) For me, focus with this lens is problematic. Manual or auto, it is much harder than with the 35-105 or with the 80-200 2.8 2) I love the macro, the BLUE macro function of the classic Minolta lens 3) I love color 4) I dont love the contrast or the definition. Still to understand if there is a problem with mine

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: lattiboy review date: July-15-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 18-250mm, Minolta 28-85mm, Minolta 100-200mm, Beercan, 35-70mm, 50mm
price paid:	185 USD (used)
positive:	1) SHARP 2) Build quality (tank-like) 3) Shows good taste
negative:	1) HEAVY! 2) Looooonnng 3) A bit slow on the focusing 4) Hunts in low light
comment:	A real beauty! Sharp as many primes throughout the range and almost no distortion. Images more than usable wide-open. Stopped down to f/7-8 it is almost as sharp as my 50mm.... however, holding this lens back is the sheer SIZE of the thing. It is such a limited range (for the size), it feels almost silly carrying it around. It hurts your neck and cramps your wrist if used for any real amount of time. Even my super-thick neck strap feels strained when walking with this on. For the $$$, there is nothing even approaching this lens. Buy it, save it. It'll probably skyrocket in value when the FF gets going.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: charlemeign review date: July-02-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 Minolta 50mm 1.7 Minolta 35mm f/2 Minolta 70-210 f/4 Minolta 135 f/2.8 Sigma 20-40 f2.8
price paid:	200
positive:	Sharp BEAUTIFULY colors GREAT range
negative:	Everything needs to be about 5 feet away... Min Focusing Distance is awful.
comment:	This lens would be perfect if it focused closer. The colors are incredible... And these lenses are built very well.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: petesidewalk review date: June-18-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	K/M 75-300 Big Beercan K/M 35-70 4 Sony 18-70 Kit Lens K/M 50 1.7 K/M 70-210 4.5-5.6 K/M 70-210 4 Beercan K/M 28 2.8 K/M 28-80xi K/M 28-135 4-4.5 K/M 35-70 3.5-4.5 Tamron 200-400 5.6 LD NEW Sigma 75-200 2.8-3.5 K/M 80-200 2.8 HS G Sigma 75-200 2.8-3.5
price paid:	275.00USD
positive:	Sharpness Amazing Colors Sharpness Build Bokeh Macro G-like performance Good Price
negative:	NONE that negate IQ
comment:	This lens is capable of unbelievable photos. For the price, it is the best performing lens one can buy. IQ is G-like. Does have a weight issue and is prone to flare, but these issues don't overshadow the lens performance. I have read others reviews of this lens being soft and slow to focus and I cannot stress HOW STRONGLY THAT HAS NOT BEEN MY EXPERIENCE. This lens focuses faster that any of my other lenses, and is tack sharp stopped down. I think I got lucky and got a great copy.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: steunix review date: May-06-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
positive:	Build quality Colors Sharpness
negative:	Heavy Minimum focus distance Hunts on a700
comment:	Heavy, built like a tank, I used this lens a lot on 7D, and it gave very good results. On my a700, it hunts a bit too much and the focus is often not precise, so I sold it. The colors are great to me, but the most disappointing feature is the minimum focus distance, that is approximately 1,5 meters... definitely limiting the 135mm side too much. The focus ring was a bit too loose, but maybe it was my copy. Still, I have to understand the meaning of a macro switch at 28mm... not very useful indeed.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: Calistoga Guy review date: March-16-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	50mm f1.7 Zeiss 16-80mm
price paid:	170
positive:	Can be very sharp and pleasing. Beautiful front element. Lens 'locks' at short and tele end so no creep
negative:	Heavy. Min foucus distance can be a pain. Can be too soft below f7.1 slow to focus and hunts a bit more than normal on my A700. NOT a low light/indoor lens. Lens barely fits in my bag.
comment:	After reading many reviews for this old classic (and many others) I worried about zoom creep. Why nobody ever mentions that this lens 'locks' on the short end and tele end is beyond me. If it has been mentioned, I don't recall. Anyway how did I get here? I had a zeiss 16-80mm and it was bad, I don't care what anyone tells me, there are bad copies of that lens out there. That lens had a bad habit of making sure nothing in the pic was in focus. Of course when it nailed it (not often enough) boy was it a sweet sharp lens. So I dumped it. I ended up using only my 50mm 1.7 for much longer than I thought I would. I just didn't like anything out there for the price. Took a chance on this lens with a very tiny scratch in the glass, hence the low price. So far I see the lens (at least this copy) is far too soft in too many instances. What are they? First, go beyond about 90mm and it can get too soft. Virtually everything that would be at 'infinity' is too soft, especially at 28mm. This lens can be sharp for me in two cases as well. If I open the lens up to say f4 to f5-ish it can be sharp for nearby objects and people. Far away, and it can just be way too soft or hit and miss (heavy on the miss). Now for people and things 15 feet way and beyond, this baby seems like it needs to be at f8 to f11 to be sharpish. In that range, as a walk around lens shooting street style photography and candids about a quarter of shots taken in that way will be just short of what I would call razor sharp for a lens like this or in this price range. It has never, nor will it ever be razor sharp like say a big G lens. Color and Contrast are strong, and I so far haven't really noticed much CA even when pixel peeping. On my A700 it can hunt more often than my prime when I'm using focus points that are not in the center, and sometimes just the simplest scence can cause it to hunt, but it hasn't been a big issue. Right now I'm loving this lens as a BRIGHT daytime walk around lens. Indoors, opening it up to get a decent shutter speed it can be a bit soft. I hate using a flash, however stepping this lens to about f7 thru 9 and hitting someone with a flash indoors it can be prime sharp, dare I say a tad sharper than my 50mm every now and then. It could be that my copy isn't 100% and that it's just old... reasons I might not give praise as others do so take my opinion with that in mind. Beyond the 100mm mark, well I try not to use it too much. To get sharpness f10 is the min and it's not very common to get any real sharpness at 135 even with a fast shutter and f11. I don't see sharpness get better beyond f11. Ok now for the macro, it's not that bad, not so great but here's why it's a blessing. The min focus distance is yes near five feet. Worse yet, it can be more than that. I've notice that if I'm about 5-6 feet from something and I zoom to 100mm up to 135, the lens can't lock focus until I move back about another foot or two. Even manually the lens isn't physically capable of focusing in such instances. So yes the macro mode won't let you take truly gigantic pics of flowers and bees, but the range will let you take pics of anything from a few inches to nearly a foot away, it's good enough to get close for ebay pics and such. I still keep my prime for indoor stuff as this lens can get too soft at f4-f5 and such. For the money I paid it's a top notch lens compared to what's out there in this price range. If you can get a copy at a good price, it's at least worth taking a chance on. I'm glad I did in spite of its quirks. Almost forgot about flare. For night pics with some bright lights, it's better than my prime. While my prime is fast, it's a flare monster in such cases, here it's more controlled and rarely a problem. In bright light, I haven't seem much flare, but because there is no hood, I've had the sun hit my lens often. This causes my images to wash out and lose contrast, but to actually see flare, I usually have the sun in frame or nearly in the frame. Also be careful. Unlike other 72mm zooms, there's virtually no distance between the front element and the edge of the barrel. Hitting that glass can be super easy. I'm looking at a filter, maybe the new Zeiss 72mm T* coated ones. And one final bonus of this lens. Its big barrel and 72mm front is something I like. Bonus, when taking pics, especially last weekend at a local Jazz and Blues fest, people get the heck out of your way, they stop rather than walk in front of you, and just notice and or respect you a little more. It sounds funny, but going from a dinky prime or zoom with a 55mm front element, you'll notice a difference in those around you. I've got pics taken with this lens here http://s231.photobucket.com/albums/ee146/sslabs/ Pics are labeled so you know what lens I've used, all are taken with an Alpha A700 only, and all are big-ish in size, no dinky 600 x 800 pics, just click on the full size option. I'm posting pics there all the time.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Kaishi review date: February-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 F3.5-4.5 28-80 F4.5-5.6 SAL1870
price paid:	230 USD (excellent)
positive:	Focus speed.
negative:	VERY heavy. 0.75 kg. A little slow.
comment:	This lens is absolutely stunning. Using one will be the best argument you'll find for wanting to own one. They're rare, expensive, heavy, and slow, but the photos are completely worth it. Macro is roughly 1:4 magnification. Lens has a unique rear-focus system that allows for extremely light and quick focusing. A clutched focus ring would be an improvement but is really unnecessary. If you can find one of these, at least consider it. In my opinion, it is the best lens purchase I've ever made.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Sildra review date: January-17-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 50/1,7 Minolta 35-105/3,5-4,5 Minolta 50/2,8 macro Minolta 100/2,8 macro Tokina 19-35/3,5-4,5
price paid:	180 $
positive:	excellent build good sharpness quite fast AF
negative:	heavy for a walk zoom 1,5m minimal focal distance
comment:	One hell piece of lens! Definitely one of the most succesful product made by Minolta in optics. It's can be reference to other lens in sharpness and colour issues. Someone can find it as too heavy for a usual walkaround lens but in my opinion it's so much versatile that its weight shouldn't be measured as cons. It's really worth of money spent and I highly recommend it to everyone that cannot decide which lens buy instead of kit 18-70 lens. Regarding build issues one must be told that it's diffucult to find something more solid in the lens market (even today)then this model. Perfect glass.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: awaken77 review date: January-16-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-70/3.5-5.6 Tamron 17-50/2.8 Vario-Sonnar ZA 16-80/3.5-4.5 Minolta 85/1.4 G Sony 50/1.4 Sigma 20/1.8
positive:	Bokeh Color rendition Built like a tank Impressive focal range Neglible distorstion
negative:	AF hunting on Sony DSLR-A100 Softiness Prone to flare No standard shade
comment:	Old Minolta legend, rare to find in good condition nowadays. It renders pleasant (but not very sharp comparing to modern "digital" zooms) picture with nice colors and smooth bokeh. I consider it mainly as a portrait lens "all-in-one". Wide end (28-35mm) is very soft, and it isn't a choice for landscaping. However, form film and 6MP digital it it probably OK. Biggest drawback for me is AF hunting with A100 - it's almost impossible to use this lens on incandescent light on wide end. On Dynax 7 film camera, AF is OK - fast and reliable. It would be interesting to try it on A700.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: accady review date: December-20-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 28-105/2.8 Minolta 35-105/3.5-4.5 RS Minolta 18-70/3.5-5.6 (kit) Minolta 100-200/4.5 Minolta 50/1.4
price paid:	140 USD
positive:	-image quality -range -price
negative:	-heavy / weird balance -min focus distance (sometimes)
comment:	Given its range, the image quality is outstanding as it easily matches some primes (especially from 28 to 100mm). That's the reason I consider it a deal even at current 300+ prices for a good sample. It is prone to flare in certain conditions but this doesn't bother me at all. It is the kind of flare I like (spreads evenly throughout the frame) and this could be used creatively. Another 'treat' from this lens is the macro mode. Many consider it useless but I quite like it. Getting close to you subject at wide angle makes for some creative opportunities.(TIP: While using the macro feature of the lens, switch the camera to manual focus to enable the focus assist feature - at least that's how it works on my 7D). Min focus distance can be annoying in tight spaces (indoors) but this is rarely a problem for me as I use it mostly outdoors. While it seems built like a tank, the vast number of bad samples proves it is in fact extremely delicate. Mine has no problem so far but I feel I need to have extra care every time I use it. One thing I really don't like about it is the way it balances on the camera. Due to a heavier front, the overall camera-lens balance is different from any other lens I own and this feels weird. Recently, I've noticed the AS/SSS performance is better with other lenses at same FL/aperture combination and I suspect this has to do with the balance. My Tamron 28-105/2.8 is of similar weight but it balances better on camera and has better AS results. Anyway, take this with a grain of salt as it well may be just personal preference. Final conclusion: the image quality easily makes up for all the negatives. I think this is the queen of non-G Minolta zooms.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Dumont review date: December-16-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	135/2.8 85/1.4 G D
price paid:	160 USD (used)
positive:	Very sharp, images IMHO are G like (very 85/1.4'ish)
negative:	Macro at 28mm seems pointless. My copy's zoom is not very smooth especially bewteen 100 and 135mm. I haven't read all the reviews but mine seems to have a familiar problem of AF not working at certain focal lentghs.
comment:	I think this lens is as much a classic as the beercan which it compliments very nicely on film or a full frame digital (A900?), on cropped digital the range is not so usefull but better than the usual 28-75mm/2.8 long zooms if not faster... I only bought this lens because of the low price (ahh mine also came with a small scratch in the front element which sofar does not show in the photos), I suppose it's worth the usual USD250-350 a good copy gets...

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Webguyyy review date: December-04-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 16-105 Sony 18-70
price paid:	550cdn new
positive:	Sharp pictures, very well made classic lens.
negative:	Heavy, large filter size. Macro feature at 28mm. Range mostly suited to film cameras. No lens hood.
comment:	This was a great lens in it's day. Takes excellent pictures on 35mm cameras and digital. I used this lens for a long time before recently selling it because it's range on a digital equates to 35mm equivalent of 42-202.5mm. Great range on a film camera, but far less useful on a digital with a c size sensor. Biggest drawback was that it is a heavy lens, and the large filter size makes attachments expensive. The lens never had a lens hood, because of it's 28mm wide beginning range. It was designed before the current petal lens hoods. The macro feature is at 28mm, which is like having no macro feature at all. It's a good, collectors item, but with digital, it's range limits it's usefulness.

sharpness: 3 color: 3 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: bender21 review date: November-30-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 24/1.8 MinO 35/2 MinO 50/1.4 MinO 100/2 MinO 135/2.8 KM 28-75(D) etc....
price paid:	180 USD (used)
positive:	Beautiful lens to behold... Fantastic zoom if working properly
negative:	Build issues.. Flare Heavy Long Min. Focus distance Zoom creep
comment:	I have no doubt that these lenses were/are fantastic, however I have heard of and seen a number of problems with them. The first is how delicate the internal alignment seems to be. I have seen some image samples that attest to the great IQ this lens can have, but that hasn't been my experience and felt this would be the perfect place to share it. I have had the same issues as everyone else, with the minimum focus distance and flare. At first, I loved this lens.. it is absolutely beautiful and I had taken some very nice photos with it, then boom, disaster strikes! After about 3 years of owning and using this lens, the zoom mechanism begins to lock up and become stuck, or won't zoom past a certain point, and then the focus won't focus past a certain point. I had it opened up and what do you know, something broke off inside for absolutely no reason that I can think of, the metal tab to the macro switch I believe and it had been loose, wreaking havoc inside the lens. Well, everything seems to be fine again, but then I shoot a whole day of pictures and they are suddenly dreadful. A haze or halos over/around everything, terrible sharpness, colors and contrast are very underwhelming.. I believe the alignment of the elements might have been knocked out of whack, and after some checking around, it seemed to be a common problem with this lenses, thus my thought of them being pretty delicate.. Supposedly the alignment can be shot by even a good shock.. I try to baby my equipment, and it happened to me. Oh well. I really do want to like this lens, I believe they put alot of money, and really over-engineered it, and believe it is capable of alot, but I just couldn't trust it again.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Jeroen review date: November-16-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	24-85 F3.5-4.5 35-70 F4 24 F2.8 Sigma 70-300 Apo Macro
price paid:	130 euro
positive:	sharp great colors if it was not so heavy it would be a great alround lens
negative:	heavy no dedicated lens hood
comment:	Used this lens a lot on film camera. Loved it. Good range. I sold it because I used to travel a lot and wanted to travel light.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 2	user: Maffe review date: November-15-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28-70G, Sigma 24-70/2.8, 80-200/2.8
positive:	Color, image quality, build
negative:	MFD 1,5 meter, flare control
comment:	This lens is just lovely, build is excellent this is how a lens should be built. Color is like other minolta lenses from this time, great! AF is fast, my 7D hunts a little, on the Dynax 7 it´s faster and less hunting. Would be nice to test this on a700... MFD is 1.5 meter and that is one of two bad things with this lens. Flare is the other week spot.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: MCNGUYEN review date: November-01-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron SP AF 90mm F2.8 Di Minolta 28-85mm F3.5-4.5 RS Minolta 70-210mm F3.5-4.5 Minolta 35-105mm F3.5-4.5 Minolta 75-300mm F4.5-5.6
price paid:	150 Euros used
positive:	Wonderfull color and sharpness Fast focus
negative:	Heavy, close focus a bit long
comment:	Great lens. Love the colors it produces. It's my walk around lens now. Would change it for the Tamron only for macro or portrait. Heavy, but that means a quality lens too. Samples here: http://www.pbase.com/mcnguyen/como_2007

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: TangoJetta review date: October-17-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 28-75 F2.8
price paid:	$160. USD shipped
positive:	Sharp, great colors and bokeh, build, great range
negative:	Heavy, no hood
comment:	This is an great lens!!! Very sharp, contrast is outsanding, AF speed is good, and great colors on my 7D and 7xi. I mostly used it as my all around outdoor lens since I have the Minolta 28-75 F2.8 for indoors shots. The build is second to none.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: hotwire review date: October-07-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 24-135
positive:	Flexible range Near constant maximum aperture
negative:	No Hood
comment:	Great lens, but I prefer my faster f/2.8's, but that is just a matter of my shooting style.

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Minolta Head review date: October-06-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28-70 (D) 24-105mm (D)
price paid:	180 USD (used)
positive:	Sharpness Bokeh Solid Build
negative:	72mm Filter Autofocus Hunting Weight
comment:	The sharpness/bokeh/contrast/colour are typical of older Minolta lenses. I examined my first test shot for sharpness and realised that the whole shot from edge to edge was crisp. the build is solid, the lens is a little heavy compared to modern carbon based offerings. A biggest negatives for me are the AF speed which is slow and unpredictable, and the weight. Macro is really funky, operating at the wide end, you have to take care not slam the lens right into the subject it is so close. Overall I would not hesitate to buy another, but be aware of the condition..I was lucky with mine, many others have bought paper-weights, this after all is a fairly old model. July 2008: I sold this lens simply because the weight added to my kit bag is too much to cope with.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: NM Guy review date: October-06-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 24-105 Tamron 35-105 Minolta 100-200 Minolta 17-35 Minolta 50
price paid:	$130 USD
positive:	Very usable range Image quality is exceptional
negative:	Kinda heavy Long minimum focus range
comment:	This is the default lens on the camera. I agree with about all of the comments on the lens, both positive and negative, that have been posted previously. I won't rehash that ground again. As far as images the lens can capture, generally they are extremely good. In my opinion they are as good as any more recent lens and must have been phenomenal when it was manufactured. I've found limitations in the flare and minimum focus length though (OK, guess I will go into past comments). My copy of the lens came to me used. It had seen some pretty good use before it got to me. With that in mind though, it shows very good workmanship and rugged components. Even showing some previous use it is a solid, smooth performer that above all gives great images.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: artuk review date: October-06-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 24-85 f3.5-4.5 Minolta 24-105 f3.5-4.5 Sigma 24-70 f2.8 EX
positive:	Very good image quality Classic Minolta colour Very well built
negative:	No dedicated lens hood 4ft close focus
comment:	Originally launched with the first batch of AF lenses with the Minolta 7000 AF body, this was an expensive lens (L350). As with all the first generation AF lenses, it has a metal body, and uses (I believe) glass elements rather than plastic, which would account for its weight of around 700g. It is rumoured this lens was designed by, or co-designed with, Leica, but I do not believe there is any evidence for this. My own understanding was that it was designed and built by hand at Minolta's lens plant in Osaka. It differs in detail from other Minolta lenses as the focus ring is in front of the lens mount, near the body, no doubt making it easier to find than at the end of the zoom. Fingers need to be kept clear as it rotates when the camera drives the AF gear, as it is not clutched. A very wide knurled metal zoom ring fills most of the lens body. Build quality is exceptional. Minolta stated at launch that the large front element (72mm) had been designed to give good image quality at 28mm at full aperture. At 28mm and full aperture (f4) image quality is very good to excellent, from centre to corner (full frame). Stopping down one or two stops improves image quality a little, but not by a great deal. It can be used at full aperture with confidence. At the long end, where maximum aperture drops to f4.5 the situation is similar, with good to very good performance fully open rising to very good to excellent about 2 stops down. Intermediate focal lengths are equally strong. At 28mm, a "macro" mode can be engaged by pulling the macro button and twisting the zoom ring beyond its 28mm limit. The zoom ring then becomes a focus control with a well weighted damped action. In this mode, the lens can focus at a ratio of about 1:4 (not true "macro), but this represents a subject distance mere centimetres from the front element, so care may be needed! The image quality in this mode is extremely good, sharp across the frame even from full aperture. The lens displays typical early Minolta colour and contrast. Overall contrast is moderate, giving good overall image and edge contrast but without the aggressively high contrast of some modern lens designs. Colour is well saturated, and seems to exhibit that classic Minolta "liquid" colour. This type of image quality is often attributed to good micro-contrast, the ability to handle very fine changes in contrast and colour/tone giving the image a very "real" almost 3 dimentional quality. Leica have always designed their lenses with this in mind, and this may explain the rumours of a Leica design in this lens. Distortions are surprisingly well controlled for a lens of this vintage and extreme range. There is some barreling at 28mm, though it is not the worst I have seen in a full frame zoom lens. At the long end, there is some subtle pincushioning, but it should generally not cause a problem. This isn't the ideal lens for architectural work at its widest end, as straight lines toward the edge of the frame will display a little outward bowing, but it is usable. AF speed is surpirsingly good for a lens of this vintage, the AF gearing is reasonably high, and on a mid-range body such as a Dynax 7, AF speed is good and accurate. Unfortunately, the minumim focus distance is around 4 feet. This was not doubt a limitation of the design at the time, the lens undoubtedly having been designed by Minoltas engineers with only a little assistance with computer aided design. Given it's focal length range was quite extreme, the image quality was exceptionally good, and the aperture reasonable, something had to give - and it was focus distance! Flare control in undoubyedly is biggest weakness. Bizarrely, it was never sold with a dedicate lens hood, though in fairness a hood designed for 28mm would offer no protection at 135mm - just check the hood on the 35-200mm Xi to see! Although I would not say the lens glass itself is especially prone to flare, with a 72mm front element right at the front of the lens, it is easy to get flare when a light source is out of shot but in front of the lens. It tends to be the contrast reducing type of flare than can ruin an image, rather than the more localised type of "sunspot" flaring. There are some internet reports that some examples are more prone to flare than others. The best solution is either to use a hand to shade it when it becomes a problem, or use a rubber collpapsible lens hood that screws into the filter ring (Hama et al make them). Overall, this is a terrific lens. It may not compare to some of todays high resolution and high contrast lens designs on digital, but the overall image quality is fantastic.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: leitnor review date: August-17-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28-80/3.5-5.6 50/1.7 70-210/4 24-85/3.5-4.5 17-35/2.8-4
price paid:	140€ (used)
positive:	Very sharp Contrast Good zoom range Well built Quite quick AF Looks nice on 7D
negative:	Heavy Bad minimum focus No dedicated hood Flare
comment:	I think its sharper than the 24-85 or the 17-35. Very useful walkaround lens. Focal length is good but it will be even better if it starts at 24. I think one of the best Minolta AF lens. I recommend for everyone!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: DLNY review date: July-25-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 28-75 EX 2.8 Minolta 28-85
price paid:	175 euro
positive:	Everything, I like this lens better than my 80-200 HS APO
negative:	No hood Minimum focus distance a bit to long
comment:	Everyone wants a Beercan, but I think this lens should be in every true Minoltian's bag. Because of this lens I'm thinning out my line-up, these are the 3 main lenses I'll be using from now on: Tokina 20-35, Minolta 28-135, Minolta 200 HS APO

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: lauge review date: July-25-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	18-70kit, 50/1.7, 70-210/4
price paid:	133€ (mint in box)
positive:	Color and contrast, Build to last, Amazingly sharp, Price/Quality, AF performance
negative:	Min. focus distance, Good samples seems rare
comment:	This lens really lives up to its reputation! It compares to the 50/1.7 in sharpness and it's miles ahead of the kit lens in every aspect. Its build quality is amazing, if it wasn’t so heavy it would have been the perfect walk-around zoom but then again good glass is heavy. Color and contrast is really amazing and I haven’t really experienced that much problem with flare as others have. The macro at 28mm gives a fun perspective to macro shots. Gets a bit softer at 100mm and up but still sharp. The price and quality of this great vintage Minolta lens makes it a must have for the cheap lineup.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: andapp review date: July-09-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28-85 RS 135 2.8
price paid:	L150 (used) see note
positive:	Build quality Colour Blokeh Sharp Fast AF
negative:	Rare Poor minimum focus length
comment:	I have been searching for one of these lenses for some time, they are becoming rare as hens teeth. I wanted one to supplement my 28-85 RS that use in my studio as I often have to change to my 135 2.8 for tight headshots. Eventually found one on Ebay that was described as perfect but with a sticking zoom. I paid way too much for it and when it arrived not only did it have a sticking zoom but the filter thread was damaged where it had been dropped and the optics were filthy. I called Dave at the Camera Repair Workshop and he agreed to take a look, after a bit of persuasion he agreed to repair and clean it for a very reasonable cost. I now have an excellant example and boy is it great, fantastic colours, sharp and feels fantastic in use. If you can find one of these lenses grab it.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: Pyl62 review date: July-09-07
	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:	€200
positive:	Build Quality Image Quality Good range
negative:	Heavy Prone to flare Not wide enough at the short end Very poor near focus range
comment:	Fantastic walk around lens except for a few things: I haven't got around to getting a hood yet and it is very prone to flare, it is quite heavy and 24 or even 20mm at the wide end would have been excellent! Also, the near focus range is pretty bad. The build quality is nothing short of stunning! Great IQ and bokeh, stunning colors!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: madcat207 review date: April-24-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 28-300 XR LD IF
price paid:	$50 (got lucky)
positive:	Excellent zoom range. Built like a tank. Good aperture. Rear focus provides very fast focus.
negative:	A bit nose heavy. Very delicate front element.
comment:	For those that don't know, this is the father of all original Minolta wide zooms. While the 28-85 and 28-105's are "dime a dozen", the 28-135 truly is something special. The lens is one of the last designed with Leica, and it shows. The lens has a giant front element (72mm), and a good aperture throughout its zoom. One of the really unique aspects though, is the rear focus. Unlike every other Minolta lens made, this lens features the focus ring and elements at the back of the lens, rather than the front. While this is due to the design of the lens, it has the side effect of creating a very fast AF system (less gearing, higher turn ratio). The optics of this lens are what truly makes it great. It is easy to see the quality put into the lens, in both physical feeling, and the pictures produced. The colors are crisp, and the lines are sharp. However, there are two flaws: 1) No hood is included, and the lens can be prone to flare. This is fixable though, with a good after-market metal or rubber hood (metal obviously fits the look of the lens better). 2) The front element is extremely delicate. It is very easy to scratch a coating; and while only cosmetic, it obviously can't be fixed. If you do get a copy with a pristine element, put a protective filter on it, and never remove it. All-in-all, this is a great lens if you can find it. They are currently demanding a high price on fleabay, but if you are looking for the ultimate in original Minolta glass, it is worth it.

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 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:
price paid:	100.00 CAN (used)
positive:	Well built. Focus ring is in a perfect spot.
negative:	Bit too heavy.
comment:	The toughest lens I have ever seen.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: DavidB review date: March-26-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	24-105 zoom, 100 macro 24 2.8 200 2.8 APO
price paid:	Forget
positive:	Very sharp, good colour, excellent range for film & FF, a good all-around lens that I use if only taking one. Very solid build.
negative:	Heavy, lack of hood, flare can be an issue if shooting into light. Front element rotates with zoom. Don't use macro much at all... have 100 macro.
comment:	I have owned this lens since it first came on the market, and it is the one I always take if travelling "light" (for film or FF a900). I use the 24-105 on my 7D as I like the compactness, light weight and wider angle on APC. This is an excellent lens in almost every respect, and has never given me any trouble. Examples can be found on my blog at: http://web.mac.com/davidbannister

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: maxfarphoto review date: March-15-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 17-35 f 2.8/4 Minolta 70-210 f4 (beercan) Minolta 75-300 f4.5/5.6 (big beercan)
price paid:	€ 150
positive:	- Sharp - Solid as a rock - Smooth zooming - Great colors - Fast
negative:	- Hood missing - Delicate front lens
comment:	Great walkaround lens, I am using it in a trip across Asia and found it extremely versatile. Focal length is good but it will be even better if it starts at 24. Flare is not so much a problem but, of course, you must take care of sun position to avoid it. This lens is incredibily sharp, even sharper that my 75-300 (big beercan), as from f 5.6 to f 11. I have tried at min aperture f22 and it is still sharp (but it was cloudy so I don't know how it manages with diffraction). This is the kind of lens which makes me an A-mount system "addicted"...... edit 01/05/11 Now on A850 it performs its best...what a lens!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: yariv review date: February-10-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 28-100 (D) Minolta 28-105 xi Minolta 50 f/1.7 Minolta 70-210 f/4 (Beercan) Sigma 28-70 f/2.8 EX
price paid:	200 USD (USED)
positive:	Very Sharp Very Fast AF Excellent Zoom Range
negative:	Limited near focus (1.5m)
comment:	I bought this Lens 6 month ago after reading lots of reviews at dyxum web site. I think others just Said it all. This is my favorite lens which I never take off. I like the speed and accurate of the AF. I like it's sharpness. A bit of a problem to use indoor because of the Limited near focus. This is MUST HAVE lens for all KM users.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 2	user: mikiha review date: February-01-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	canon 28-135 IS USM
price paid:	160$ used
positive:	sharp !! at f 5.6 very nice bokeh very nice colors build like a Tank
negative:	heavy minimum focus too big no hood
comment:	wow this is a good walk around lens not so good handling flares but if you can set up a hood it will be fine. very sharp at f5.6 - F8 beautiful colors and bokeh the big problem is the minimum focus range if you want to take pictures indoor its a problematic lens - better of taking the minolta 17-35 .

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: TheBeej review date: January-24-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta AF 18-70mm f3.5-5.6 Minolta AF 70-210mm f4 Minolta AF 50mm f1.7
price paid:	$200 USD
positive:	- Build quality is top notch - Awesome range of focal lengths - Very usable macro function - Extremely impressive sharpness, color, and contrast across all apertures - Fast AF!
negative:	- Slightly less than ideal range on APS-C sized sensor (wide) - Very prone to flare (no dedicated hood) - Bizarre minimum focus distance characteristics
comment:	After spending four days in NYC over New Years, I found myself using the 5D kit lens a lot more than I had anticipated. I was pretty spoiled with the sharpness of the 50mm and beercan, but some of the shots I took with the kit lens were pretty soft (no surprise). Not a big deal, but I knew I could get a better performance out of a higher quality lens. I cruised around Dyxum and various other photo forums dedicated to Minolta glass, and I ended up deciding on the 28-135mm to use as my main walkaround lens to replace the kit lens for that purpose. The minimum aperture of F4 leaves it a little less than ideal for indoor use, but it comes from the same generation of lenses as the Beercan, and was manufactured by hand at the legendary Sakai plant (where the G glass lenses were built as well in the mid 1980s). Since it arrived in the mail on Saturday, I haven't taken it off my camera. It's an amazing performer and I got it for a really fair price from a fellow Dyxum member. Highly recommended lens! The bokeh is very pleasant, images are super-sharp and clear, and the color/contrast creates images that have that "pop" I've been looking for. Should Sony ever go full frame, this would be the ultimate killer lens!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: RobY review date: November-05-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	24-105 D 28-85 3.5/4.5 18-70 "Kit lens"
price paid:	€200
positive:	Very very Sharp Excellent Zoom Range Minolta colour Build Quality AF speed
negative:	Limited near focus (5ft) Heavy No dedicated hood Large compared to lens with similar range Did I say heavy?
comment:	It's built like a tank and does look the business on the 7D. Never used the "macro" setting (28mm only). Got over the lack of a dedicated hood by using an extending 77mm rubber hood with a 72 - 77mm step-up, this also protects the big 72mm filter thread. Thanks gsaronni, it's a great lens! I've now seen its true potential on a 9xi film body. The detail it resolves is fantastic, on the A900 it is a great lens.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: jubilee0504 review date: November-05-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28-80, 28/2.8, 50/1.7, 135/2.8
price paid:	L160 (s/h 1995)
positive:	Very Sharp Excellent Zoom Range Build Quality AF speed
negative:	Limited near focus (5ft) No hood Zoom range not so useful on digital
comment:	I bought this s/h in 1995 when I had a 9000 and 500Si. It's a superb travel lens and has been all over the globe with me. It's built like no other modern lens and will probably last forever. It is incredibly sharp for a zoom at all focal lengths and apertures, holding its own even against prime lenses. The limitations are the close focus at 5ft, although it is possible to manually focus closer at 28mm only - I have found this useful for getting wedding couples in the back of the car shots. Also because of the front element size and focal length range there isn't a practical way of fitting a hood to it - it can be prone to flare in contre-jour situations. A great lens!

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: PMac review date: October-30-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	70-210 f4 (beercan)
price paid:	210USD (used)
positive:	Really, really sharp. Very useful range.
negative:	Self extending front is a pain. Flare.
comment:	This is my first ever review of my first ever lens on my first ever DSLR so treat this however you like (and I'll try an update it when I know more). This lens is my basic walk around kit and I love the images it creates, the detail is so rich and sharp that there is plenty to play with when I get home. It is heavy but then I'm a big guy used to carrying around heavy stuff so thats not really posing a problem at the moment. The downside is that I'm having real problems using it effectively due to flare. Inside, with a flash, in flat light etc the lens is a gem but once the sun is out I'm really struggling. At the moment my solution is to simply underexpose the image to preserve all that wonderful detail and then play with the lighting in post processing. Much of the flare manifests as almost a faint blue mist so I wonder if a UV filter might help a little but until then I'll continue to rely on software.

sharpness: 3 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: DaveK review date: October-16-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- Zeiss 24-70 - Zeiss 135 1.8 - Minolta 100 2
price paid:	150 Euro
positive:	- nice range - solid - Minolta colours
negative:	- softness - flare - weight (not realy a problem) - no lensehood - focus distance
comment:	I owned 5 of them, because this lens must be a lens in the 'G' quality. But all 5 were not. Maybe I had all foulty lenses, but they didn't bring me what was promissed in this section. Not on the A100, nor the A700, nor the A850. Very disappointing results. Photos were all rather soft. Love the looks of this lens though. But again, very overrated imho. Swapped it for the CZ 24-70 eventualy: a lot more expensive, but worth every dime.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: seagr112 review date: September-23-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Vintage 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5 135mm f/2.8
positive:	Sharp Image Reproduction Solid Vintage Build Very Minimal Distortion Fast Rear IF Natural Color Rendition
negative:	Minimum Focusing Distance Max Aperture f4/4.5 28mm = 42mm digital
comment:	I am totally hooked on this lens. As most other reviewers have pointed out, this is one of those classic Minolta lenses that proved the company knew how to make great (and innovative) glass back in the day. Released in 1985 with the first line of vintage Maxxum lenses, it has been out of production for some time now. For covering such a wide focal range, the lens is close to flawless in its image reproduction. The only "complaints" that I have about it are the limitations in maximum aperture, minimum focusing distance and the (only) 28mm wide end. The lens was very expensive in 1980's dollars ($600-800 retail), so I'm sure its price would have been exponentially higher had those issues been addressed. I use this lens as my everyday casual walkaround with my 7D/VC-7D. Quite a handful, but it works. And it minimizes lens changes with its wide range. Many of these lenses have crossed my desk in the past few years, and it surprises me how poorly cared for some of the copies were. Perhaps because of its size and weight it has the potential to receive more of a beating, but what a shame! On the flipside, mine is a beauty and the zoom is still tight with no creep whatsoever. Well used copies tend to get a little sloppy. The rear AF is fast, and the front element (obviously) doesn't rotate which is great for CPL use. The macro is pretty much useless, but there if you need it. I consider the vintage 28-85mm zoom to be the "poor man's" 28-135mm. A little less range, just a little less of a performer, but great value as it seems to have fallen out of favor of late. The 135mm prime is comparable at this focal length but with the larger maximum aperture and a steep price. In the digital domain, the 28-135mm loses a lot on the wide end, (28mm becomes 42mm) but I have several wide primes to compensate for this and usually carry one of those if I think I'll need it. (My walkaround just got heavier!) Rebuild this lens with a 20mm wide end, make it f/2.8 and close focus....sorry, just dreaming for a minute! As it stands, it's still one of my favorites. Highly recommended, but like all other good Minolta glass, getting more expensive to procure with the popularity of digital.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: jarenas review date: August-19-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 24-135, KM 28-75D
price paid:	175USD
positive:	built, color saturation, macro, super fast AF, 72mm filter
negative:	weight, no lens hood, focusing distance, rotating front element
comment:	If someone asked me which would be my last lens that I would sell it would be this one. Sure it has its short coming but the pros certainly outweigh the cons. First, the flare was nowhere near as bad as I was expecting. When compared to my sigma 50 2.8 it was slighty more prone to it but only by a few degrees. Also, the colors are so much more rich and vibrant than the KM and blows the Tamron out of the water. I'm still getting use to no lens hood and the fact that the focus ring is in the rear forces me to change my holding style. My version had a bargain rating and it looks like its had a long career but I have no doubt that it will continue to produce quality shots for me.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: terrylloydsmith review date: August-12-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28-75/2.8 KM 17-35/2.8-4 KM
price paid:	265.00
positive:	Nice, robust and sharp Great build quality
negative:	Close focus is just 1.5 meter
comment:	I purchased this lens from a dealer after reading the excellent reviews. The lens I bought has several wear places but the glass was clean. A well used "user" model. I'm surprised how good this zoom really is. It's just as sharp as the 28-75 KM and sharper than the 17-35 KM. I think I'll purchase another nicer example later...this lens is that good. Update: I finally purchased a very nice example of this lens and it's one fine optic...right there with the G glass as far as I'm concerned. Aside from the not-so-close focus, I love this lens.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Jose de Luna review date: July-31-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
positive:	Excellent build and optics quality.
negative:	No dedicated hood, closest focussing distance only 1.5m
comment:	I can't deny that this has been my workhorse lens since my film-days. Match this lens with a Fuji-Velvia and you will be amazed with the colors and sharpness of any photo that you'll capture. With the 7D, image quality is superb. In normal prints (6x4" or 5x7") you can't even distinguish the difference between a photo taken with this lens and with a prime or G lens. It also performs well in flash photography, very ideal for indoor parties or weddings. Rear focussing serves its purpose, and it seems very fast considering that it's an old lens (circa 1980s). The aperture is almost constant at f4. That means I can practically simulate a 340mm/f4 lens (135mm x 1.5 crop factor x 1.7 TC).

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: gipper51 review date: April-25-06
	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 28-70 2.8 Tok pro SV
price paid:	$120
positive:	-good zoom range, would be perfect if started at 24mm -sharp wide open at 28-100, very sharp stopped to f5.6 -quick AF even in low light (for its age) -good contrast -built like a tank -low distortion
negative:	-a tad soft wide open at 135mm, but still outstanding. -weighs as much as a tank -purple fringing even stopped down -flair prone -72mm filters = big $$
comment:	I picked this lens up on a whim when I found a near mint copy in a local camera store. I'd was new to SLRs and never heard of it. Didn't know how good a lens I found until doing some research and taking some pics. Compared to the 5D kit lens I had its a night and day difference. The lens is very sharp throughout but as with most big zoom lenses it loses just a bit at the wide open long end, but not much. It's still phenominal though, especially for the price. The zoom range is good but would be better on a APS-C camera if it started at 24mm. This is my primary lens and will be for a while I think. My only complaint I have with the IQ would be the purple fringing. It's often there even stopped down, and can be quite noticable wide open in high contrast pics. Given that this lens is hard to find these days, prices are high and it's big and heavy you may be better off with something newer but will have spend a lot of $$ for comparible image quality. If you can find a clean copy for a reasonable price I don't think you can go wrong.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 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:
price paid:	200 € used
positive:	Professional build level, colour's answer and sharpnes' definition
negative:	Minimum focus distance only 1,5 meters and flare.
comment:	Heavy and solid lens with macro possibility (only in macro position). Together the new 17-35 f/2,8-4,0 it make my couple for travel around the world.

sharpness: 4 color: 3 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 2	user: william_01 review date: February-24-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 28-105, Tamron 28-200 etc etc
positive:	Soild, fast/quiet AF, good focal length, good to excellent sharpness.
negative:	Flare prone, medium to low contrast. Longish minimum focal length.
comment:	Relatively sharp lens for its focal length. A solid performer. I trust this lens a lot. Indoor photogrpahy is no problem. With 5d's excellent high iso performance and this lens, covering 45mm to 180mm-ish focal length, it does the job alone. Close focus distance is a bit of problem, 1.5m. It's bit too long for intimit shots but can be rectified by carrying another lens, i.e. 50mm. I would definitely buy another one.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: RacingManiac review date: December-09-05
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	AF DT 18-70 f3.5-5.6 AF 70-210 f4
positive:	Very Sharp Good Build Quality MF ring near the body Surprisingly useful Macro mode Relatively constant aparture throughout.
negative:	Heavy Extending front element Hard to find shades for with 72mm ring Small-ish aparture for such a big glass. Long minimum focus distance
comment:	My replacement for 5D kit lens. Its got a useful 28-135mm(1.5x for 5D) range and relatively constant aparture throughout. Images are very sharp and in good color. It is heavy but adds a good feel to the small-ish 5D. The macro range is usable for doing model kit and stuff. I wish it is available for lower f stop though. And the 72mm filter thread is hard to find accessory for. Recommand it if you can find one in good shape and for reasonable cost.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: 2manycamera review date: December-06-05
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 24-105, 28/2, 35/2, 100/2, Sigma 28-200, 24-70/2.8
positive:	AF speed, sharpness, build quality, contrast
negative:	front heavy, flare, spinning focus ring under your finger
comment:	I like it so much I bought it twice. I bought a somewhat abused sample a few years back, stuck it on my 9000 and shot away! For all of its dents, scratches and dings, it focused FAST and took terrific pictures. When I got the 7D, I bought a mint copy and couldn't be happier. For walking around with just one lens, and I don't need the speed of a prime, I go to the 28-135. I don't do lens to lens tests, so my reviews are always subjective. I like the look of pictures with this lens. It is rumored it was one of the last lenses built in co-operation with Leitz. I believe this is true, as the lens displays many "leica" qualities. The contrast is marvelous, the colors rich and saturated. As far as drawbacks, the front heavy nature of this lens is why it is so hard to find a realy nice one. Carried over the shoulder, it takes on a life of its own. I've gone to wrapping the strap around my wrist and carrying the camera by the VC-7D. I needed to change my grip slightly, because the rear focus ring spins next to the mount, well worth it for the fast focus. No surprise, flare is an issue, but with 1.5 crop, a regular rubber hood causes no vignettes and flare control is markedly improved. My favorite accessory is the Minolta 72mm C. Polarizer. Since it is actually a 77-80mm filter in a permanent 72mm step-down ring, it is much easier to hold in place as the lens focuses, since the front element does turn. Finding one at a reasonable price is problematic, unless you can inspect prior to purchase. However, even abused lenses can still perform well due to its incredible build quality.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: brettania review date: October-07-05
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 28-75, Minolta 85 f1.4
price paid:	120 NZD (2/h)
positive:	There's still a lot to like about this "oldie" which I have judged against the highest quality lenses as well as the more digitally optimised KM 28-75 D. Good colours.
negative:	A bit too heavy for a walk-around in this day and age. Some CA.
comment:	If you are on a limited budget this one definitely still has a place if you are young and fit. I have had some good results when using flash with this lens.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: Kiklop review date: October-03-05
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 28-75/2.8D
price paid:	120 € (used)
positive:	Excellent build Sharp Beautiful image qualities Fast AF
negative:	Without dedicated hood Minimal focus distance a bit too long Occasional CA and flare Unfortunately not produced anymore
comment:	This is one of those lenses that witnesses how much care Minolta used to have in building lenses. My sample is almost 20 years old and is still smooth in operation. For lenses like this one, I've been a long time Minolta user. I'm glad to say, that many of the qualities are still here, in digital age. It's sharp (with a bit closed aperture it's real fantastic, at least until 100mm), with a special Minolta-like color renditions. You may be surprised how good the AF performance is despite the old design and a bit slowest aperture. With FF bodies it can be hard to find a good hood for it (this lens is designed without the hood in mind) but with 1.5 crop camera, a standard screw in hood will do the job nicely. Flare control was always a bit problematic, but I must confess that my sample does not exhibit this often (most of the time I use hood with it). What could be an "issue" with digital is CA on high-contrast scenes. The lens has a macro option, but only at the wide end, which I haven't find useful on many occasion. It's an old lens, but in many ways, it a G-class. Full frame Solid performance with very good results across the frame once stopped down a bit.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: natamambo review date: September-06-05
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
positive:	Sharpness, clarity, colour rendition, bokeh.
negative:	flare, weight (but worth lugging around)
comment:	This has to be the one of the sharpest, purest zooms ever made. I have gone from a host of primes on my X-700 to (most of the time) just one lens on the 7D. I have photographed birds 20 feet away and you can see every filament of the tail feathers in a photo blown to 12"x18" with no pixelation or distortion whatsover. The colours are just superb, the rendition of skin tones the best I have ever seen, sky, water, foliage, all reproduced perfectly without any shift in hue or colour depth. See http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=00DP4F&photo_id=3684190&photo_sel_index=0

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: agetan review date: July-09-05
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	24-105, 28-85 f3.5-4.5
positive:	Useful range, Sharp, Cheap, Nice Bokeh, Heavy, but well balance
negative:	flare could be a problem in some situation. A bit slow (old lens)
comment:	Nice and heavy lens, construction wise is very good. I love the way that the focusing ring is at the end of the lens because I use a lot of manual focussing when doing portrait. I like the bokeh (out of focus). The range is very nice on 7D and not too bad in terms of focusing with 7D or film 7. It is very sharp and colour is very natural. sample pictures can be found on http://www.pbase.com/hartanto_tan/lachlan_yvonne

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: lysander review date: June-18-05
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28-70G
positive:	Very great lens
negative:	Very heavy. Rare to find.
comment:	Very great lens.

Dyxum.com - Home of the Minolta / Alpha-mount dSLR photographer.

Feel free to contact us if needed. You can support future development by making a donation.

Lens index page

Fixed focal length

Macros

Zooms

Teleconverters

Comparative view

DOF Calculator

Dyxum Lens Database Reviewing Guideline

Lens Glossary

Suggest a lens

> Dyxum lens forum <

Support dyxum when buying lenses

Support Dyxum purchuasing at B&H

lens image

Summary ratings

sharpness: 4.65

color: 4.83

build: 4.79

distortion: 4.45

flare control: 3.47

overall: 4.44

total reviews: 178

Forum sample images

AF 28-135 F4-4.5 lens details