Minolta AF 70-210 F4 (beercan) reviews

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: flysheep review date: May-21-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 35-70 f/4
price paid:	156 (used)
positive:	Top notch build quality. Nice colour rendering, good contrast. Pleasant out of focus area.
negative:	Screw drive AF is slow
comment:

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Devilish54 review date: May-20-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 35-70 f4 Minolta 50 f1.7 Sony DT 18-55 f3.5-5.6
price paid:	80 USD Used
positive:	Price Build Smooth Bokeh Very Sharp Constant f4
negative:	Weight
comment:	What almost all of the other reviews have said are echoed in my review. The lens is super sharp, has great Minolta colors, and a tank like build quality. Comparing it to the Sony kit lens at f3.5 wasn't even fair. The Beercan excels in every area. For 4 times the price it would still be a very good lens. When it comes to the weight as a negative, my a57 makes my shaky pictures look as though they were tripod mounted.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: DSKComputers review date: May-20-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta Maxxum AF 50mm F1.7 Kalimar MC AF Macro 60-300 F4-5.6 Tamron LD XR DiII (IF) AF 18-200 F/3.5-6.3 A14
price paid:	125 USD
positive:	Legendary Beercan! Sharp as can be. fast zoon great bokeh superb color I like the size and weight Reminds me of shooting bull barreled sharp and accurate!
negative:	I wish it was a 2.8
comment:	I have used this for everything from birds in flight to portraits and it has excelled everytime. This was the 3rd non kit lens and I really wish it would have been the first, I may not have bought the Tamron!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: fingertrix review date: May-03-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	2,1000,000IDR/200USD
positive:	Very sharp constant f4 at all range built like a tank
negative:	Relatively slow AF performance prone to CA at f4
comment:	My first telephoto zoom lens. Quite satisfied with this baby...though sometimes very hard to control CA at daylight, especially when using maximum aperture. Slow autofocus performance when shooting in lowlight conditions, not really a problem right now.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: shadowgunner review date: April-25-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Min 35-105 Min 100-200 Min 100-300 xi
price paid:	100 USD
positive:	Minolta colors Build quality fast & accurate AF range bokeh
negative:	CA weight
comment:	I just recently picked up this legendary lens at my local shop. I did some test shots and went home to see the results. I saw what everyone has been talking about, regarding this lens' qualities. If I had purchased this lens 5 years ago, I would probably only have a 2 lens kit ( the 70-210 beercan and the beercan 28-85). This is an amazing lens. The colors ARE outstanding and it exhibits something special that is impossible to describe. The bokeh is very pleasing and wow, does it AF fast on my A700. It is heavy, but it is expected. The CA is there, but easy to correct in PP. It is a good range, and surprisingly it worked well with a friends 2x adaptor.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: havoc315 review date: April-24-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 70-300 usd Minolta 70-210 4.5-5.6
price paid:	125 usd (used)
positive:	Contrast and Saturation Constant F4 Sharp Bokeh
negative:	CA Heavy
comment:	This lens had been collecting some dust since I purchased the Tamron 70-300, and I was considering selling it. Decided to try it out 1 more time, shooting my son's little league game. Well, I won't be selling it. The lens has absolutely incredible contrast and saturation. Needs far less Lightroom adjustments than my other lenses. The main required adjustment is a basic lens profile correction, as there is a fair amount of distortion and some vignetting. Occasionally, CA adjustments needed. This lens is center sharp, even wide open. Achieves smooth bokeh. The extra F-stop over most zoom lenses is quite helpful. The Tamron is a great lens, no question. I've also used it to shoot Little League games... But to get super-fast shutter speeds, even in bright sunlight... I need ISO of 1000-1600, as opposed to 400-800 on the beercan. With a Sony SLT, this was the line between noise and noise-free. The lens is heavy. It's about the same size and weight as the Tamron 70-300, with 90mm less reach. So I'm keeping both lenses. Though I was impressed at how quickly this lens focused in sports situations, at least as fast as the Tamron. (Of course, the Tamron is internal focusing, while the Minolta relies exclusively on the camera) The biggest complaint is that you can get a good amount of CA. Though as long as you watch for it, it's an easy correcting in post-processing. Considering you can get a quality copy of this lens for under $150, and a 70-200 2.8 runs over $1500 and is twice the size... This lens is a no-brainer unless you absolutely need the extra F-stop.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Pygmy review date: April-23-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 100-200 4.5 Minolta 70-300 New
price paid:	87 pund
positive:	Colours & contrasts Sharpness Macro & focus distance Bokeh f4
negative:	CA Size
comment:	Finally grabbed a mint condition of this famous lens. The size always scared me off, therefore I kept a 100-200. CA seems to be worse on this beercan compared to my 100-200, but the focus distance and macro capibilities are really excellent making this lens much more useful, and give great bokeh easily. Sharpness seems to be the same, that is plenty sharp wide open already, at all focal lengths including 210. The lens is long but it's still rather light, so I don't think I will be too bothered. Highly recommended, also over the 100-200 although I loved that one!

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Smegenai3000 review date: February-26-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	150 usd (used)
positive:	Sharp, Colors, Build quality,f4, bokeh
negative:	CA, not that sharp at 210
comment:	Nice lense,for me only negatives is CA and little less sharpness at 210.Anyway its very nice lense i enjoying using it.it has nice colors and bokeh too.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: homeranger review date: February-03-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	N/A
positive:	Build Quality Minolta Colors Bokeh is pleasing Sharp Affordable Internal Zoom Constant F4
negative:	Nothing considering the value, build and quality of images you can get from this lens.
comment:	I wish I still had this lens. I had a mint copy. If you can find one at a good price...get it! This lens is heavy, however it's a labor or love to use. It lives up to all of the well deserved hype.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: Tester review date: January-23-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 90 mm F2.8 Macro
price paid:	80 €
positive:	Build quality Price IQ at 70mm
negative:	Bad flare control Low contrast and sharpness at 210mm
comment:	Few of my best photos are taken with the Beercan and have some kind of magic in it :) I can easily recommend it as portrait lens. My copy is however missing contrast and sharpness at 210mm needed for landscape photography.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: asiafish review date: December-10-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	55-200 SAM Minolta 100mm F2.8 Macro Minolta 85mm F1.4
positive:	Bokeh Minolta Color Build-Quality Constant F4
negative:	Prone to flare Diffraction from F11 Big and heavy
comment:	This is a very good lens, but the hype is out-of-proportion to the reality. I would say that this is, absolutely, the best consumer telezoom of the 1980s, and when used well (with the hood, a good multicoated filter and careful control of bright light sources. When properly used, however, the results are incredible (as they should be with any quality lens). Color and bokeh are beautiful, far nicer than the sony SAM 55-200. The best feature for my use is the constant F4 aperture. Anything faster (F2.8) will be much larger, heavier and more expensive. Anything smaller and lighter will also be at least a stop slower at the long end. Most importantly, unless you spend some real money and get something like the 70-300G SSM, you may equal the Beercan's quality, but you won't exceed it. I really like this lens, but don't use it very often, which is more a reflection of the 85mm F1.4 than of any limitation or shortcoming of the beercan.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: maxeythecat review date: December-10-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	150.00
positive:	Sharp sharp SHARP! Excellent bokeh, lush beautiful Minolta colors, fast snappy AF, built like a brick you-know-what!
negative:	A little heavy but bearable
comment:	Right from the start this lens impressed the hell outta me. I'd always heard that this was one of Minolta's great "legacy lenses", and being a Minolta-phile from waaaay back in the Dark Ages of film, I snapped one up and boy, I could'nt be more pleased. Built like a tank, this baby can take a real beating out in the field and still deliver the goods. It's macro feature is terrific with sharply detailed pictures that rival my Tamron SP 90 for performance. The colors are gorgeous and the AF is pretty damned snappy for a lens that's been out of commission for more than 25 years,not to mention the constant F/4 aperture....simply put, this is indeed a legacy lens that lives up to it's reputation!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Lesuave review date: December-04-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	100 USD (used)
positive:	- IQ - sharpness - bokeh - constant f4 - minolta colors - solid built
negative:	nothing for this price
comment:	I'm so happy with this lens that I decided to write my first lens review. I bought this lens on ebay for only 100$ and it seems that I got an uber sharp copy, even at wide aperture. Fast and accurate AF with the A77. Some fringing though but easily removable in PP. Nice for macro and portrait too. Colors and bokeh are awesome.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: brikas review date: November-13-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony DT 55-200 4-5.6 SAM
price paid:	60 GBP (used)
positive:	Build quality Constant aperture
negative:
comment:	I bought this just to compare it with my existing 55-200. I read many good reviews about "beercan", so, decided to get one for me too. Comparing to 55-200, basically, image quality is not far away, both are cheap and give very similar- cheap looking results. One good point about beercan is constant aperture- in darker, cloudy day, it's very useful, that at 210mm it still has f/4 instead of f/5.6, difference is pritty visible- I can take much lower ISO setting, and for my old A290 it's very important. I could shot some birds in very shadowed areas, where I couldn't do anything with my 55-200 anymore. Extra 10mm are also sometimes extra, it's better than lack of 20mm in short end, it's telephoto, not wide angle. Overally, it's good lens and if you don't have any telephoto, it's worth to buy this. Solid build gives very nice feel when holding, also it looks more expensive than it is.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: derekw review date: November-11-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 70-210 f3.5-4.5 Minolta 75-300 New Minolta 75-300 Big Beercan Many other lenses of similar range/
price paid:	53GBP used
positive:	Sharpness Colour Build Bokeh
negative:	Heavy Needs hood to combat flare
comment:	At last, a copy of this lens worthy of its reputation. Super sharp above f5.6 and gorgeous colours. Well worth the price - quality optics

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: martinsvanags review date: November-02-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta - AF 70-210 F4.5-5.6
price paid:	60GBP
positive:	sharpness bokeh colors
negative:	loud AF big heavy
comment:	I own two, different ages, but both perfectly sharp and nice. The newest one has a bit better/lower noise on digital, it also has fungus on front elements, but the lens are easy to disasemble and clean even at home. On my NEX7 it looks massive (with SLT adapter in the middle) but works well.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 3	user: James Yeoh review date: October-20-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 100-200mm f/3.5
price paid:	SGD 300 (used)
positive:	1. Solid Built 2. Very sharp with good lighting 3. Saturated and warm color
negative:	1. Very poor sharpness and hunts under poor lighting 2. Heavy and long
comment:	With all the hype from Ebay and other users, I find that this lens does not perform as expected (may be due to my copy). Compare to the newer Minolta 100-200mm f/3.5-4.5, it is less sharp under poor lighting condition. However, when using it with external flash under the same condition, this lens somewhat produces much sharper pictures.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: jpollard review date: October-14-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 EX HSM
price paid:	$80 AUD
positive:	Sharp -Solid Construction -Cheap -f4 at 210mm
negative:	-AF is slow and sometimes hunts -Significant CA compared to modern lenses -Weight Distribution
comment:	I picked this lens up for $80 with a Sony DT 16-50mm f2,8. Sharpness is fairly good at f/4, improves a lot at f/6.3. The weight isn't as bad as some reviews suggest, it is lighter than the Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 and around the same weight as the Sony 16-50mm f2.8. The weight distribution is skewed towards the front however especially at 210mm which is more noticeable than the overall weight of the lens. AF is a little slow especially in low light, I mostly prefer to use manual focus with this lens. If you are fortunate enough to have a body with focus peaking this makes MF less painful and also allows you to see the DOF easily. My copy is a little soft around the edges at 210mm f/4 but this improves greatly at f/6.3. It does suffer badly from chromatic aberration in high contrast conditions compared to modern lenses with better coatings. You can remove this to some extent in post but it's difficult to get it all. This doesn't really improve significantly on my copy until around f/9

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 2	user: DWardCA review date: September-06-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	200 CAD (used)
positive:	Great Minolta Colours Inexpensive Solid Design Doesn't depreciate in value
negative:	Dust Prone CA - Purple Fringes Sharp IQ drop off at 190mm+ Heavy
comment:	While I list a lot of negative aspects to this lens, don't get my wrong - this is the most frequently used lens in my kit. I absolutely love it. I purchased mine in near mint condition and it was the best $200 I ever spent. It doesn't have an in-lens auto focus motor - but for me this is a non-issue as I tend to always use manual focusing so I can "see" my DOF via focus peaking in the EVF. I have a few specs of dust in my "mint" version. I realized that as you focus, the end lens piece goes in and out of the body. Its easy for dust to just slide on into the casing and show up on the inside of your lens. I find that the lens is quite blurry at 210mm. I've heard that all zooms perform worse at either end of their zoom ranges but I've noticed a distinctive drop in IQ after 190mm on my lens. This is a heavy lens - but its really good bang for your buck.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: megrim review date: August-23-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony DT 55-200mm Minolta 70-210 4.5-5.6 II
price paid:	120 EURO
positive:	Build like a Tank Doesn't Extend during Zoom Nice contrast Nice Bokeh F4 all the way
negative:	Focussing has extension and it turns Size bigger then most beginner camera bags [about twice as big as a kitlens] The Weight shifts a bit during zoom [the glass groups inside move]
comment:	Right the Beercan. And yes it is as good and yet as old as they say. It does definitely has some CA's to deal with in high contrast situations. Also flare can become an issue so use the supplied Hood. But in return you get a lens build like a tank, lovely rich colors beyond your expectations. A very solid feel in the hands and of course it is sharp. It really is sharp! One could say this lens has Character. Where many lenses are made today that indeed have CA's very well under control. [The DT55-200 for a kitlens has a very good handling of it] those do tend to need a bit of after works to make special. The Beercan in all its oddities on the other hand adds something lovely to the images. Where with quite some other lenses I have to raise the contrast, this lens comes naturally with a strong contrast. The colors also are warmer. Meaning that less work needed in the RAW departement ;) In short yes it is an oldie and you gotta understand its limits. In return you get a lens with character that will offer you many great things. If you allow for its shortcomings. And you know what the Bokeh certainly is an upgrade from the Sony DT 55-200 and definitely the Minolta 70-210 4.5-5.6 And compared to the Minolta 70-210 4.5-5.6 II ..that lens is so flat and so well MEH.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: kerrath review date: August-01-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 28-200 3.5-5.6 Aspherical IF Tokina SD 35-200 4-5.6
price paid:	150 USD (used)
positive:	Very solid build, easy to repair. Very sharp, even at F4. Continuous F/4 through range.
negative:	The CA is disappointing with the level of sharpness. Prone to flaring. Light hitting the lens from oblique angles causes substantial washing out of the image. You need a hood.
comment:	You need a very solid tripod, or very strong hands to tighten the clamps down on your tripod to keep this lens from pulling the head down. AF is surprisingly quick on my A580, I suspect because when the focus is dialed in, it is really quite sharp indeed. If this lens were F2.8 and were APO, all else the same, it would cost 10x as much. Definitely a good deal for amateurs and enthusiasts.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Dlkillwaterbear review date: July-24-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 70-300 Di Macro f4.5-5.6
price paid:	SGD250(used)
positive:	Good in terms of: -Fast, accurate AF -Quality of glass for the price, focal length as well as a constant aperture.
negative:	Very old lens. Difficult to find tecnical support.
comment:

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: JamieZ review date: June-09-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 70-300 Tamron 70-300 Minolta 55-200 Tamron 35-135
price paid:	110USD (used)
positive:	Color F/4 Internal Focus
negative:	Must have hood in bright sun
comment:	Great lens for bugs and flowers (long macro) put a 2x and it still works for airshows and birds on a crop sensor

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Dan Berke review date: June-08-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 100-200 f4.5
price paid:	£100
positive:	Colour Build Bokeh Sharpness
negative:	Small manual focus and rotating front element Big
comment:	I think I have struck gold and bought a perfect copy. It is razor sharp wide open and at all apertures and focal lengths. The colours are stunning and the bokeh is a dream. It balances well on my A77. I compared this to the Minolta 100-200 f4.5 as it is the closest comparitor. The 100-200 left my A77 feeling off balance, had a poor MFD and simply I need to fall in love with a lens to keep it. The 100-200 was a one night stand but the beercan is full blown affair. Yes f4 is a bit slow and it is a little heavy but so am I....

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: cicaro review date: May-15-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- Minolta AF Zoom 75-300mm 1:4.5(32)-5.6 - Sigma - 75-300 F4.5-5.6 APO - Minolta - AF 100-200 F4.5
price paid:	20USD (Fleetmarket)
positive:	- Good aperture - Nice colors - Sturdy/solid build
negative:	- Heavy - AF little slow - Wish it had a closer close-up limit
comment:	Used this on a daily basis until I got my hands on the sigma i compared it to. This lens is good no doubt, but the sigma lens is a pinch better and has taken the first place thanks to its greater zoom range. For someone searching for a tele I would recommend the sigma, even if its harder to find, its more lens for the money!(on the other hand if you find a big beer can on a fleet market for nothing, get it!)

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: boyzone 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:	70-400G
price paid:	240 USD (used)
positive:	-F4 across the range -Cheap
negative:	Auto focus speed is a bit slow
comment:	Is soft at F4, need to step down at least F5 to get up to expectation sharpness. Compare to Canon 70-200 F4, Beercan is much cheaper than it. Sell it after I bring in the 70-400G. 26/4/2012 update: Get 2nd copy of beercan as weight of 70-400G is overkill for portrait shoot. Manage to find a sharp copy with wide open after tested several lenses. The optic performance is much better compared with my 1st copy, no front / back focusing on this lens make the sharpness on par across the range with wide open. Furthermore, DIY to extend the hood to further improve on the flare performance. Good to keep a copy if u manage to get a sharp copy.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Andy81 review date: November-16-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-70 Kit lens Sigma 24-70 f2.8 EX DC Macro Tamron 55-200 Minolta 50 f1.7
price paid:	GBP 82
positive:	Sharp Indestructible Price Constant F4
negative:	Flare control Slow AF (compared to modern lenses)
comment:	For the price, this can't be beaten. Despite its age, it is very sharp and build quality is excellent. Yes, it is heavy for its size, but it's not so heavy it can't be used as a walk around lens. Really pleased with my copy and will be keeping it for a long time.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: bill_bly_ca review date: November-16-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	70-200G 55-200 SAM
price paid:	75 CAD Used
positive:	Constant 4 Cheap Solid build
negative:	(Relativly) heavy vs 55-200SAM CA
comment:	This is my second Copy. Bought the first in 2008 and it had regular use until I bought the 70-200G in the fall of 08. After that the BeerCan only came out for the odd film shoot on the 700si or when the G was at risk of being damaged. Sold copy #1 for close to the (overpriced) $200 I paid for it in the first place in Jan of '10. Now I am going on travel where the G is overkill and I needed a simple equivalent. All told I would rather carry a 55-200SAM (which I typically borrow from my sister in these sort of events) but a visit to a local camera shop reveled a hoodless copy for $75. Surprisingly I never did try it on the a850, which ownership of the first beercan overlapped by 3 months, and I have to say I am pleasantly surprised. While the lens is not up to the myth that precedes it, it is quite satisfying at the $75 price point. Personally I would not pay more than $125 for a copy as you would be better off with the 55-200 SAM - But below $125 you are getting good value for the money (Especially if you still run a roll of film from time to time) CA is too obvious under high back illuminated items.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: eonconsult review date: November-16-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	150
positive:	Stunning pictures with the A 77 Constant F/4 aperture
negative:	Heavy Lens has problems with low light situations.
comment:	Again a Minolta gem. For the price paid you cannot hardly find anything better. The sharpness of this lens is amazing and this even at 210 mm. The lens combined with the A 77 is a heavy thing but i forget it when i see the results ontained.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: JimmyMelbourne review date: November-12-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-250 Sigma 50 1.4 Tamron 17-50 2.8 Minolta 50 2.8 Macro
price paid:	110 CHF
positive:	Versatile Great macro length for baby photos Reasonably sharp
negative:	Heavy for every day use, but good for short shoots
comment:	I bought this as an afterthought, I once had a beercan and it was soft as hell, so I sold it. I saw this when buying another lens and grabbed it at the price. This copy is much sharper, and i am very surprised by the macro capbilty it provides a slightly different macro approach than the 50 2.8, which adds versatility to my lens collection. For this price, definitely worth having around for special shooting needs (portrait, baby macro etc)

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 4	user: GlassEye review date: October-22-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony Kit lens Tamron 90 mm Macro
price paid:	$200 w/ shipping
positive:	Inexpensive Reasonably Fast Good Zoom Range Sharp
negative:	Purple Fringing Heavy (of course)
comment:	If you like purple outlines, you'll love this lens! Even down to f8, this lens in not good zoomed all the way out. It does get considerably better by f11 or so. All that said, it is still a good lens for the $. It is sharp even at a pretty wide aperture. I like that it feels and looks like a 'real' lens! Be careful of the CA and remember, a lot of that can be taken care of PP. 5-2-2012: Update. The more I use this lens, the more I like it. It truly is sharp. I use it often as a 'walk around' lens. It works reasonable well as a close up lens for flowers and such. I did have to send it tho KEH for repair, though. The focus just locked up. The repair cost $110, about 1/2 the original purchase. It came back about like new. KEH repaired the focus and went all through it. I think they even cleaned whatever dust may have been inside. All in all,for the price, a keeper.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: LKB review date: October-05-11
	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 Zeiss 135/1.8
price paid:	110 GBP (used)
positive:	Bokeh constant F4
negative:	sharp from ~F7.1 purple fringing until ~F7.1
comment:	This was my second lenses and I do like them a lot. On my APS-C (A55) I prefer them for nature/animals/sports shoots. I like its weigh and size, as its allows me to hold camera (hand on camera& hand on lenses) firmly. Bokeh with those lenses is amazing (I really dislike Minolta 50/1.7 one). I have a few shots, which are unique due to that. I use primes in lower light conditions, but for fair weather those lenses do deliver. I had AF problems with object on water (shining background) and in lower light conditions, but apart from that is steady and reasonably fast. I used it for sport photography and with careful focusing I was able to get very good photos. They don't make a good macro lenses but they are not intended to. Flare control is average (they are 20 years old, after all), so use hood!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: jasonh 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 - AF 28-135 F4-4.5 Minolta - AF 100 F2.8 Macro Carl Zeiss - Vario-Sonnar T* 24-70 F2.8 ZA SSM Sony - AF 70-400 F4-5.6 G SSM
price paid:	$200 US
positive:	Sharpness Bokeh Colors
negative:	Focusing is slow
comment:	The beercan began my love affair with A-mount. A while ago, my wife (my girlfriend) had a Canon AE-1 that was consistently underexposing, and I had a Pentax "Program Plus" that remains awesome to this day. We were early adopters of digital (Olympus D500L). It was fun but abysmal quality. Later, married, we took a trip to Japan but forgot the cameras! Oops! A short trip later to Akihabara, we came out with an a350 and a kit lens. Nice, but a few frames later, it felt drab, still a digital backwater. I didn't believe that it could be that bad. I'd never used A-mount, but once we came back from Japan, I looked around for help, and found Dyxum. Looking through the forums, the beercan is clearly unique. I invested a little time, and I happened to find a copy on Amazon, and it arrived -- seemingly untouched from 1985, pristine. I was blown away. The color and sharpness are awesome. It is different from what I had before. I love the grain of film (digital noise doesn't compare) -- but the beercan, as a lens, brings both technical precision and joy. The color and light capture the scene -- and capture my heart, too! The bokeh is awesome. Actually, the bokeh is like candy. I like close portraits, where the background is blurred creamy smooth. The beercan is so good at that, I have to force myself away from it, or everything I do will have that beautiful creamy look. Downsides: Well, it's kind of long, f/4 is a little dark. Whatever, get over it, there are no downsides. You will never regret your beercan. I don't use the beercan much anymore. I now have a 24-70CZ, and a 70-400G, and they are awesome -- and also very expensive. The sword has two edges.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: nilotek review date: August-24-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	minolta 35-105 old Sigma 17-35 2.8-4 FX sony SAL 18-55
price paid:	190€ used
positive:	- breathtaking sharpness - gorgeous colors - huge zoom ring - nice bokeh
negative:	- weight - small MF-ring - a bit slow AF
comment:	next telephoto lens i´ll ever buy is definitly a 70-200/2.8.. i don´t see any need for other telephoto lenses, due to the outstanding IQ and sharpness of the beercan.. i´m very happy with it.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: bebgsurg review date: July-30-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony Zeiss 16-80, Minolta 100-200 F4.5
price paid:	130 USD (ebay)
positive:	solid construction. Its 70 mm low end puts it into the portrait range and it is very sharp.
negative:	Heavy and big. Has some chromatic aberration.
comment:	Will be selling my Minolta 100-200. This lens beats it for sharpness all the way though, and the low end 70mm is useful for portraits. This lens is sharper than the Zeiss at 75mm for both, I tested them at F4.5 and F7.1. I will be keeping this one for a long time unless the weight begins to bother me more than I think.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Tudor review date: July-27-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	3 copies of this lens
positive:	Very well built
negative:	Weight One of the copies I bought had fungus
comment:	Take the weight into consideration before buying one. If you can test it before you buy it, open the aperture and carefully check it for fungus.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: blackworx review date: July-27-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	70GBP (eBay, 2006)
positive:	Colours Sharpness Bokeh Build Price Weight
negative:	Slow AF AF hunt in low light/near MFD Weight!
comment:	Can't really add much to previous reviews. This lens constantly amazes me, and every time I have to leave it behind (usually because of the weight/bulk factor) I miss it badly. Combined with the 7D, which is itself no stranger to a pie, this lens is a serious heft. I love it in some ways (great to handle, stops you from blowing away on windy days) but loathe it in others (strap that combo to your neck on a walkabout and you're getting home three inches shorter than when you left). A bit of CA wide open but nothing to get one's knickers in a twist about. Despite its little foibles, I wouldn't change this lens for the world.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: straupenieks review date: July-26-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Various cheaper zooms
price paid:	40 GBP (used)
positive:	Handy range, great bokeh, decent sharpness
negative:	CA when open wide A tad too soft at its longest end
comment:	Got this lens quite cheap as it had some minor scratches on the front element. Luckily they dont seem to affect photos at all, at least I havent run into any problems yet. Yes, this lens is built like a tank and for people used to modern plastic lenses -this will seem big and heavy. But it really is a great lens for the price. I use it as a walkaround lens, together with 35-70 f4, decent for occasional telephoto shots and just purely awesome for portraits. Definitely would recommend this to anyone on budget looking for a universal lens with good picture quality

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: KS56 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:
positive:	Sharp Well built Constant aperture Internal zoom Inexpensive
negative:	Slow focusing
comment:	The Minolta 70-210mm f4 was one of the first zoom lenses I purchased in the mid 1980's. My Minolta film cameras are long gone by now but I still find this lens very useful for low light shooting with my Sony A700 and now with my Sony A77. The focusing is slow but the image quality is still very good. It is a very sharp lens and very useful for macro photography. When 1/4 life-size magnification is not enough, I attach a Nikon 6T diopter in front of the lens for greater than life-size magnification. As a bonus, when turning on SSS in the camera, the lens actually becomes an anti-shake lens, something I suspect Minolta Engineers never dreamt of when they first designed this lens. Kudos for good reverse engineering by Sony to make this possible.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: dovlamsi review date: June-10-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	minolta 75-300/f4.5-5.6 D minolta 35-105/f3.5-4.5 minolta 50/f1.7 minolta 28/f2.8 soligor 28-105/f2.8-3.8 sony sam 18-55/f3.5-5.6
price paid:	50 euro /used/
positive:	greate color very good sharpness good build
negative:	heavy
comment:	for price I paid for great lens. Use on A 100

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: trongkien review date: June-07-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minnolta 85mm f1.4 Minolta 50mm f1.4 Sony 50mm f1.4 Minolta 28 f2.8 Minolta 50mm f1.7 Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 Sony 17-70mm (kit lens)
price paid:	150 USD (used)
positive:	- color - sharp - good bokeh - price
negative:	- heavy, very heavy - slow forcus - noisy
comment:	With its price, it's very good for tele-photography. It's good for portrait as well when you stay far away from subjects. But you need strong hands, it's quite heavy.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Pipswich review date: May-30-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	I have compared it to various sigma, quantaray and other similar zooms and they are all rubbish compared to this.
price paid:	100
positive:	For a novice it's easy to use and the AF works very well on my Sony A33. It is very good for family photos for graduations and playground and outdoor photos of children etc. It will focus and generate crisp strong color photos across two rooms for ebay photos!
negative:	A little heavy and when you pull this out people think you are a professional photographer because of the length of lens.
comment:	These are typically 150-175 us dollars on ebay and worth every penny. A significant upgrade to this lens appears to be not just a matter of a few hundred dollars but perhaps all the way to $1500 in the g series lens at f2.8. For a hobby photographer there is no real need to go beyond this lens in this range.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: StefB. review date: May-23-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 80-210mm Minolta AF 100-200mm
price paid:	75 Euros
positive:	- Nice color - well built - really sharp only @f8 - Bokeh
negative:	- big and heavy - Slow & hunting AF, specially in low light condition - CA - Flare (OK with hood)
comment:	We can read that lense is like a tank, indeed, it is big, heavy, slow and noisy, but nice shot !! - This lense is a good one but too hyped, not a legend for me. - Used on a Sony Alpha55. - Do not expected to record video with that lense. The AF is too noisy.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: arCreation review date: May-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:	160
positive:	great colours great sharpness at 70mm amazing bokeh great portrait lens
negative:	not much
comment:	This lens is the best bang for your photographic buck. It has everything going for it. Even on a full frame, it barely has vigneting at f4 and the colours are amazing. The zoom ring on my copy is very loose, but i don't find that to be too disturbing. Focus is sharp and accurate on my a850. The guy i bought it from even gave me the original leather minolta case in mint condition. There's nothing better than that feel of a classic lens. Can't get anything better for this price period. Great portrait lens.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: hrstrat57 review date: May-12-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	35-105 35-105N 28-85 24-105D 100-200
price paid:	165 USD
positive:	F4 I have wanted one of these beasts since they came out in the mid 80's but settled for the 100-200 at that time due to cash considerations. Recently I was lucky enough to come across a mint nearly unused copy and I jumped. It is everything I hoped for - fabulous bokeh and Minolta colors and has that feel of fine machinery that I love about the lenses of this era.
negative:	A bit of flare can be an issue but hey it is almost 30 yr old technology. You gotta use the hood, make sure yours comes with it!
comment:	I think every Alpha shooter should experience a good copy of the beercan! I was lucky enough to get a very good copy in great condition. I have been told there are some dogs in the beercan pack, some copies get very fuzzy as they approach 210 at F4. Mine is sharp, sharp, sharp all the way through the range!

sharpness: 3 color: 3 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 2	user: britdaveg review date: April-23-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 70-300 Sigma 70-300 Sony 18-250 Minolta 70-210 f3.5-f4.5
positive:	Build Quality F4 Aperture
negative:	Very Heavy Only 70-210 Not as sharp as f3.5-f4.5 version at long end. Hunts in low light (A500) Not as good in low light as expected as it needs to be stopped down. Massively over hyped Massively over priced.
comment:	Like the rest of the sheep I believed the hype surrounding this lens, initially I thought it was great but with time and the novelty factor wearing off, I got rid of it and for the price I got on ebay, I bought a Sony 18-55 AND Minolta 70-210 f3.5-f4.5 & still a lot of change ;-). Given that my f3.5-f4.5 was only £46 It does make you wonder why the beercan costs such much, at the short end the f3.5 is quicker and although slower at the longer end it is sharper than a beercan. The lack of a hood did'nt help matters, again sadly becuase of the hype these too are well above what they should be(more than I paid for the 18-55). So if you do want to buy a beercan make sure it's got a hood. Build quality wise beercan's will still be going strong in another 30 years, but advances in new lenses will widen the gap between old and the new even more, e.g look at the Sigma 50-200 hsm or even sony's own 55-200 sam, were it not for the f4 aperture the beercan would be selling for less than £50, sadly although being f4 you do have to stop it down to get the best IQ which then brings it into the region of the newer lenses. Not forgetting that it is only a 210mm lens and that for less than £100 you can get a brand new Tamron 70-300.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: czechmate review date: April-18-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 17-50/F2.8 Minolta AF 50/F1.7
price paid:	270 USD (LN)
positive:	- price/performance ratio - built - large zoom ring - bokeh - 1:4 macro on 210mm
negative:	- lens hood design - a bit noisy AF
comment:	I bought this lens in a very good condition, with original caps and hood. Until now my longest lens was 50mm, but I got used to this telephoto very quickly. I absolutely love the bokeh. At the long end there is some distortion going on. But overall lovely lens with great price/performance ratio. As for focusing I don't think the lens hunts, at least not my copy. It's a telephoto lens, therefore the focus has bigger range and the AF has to go through it. Compared to my other lenses, the AF is significantly louder, which might be an issue for someone. The lens is quite heavy, but I chose that over plasticy lens and I'm glad. The lens hood is not designed very well.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: the_fat_zebra review date: April-17-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	90GBP
positive:	- Very Sharp. - Constant f4. - Good color. - Good focal length. - Filter size. - For this price it is unbeatable and jusfiedly legendary.
negative:	- Heavy. - Hunting and slow focus. - Color fringing. - Does not balance well on A230.
comment:	I have bought this lens from a dyxum member. Would I like to have an f2.8 at this focal length, sure, but I cannot afford it. This is the next best thing for me. I have tested this lense on flowers and some portraits, and I really like it. For me the problem is though that it weighs about double the A230 does, and with its poor grip, cramp in my fingers! Excellent lens though hand higly recommended in spite of its drawbacks.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: mob81 review date: April-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:	$65 (Used)
positive:	Build, Color, BOKEH, Good Focal Range, Affordable, Sharp, Legendary
negative:	Color fringing, Size, Moving Focus ring during AF
comment:	Amazing lens with GREAT BOKEH, Legendary. I was tempted for long time and when I bought it, it exceeded my expectations. the way it draws is amazing Color or B&W. Color Fringing is the main problem that I faced. It's apparent on a contrasty situations even at slower apertures! wonderful lens

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: filipescu1007 review date: April-08-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
positive:	Amazing colors Internal focus Bokeh Cheap
negative:	Slow and hunting AF Rotating front element CA
comment:	I felt like a true Sony/Minolta photographer mounted to my camera. This lens helped me with my "fear" of street photography (shooting strangers was somehow difficult) and I just loved being able to reach details around me that I could only slightly see before. It is heavy, it hunts, there are CA issues but it's all worth the ride. I loved the colors and if I wasn't about to get the 70-300G, I would have bought a Beercan instead.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: sagiluck review date: April-08-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	100-200 F4.5
price paid:	280 SGD
positive:	+ cheap ( can't deny it ) + solid metal built + sharp even at 210mm F4 + wouldn't extend when zooming + 55mm filter size
negative:	+ rotating front element + a bit too long
comment:	the 100-200 sharp at 100 but goes soft as it reaches 200mm. I shoot my pet dog with this at 210mm wide open and it produces sharpness that make me goes "wow". are you sure this lens is more than 20 years old ?

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 5 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:	Sigma 70-200 F/2.8 HSM II Sony 70-300 G SSM
positive:	Build quality Colours Constant f4 Bokeh
negative:	Size Flare Age PF
comment:	I really like the beercan, it's a very nice lens that I will always recommend! For the money, it's great value! but it's an ageing design and you can see that when it comes to flaring and PF, but the sharpness is quite good (as long as you get a lens that's not been abused), it's a little large for what it is, but it's build really well! it always surprises me when i handle it. Great bokeh in most shots, quite amazing.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3	user: blek review date: April-01-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta AF 75-300 F4.5-5.6 Big Beercan Minolta AF 28-135 F4-4.5 Minolta AF 70-210 F4.5-5.6 II Minolta AF 100-300 F4.5-5.6 xi
price paid:	IDR 2.000.000 (used)
positive:	Bokeh Minolta colors BOKEH Build like a tank BOKEH! Sharp BOKEH!!!
negative:	Not a lens for rich people.
comment:	Rich in detail with smooth, creamy out of focus area. Crop? Please do. It is sharp enough for 100% crop. Full? Please do. It is imbued with the great Minolta colors. Baseball? Please do. It is 100% metal short bat. The legendary lens, the gem lens. Peoples told you what it was, now, and then. For such price, you cannot get a lens better than this. Give it scratch, no lens hood, no cap, fungus, whatsoever, get one. Get one! And I meant it. AFAIK, no lens produce such a nice combination of bokeh, sharpness, and color better than this lens. A few lens my produce better sharpness, nice corner, good CA control, you name it, but remember, a photo is a whole, not a partial. And you can call me Minoltard. The only reason it is not the jack of all trades is it's range. Oh, and last one, this one clearly not a lens for rich people. They use G. :D

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	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:	Fixed length Beautiful brokeh Constant F4
negative:	Cannot access focus ring when hood is not being used. Bad CA @ 210/F4
comment:	Everyone needs to own this lens at some time in their collection.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: cessna2k review date: March-22-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony DT 55-200 Sam f/4-5.6
price paid:	110 (used)
positive:	Sharpness Color Smooth Zoom
negative:	Weight
comment:	Very good performance until 150 mm, corners are very sharp! My copy shows very little CA. It's really heavy and unconfortable to carry around on the camera, so I don't use it for travelling and hiking.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: sonolta review date: March-14-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta AF 35-105/3.5-4.5 Minolta AF 50/1.7
price paid:	about 100 Euros
positive:
negative:
comment:	Absolute Minolta classic, every A-Mount-User should own one of these. Very big one for today's standards but it does not extend when zooming. Gives very sharp pictures with good contrast and colours from 70 to 150mm. From 150mm onwards it gets a bit soft so if you mainly shoot in this range you might try the even bigger 75-300/4.5-5.6 instead. I use this as my primary tele lens on my a700 and I get the best results by slightly underexposing und then lighting up the picture afterwards on the computer. It you do not mind carrying around 700 grams only for the lens this one offers you great value for the money!

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Saint_Dazza review date: March-14-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-55 SAM 3.5-5.6 Minolta 35-70 3.5-4.5 Minolta 50 MD 1.7 prime Minolta 28-105 3.5-4.5 Minolta 28 MD 2.8 prime Minolta 135 MD 2.8 Tele Rokkor
price paid:	£113 GBP
positive:	Quality Sharpness Colours AF response
negative:	Lens Flare in very bright sunlight
comment:	I bought this to photograph my daughters gymnastic competition and was really pleased with the results. Excellent speed of focus, focal length, brightness and colours even with high ISO & shutter speed. This lens comes into its own when shooting outdoors though, the images are almost 3D. I paid top dollar but the lens had never been used before and was well worth the money. IMO the Beercan is a must for any Sony Alpha owner!! Edit.. After buying the Sigma 50-150 I've dropped the sharpness from 5 to 4.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: dcad10 review date: March-06-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	maxxum 100-200mm 4.5 canon 70-200mm F4 L Canon 55-250mm 4-5.6 IS Canon 70-300mm 4-5.6 IS
price paid:	$120
positive:	fixed f4 aperture length constant throughout range low cost "macro"
negative:	weight
comment:	At least on a 12mp A700 this lens shines. I have used the Canon 70-200mm f4 L and this is nearly as good. Contrast wide open could be a little better, but overall I am very happy with this lens.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: skm.sa100 review date: February-26-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	A whole bunch of others.
price paid:	200
positive:	Cheap. Metal build. Internal focusing.
negative:	CA. Flare. Nothing really, for the price.
comment:	This is perhaps THE most reviewed lens on this site, and my review doesn't really add that much more detail. It's a beautiful lens with great performance. The f/4.0 is nice and it produces beautiful portraits. It's especially useful for portraits as the colors are well saturated and show up well. Sharp even wide open. The bokeh is very nice and much better than other zooms but can't be compared to specialist primes such as 85/1.4. Flare and chromatic aberration (purple fringing) can be a problem. Watch out when shooting with the sun in the frame or against a very bright background. The 1/4 macro is also nice to have. Works well for pictures of flowers etc. I haven't (yet) used it for sports shooting so can't say much about AF speed, but it seems to be reasonable. There's a bit of a cult status for this lens and some reviewers are quite enthusiastic in describing this lens in superlatives, but some of that is justified. On the whole, a very good lens in terms of performance/price ratio.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: ERH review date: February-20-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 75-300 (Big Beercan) Minolta 85/1.4 CZ 135/1.8 Minolta 200/2.8G
price paid:	320 USD (LN)
positive:	Build Colours Bokeh Internal zooming Price/performance
negative:	CA Heavy
comment:	It was a great portrait lens on my A350. On A850 I prefer to beercan it`s Big brother (it was sharper and on FullFrame 210mm is not enough long) and made a beercan gift with A350 to my sister. But still I can`t tell anything bad about beercan. Until SAM 85/2.8 appeared I call the BeerCan the best portrait lens from the point of Price/Performance. Now it is just an alternative or competitor to cheap plastic portrait gem from Sony. (Anyway I prefer Minolta`s 85/1.4). So don`t wait from beercan razor sharpness wideopen (I`ve seen that Big Beercan is sharper at 75-200mm), razor sharp it only from f/5...5.6, it has a creamy bokeh, pleasant colours for portraits but may unpleasantly surprise you with lot of CA (though PostProduction nobody interdicting to you). And sometimes (if you want to take few lenses in a trip or for a walk) weight and size of the beercan (as it`s Big Brother) can be an issue. Loss of contrast in the shots against the sun is common issue for all old Minolta`s lenses from mid 80`s. Summary: Recommended, if SAM 85/2.8 is not enough long (or convenient) for you and f/4 is acceptable.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: JVPsights review date: February-15-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 50mm Minolta 28-135mm Sigma 10-20mm HSM 3.5 Sony DT 18-70mm
price paid:	250
positive:	Sharp sharp sharp!! Built to last Bokeh Beautiful colors
negative:	Its longggggg and heavy Bit of CA in certain situations
comment:	I paid top dollar for this lens because it was advertised as a mint sharp copy. After testing it extensively, I quickly handed over the $250 :) nothing beats this lens on my A700 except my Sony 50mm 1.4 prime lens. And it's maybe the smallest bit sharper but barely. All of my hand held shots always look sharp, given that the light conditions are adequate. Its easy to get creative with the beautiful Bokeh it produces. Portraits always turn out well. Its built to last and I feel like I'm going to have this lens for a long time. The only negatives are the slow AF and it tends to show some CA in certain scenarios but not really a problem. Again, I love this lens. If you ever find a good copy, don't let it go.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: ruggerizzo review date: February-14-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	160 EUR (used)
positive:	Bokeh, colours, build (reliable), internal zooming
negative:	nothing for the price
comment:	I were looking for a budget zoom for a safari, it has been my best choice ever. Sharp, internal zooming (dust is not a problem), wonderful colours and bokeh.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: dandrewmyers 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:
price paid:	100 USD
positive:	Well made sturdy build Good AF with Sony A55 Nice warm color
negative:	Heavy
comment:	I was browsing local thrift stores and found this lens for $100. I decided to buy based on popular opinion of this website and I have not been disappointed. I am new to world of DSLR and this is the first lens I have purchased after kit lens for Sony A55. My copy has minor wear on outside enamel but otherwise is in excellent working condition. I'm having fun with this lens and I'm not sure that I will be putting the kit lens back on my A55 anytime soon.

sharpness: 4.5 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:	75-300
positive:	Super heritage Lovely engineered feel in use 3D effect with some flower scenes
negative:	Bit heavy for long treks Usual comments about CA Much sharper than my old 75-300
comment:	There's very little to add about this classic lens, other than everyone should own one at some stage - it does live up to it's reputation.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: jlbigornia review date: January-25-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
positive:	f4 bokeh build price
negative:
comment:

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: olegoo review date: January-23-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	130€ used
positive:	- sharp at all (70 - 210) - nice colours - full frame - excellent build quality (it's heavy, it's reliable) - price
negative:	- slow and loud AF - it's heavy
comment:	It's one of some "must have" zoom lenses, and if u have a chance to buy it, don't let it go. I got it as a very first lens of me and I'm very happy with it.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Lupan review date: January-12-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	25 euros (used)
positive:	Amazing bokeh at f/4 Unique Minolta vintage colors Very cheap
negative:	Could be a bit sharper Some vignetting
comment:	This lens is unique. It provides an "artistic" bokeh and great "vintage" colors. It's a pure pleasure to use it. It's a great lens for all-around. You will get very nice pictures with it, even if it doesn't match the Minolta 85/1.4 or the 20/2.8 for sharpness.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: bdmorris review date: January-11-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta - AF 75-300 F4.5-5.6 II
price paid:	140 USD (used)
positive:	- Sharp - Fast - Built to last - Great Colors
negative:	- Size
comment:	I found this lens to be much better than the Minolta - AF 75-300 F4.5-5.6 II that I previously owned (traded it in on this one). It has proven to be faster and sharper over the entire focal length. You give up some focal length over the 75-300, but my results have been far superior. Because of the length of this lens I did have to buy an external case to attach to my bag, but it been more than worth. The Beercan has lived up to the hype for me and is a great lens to pick-up for a beginner.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: petaar review date: January-04-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- Sony DT 55-200 f4-5.6 - Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 LD Di
price paid:	160 EUR
positive:	- sharp even at f4, very sharp at f5.6 - nice colours - full frame - excellent build quality (it's heavy, it's reliable) - good price
negative:	- slow and loud AF - CA at the far end - prone to flare
comment:	Didn't intent to buy this lens but could not resist a good price. I've compared it to Sony DT 55-200 f4-5.6 and to Tamron AF 70-300 f4-5.6 (I was trying to decide which one of them to buy and finally opted for Minolta!). Build quality is remarkable, image quality also. I have to admit that "new" lenses do have a bit better CA and flare resistance due to modern coatings. Very happy with it, now I'm trying to find a large enough "toploader" bag for it. :))

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: snajper review date: December-31-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 100-200 Minolta 100-300 APO Minolta 70-210 F3.5 -4.5 Tamron 80-210 SAL 55-200
price paid:	US150
positive:	Build quality - will last forever Colour Bokeh Sharpness
negative:	Size Weight
comment:	I just love this lens. I have purchased it 3 years ago and still enjoy using it. Colour and bokeh are the best out of all of my lenses.(It even beats my Min35-105old and 28-135). I am fortunate enough to have very good crossed XX copy that is fantastic around F5 range.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: ustas7777777 review date: December-30-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Min 75-300 BBC, 28-105 xi, 70-210 4,5-5,6, 28-135, 50 1,4
price paid:	140 usd (Used)
positive:	Build quality, bokeh, sharp, great colors
negative:	heavy, rotating front element on focusing, Slow AF
comment:	Good color. Beautiful bokeh. Slow focus in the dark, and misses much buzz. Focus on a 100 makes a person narrow. At 105 - 210 you can get a close-up 3D images better than starikane 28-135

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: dschroed review date: December-03-10
	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 AF 80-200 F2.8
price paid:	150 Euro
positive:	great colors and sharpness, usable at F4, build quality, good bokeh
negative:	front element rotating when focussing, slow af [focus is quite fast with firmware 2.0 on the alpha 900]
comment:	This is a old lens and although I have the Tokina with F2.8 I often use the beercan. It is lighter, has got more walkaround-abillity. Picturequality is not perfect (compared to G- or Zeiss-lenses), but the relationship price/picture IQ is great.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: mydarkstars review date: December-02-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Min 70-210mm f3.5-4.5
price paid:	100 GBP
positive:	Build quality, bokeh, sharp
negative:	heavy, rotating front element on focusing
comment:	An excellent performer for landscapes and at the zoo. Unfortunately bad CA when shooting high contrast situations. I feel this will survive an impact much better than the camera body! AF performs much better on my a550 than a200.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: JNPhoto review date: November-29-10
	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
positive:	Light weight, sharp, consistent aperture, low price
negative:	Slow AF
comment:	I've owned a number of these lenses over my 20 years, and they are a great lens for a great price.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: eLCee review date: November-05-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	100€
positive:	sharp internal zoom f4 cheap
negative:	af is slow
comment:	Well i bought this to try out what the infamous beercan can do. The pictures are excellent, i dislike the size when i have to store it, thats the price of an internal zoom.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Yugus review date: November-03-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	$200 CAD (Used)
positive:	Quite sharp Build quality is very solid Internal zoom Bokeh is smooth Constant F4 Good minimum focusing distance Very cheap
negative:	CA wont completely go away even after F11 Flare control is very great AF is not very fast (Though not slow) Front element rotates when focusing
comment:	For the price that this lens go for I don't see to much wrong with it. I would highly suggest anyone who is just starting out to keep an eye out for this lens as it a very good for the money. The sharpness of this lens is quite good though a little soft wide open, then there is the issue of CA which is pretty much always there no matter what under well lit/high contrast areas. The bokeh for this lens is relatively pleasing along with the fact that it has a very good minimum focusing distance, with a maximum magnification of 0.25x. And even though the lens may have internal zoom it does extend when focusing and to make matters worse the front element rotates when focusing, though its is only an issue if you use circular polarizers. For the price that this lens can be bought at I feel this is a buy very few would be disappointed in.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: ggeorgecv review date: October-03-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	zeiss 16-80
price paid:	150 euro
positive:	built quality sharpneess
negative:	big heavy rotate front element purple fringing
comment:	I purchased it for 150 euro as a telephoto zoom and i found it very good for portraits. Excellent sharpness at f8. I usually use it at 4.5. It s as sharp as I want for portraits. I tried to moving subjects and its very good except some times it hunts a bit. Very natural and powerful colors.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: glencraig59 review date: September-28-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Min 100-300 APO D, Min 75-300 BBC
price paid:	200 USD (mint)
positive:	Sharp across the frame wide open; constant aperture; solid enough for self-defense.
negative:	Be sure to use that hood!
comment:	I tested for sharpness as follows: I compared tripod shots at all focal lengths and apertures, looking at 100% on screen at an area one-third in from the left and bottom edges. I find my copy to be acceptably sharp wide open at all focal lengths except 210 mm. By "acceptably" I mean one can really only detect slight softness at 100%. All focal lengths except 210 mm were tack sharp by f/5.6. At 210 mm, sharpness was acceptable at f/5.6 and tack sharp at f/8, a loss of only one stop over the rest of the range. Color is first-rate Minolta: why we are here. I got a screw-on ABS hood from Mennon, a big improvement over the included clip-on. My copy has shown it to be worth its reputation. The only reason I would spend more is for faster or longer; for what it does it is a gem.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: MKoziara review date: September-21-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 70-200/2.8
price paid:	150 EUR (used)
positive:	- colors - sharpness - bokeh - weight - build quality
negative:	- CA - AF - narrow focusing ring
comment:	Love this lens. It's sharp enough from f/4, very sharp stopped down to 5,6, produces great images of colours & bokeh. Quite heavy, but not too heavy, a great companion for my A700. Cons: AF is not too fast, sometimes travels back & forth. CA is quite visible when wide open. I bought Tamron 70-200/2.8 lens a couple of months ago, and... it's too heavy, fragile and the picture it produces isn't any match for a beercan.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: dumbasadoorknob review date: September-21-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Zeiss 135 Sony 70300G Min 200G Min 85G
price paid:	usd 150 used
positive:	Minolta colors Fixed aperture Reliable focus
negative:	Length
comment:	This lens is not as heavy as the 28-135, and is lighter than my 135 Zeiss -- but it seems heavier because it is long -- and the length is the only real disadvantage to this lens, I feel. My copy is really excellent in its precision, in the clarity from edge to edge, and in the Minolta colors. It has 55mm filters, and an excellent full frame range. It shines on an A900, although it was a dynamite lens on my A700 too. I like the clip-on hood and the funny macro switch, since it makes the lens wholly versatile. I like the texture in my hand and the feeling that one gets exactly what one sees in the viewfinder. I am a fan of fixed aperture zooms, and this f4 is really useable in most lighting given the ISO games we can now play. Of course it isn't quite as good as the 85G, 135ZA or the 200G -- but my copy is awfully close. The 70300G has a better range, but a less desirable f-stop ratio: it takes crisper pictures with colors that are almost as good as the Beercan's. I use the 70300G more often than I use the Beercan, but I'll never sell the Beercan, and every time I decide to use it, I'm pleased with the results. It's old technology, but so is a Bentley Mulsanne -- and if I had one of those, I'd keep this lens on the backseat.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: tmihai review date: September-16-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	35-105 3.5-4.5 100 2.8 macro
price paid:	190 Euro Used
positive:	It's build like a tank reasonably Sharp in good light fast AF
negative:	a hefty amount of CA AF hunt in low light
comment:	A pretty decent lens AF is faster that I expected for such an old lens but it's not something to write home about it and in low contrast/ low light situations it hunts but not that bad. I like the macro feature of this lens it allows me to photograph insects in the wild without scaring them. The biggest problem with this lens is it's CA. but on the good side if you print the photos you will probably not notice it unless the print is large.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: VirtualMirage 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:
price paid:	200 USD (Used)
positive:	-Built like a tank -Great bang for the buck -Zooming is internal, no change in length except when focusing -Solid f/4 through whole range
negative:	-Soft and heavier CA at 70mm and 210mm. -A bit soft, but usable, at f/4. Doesn't start to really sharpen up until around f/5.6-6.3 -Weight. It causes the camera to feel unbalanced. A vertical grip may help this -Slow focusing -Minimum focusing distance a bit long
comment:	I was in need of a telephoto lens with some length but was on a budget. I heard a lot of good things about the beercan and decided to pick one up. Picture quality does seem to vary from lens to lens due to their age and how their previous owners took care of them. My copy seems to be nice but a bit soft at both ends of the zoom range. Although usable wide open, you really don't see its true potential in sharpness until you stop it down to f/5.6 or more. That is a bit of a problem when shooting in low light situations with no flash (concerts, church weddings, etc.). Colors are great but it seems to flare easily and CA is very noticeable in bright situations or on whites. Of course, this could be just on my copy. Great for portraits and outdoor use (maybe even doing shots of the moon). A bit cramped indoors, especially in tight space. I think this lens is great for one on a budget or is just beginning to develop their lens collection. However, I think I am ready to move up and get either the Sony 70-300 4.5-5.6 G SSM or the Sony 70-400 4-5.6 G SSM.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	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:	100f2 90mm Summicron 105mm Nikkor (Leice Screw Mount)
price paid:	USD200.00 (used)
positive:	Relatively sharpish wide open, better stopped down.
negative:	Heavy. Slow focus. I have gripes, but not so much with the lens.
comment:	For me, the purpose was as an affordable portrait lens. For that, the aperture was somewhat slow. The aperture being slow, and the lens being the size it was, forced me to work harder to keep it steady. A head shot using this lens, with no flash, at f4 and 1/30 of a second, is not good. With either of the f2's, the shutter speed would have been 1/125 of a second. That is a huge difference. When it was in an element it worked well in, it was a great lens. Don't misunderstand me here, the lens is great, I just bought it when I should have bought something else.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: My-shell review date: August-12-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Min 70-210 3.5-4.5 Min 100-300 APO Min 100-200 4.5 Big Beercan Sigma 90 2.8 Sigma 70-210 3.5-4.5
price paid:	40 EUR
positive:	Bulletproof built Sharp wide open Value for money Comparable to primes
negative:	A bit heavy (logically) A bit big (but one can stand it)
comment:	I made a bargain on lens which looked very heavily used. However, it performs geatly, it clearly smashes out all low to mid class lenses I tried later. No need to stop down dramatically to get sharp image, performs very well also at bright scenes and high contrast. AF quite OK on my A200. Used recently for musicians shots in poor light wide open and still very very very acceptable results. Im getting more and more excited about this lens. Highly recommended to stay on acceptable lens size with prime optical characteristics.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Simian review date: August-03-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-80 f 3.5-5.6 KM 28-80 f 3.5-5.6 KM 28-75 f 2.8 Minolta 28-135 f 4.5 (Leica) Minolta 50mm f 1.7 KM 70-300 f 4.5-6.7 Minolta 80-200 f 2.8 G Sigma 105 mm f 2.8 APO Macro Sigma 140-400 f 4.5-6.7 APO Minolta 600mm f 4 G
price paid:	265 USD (used)
positive:	Build quality, all metal construction Excellent bokeh V. Good sharpness and contrast Exc. color
negative:	Relatively slow AF AF poor in low light
comment:	The Beercan is a classic Minolta lens and takes fantastic pictures with good sharpness, nice color, and creamy bokeh. I have hung onto mine even though I long since picked up a good copy of the 80-200 2.8 G, which is superior in every way except close focus distance. The Beercan even doubles as a semi-macro, excelling for close-ups of flowers.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: grose review date: July-27-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 100-300xi Sony 18-70
price paid:	85 USD
positive:	Very crisp photos. Impressive colors. Solid construction. Silky zoom gearing. Internal zoom.
negative:	Weight. Slow AF.
comment:	I picked up a beercan in great condition for a great price. Yes, as everyone says, it is a tank. Expect and accept the weight, because you are going to get wonderful photos from this lens. If you are in a situation were you can use a tripod, do so with this lens. I took awesome fireworks photos with this lens on a tripod. The only other lens that I have that goes out in the distance range of the beercan is the 100-300xi, and the beercan easily beats that lens in sharpness. Edit: After working more with this lens, I have found it to have issues with flare, even when working with a hood. I have since downgraded the flare from a 4 to a 3.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Pappy review date: July-19-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Min 100mm macro Min 50mm/1.7 Min 28-85 mini-beercan
price paid:	260 CDN (clean used)
positive:	Color Sharp stopped down Internal focus Solid build
negative:	F4 isn't super-fast Could be sharper
comment:	I love this lens. It doesn't get perfect scores, but it has just the right combination of attributes while still being accessible money-wise. I've had it for 15 good years, and will have it for 15 more. It is so smooth and well-engineered. It is like a chrome-moly steel bicycle frame--not too jumpy, not too stiff, not too slushy, nice and quiet, durable, and reliable. A very comfortable lens to own.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: aKenneth review date: July-15-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	1300 NOK(200USD)
positive:	-F/4 -70-210mm on FF is nice. -Cheap -Nice IQ -Well built
negative:	-The front rotates -It's difficult to use MF. -CA and lots of it! -Metering problems?
comment:	I bought this lens because it was cheap and I heard good things about it. I also wanted something longer than 75mm and didn't feel ready to spend 600-1000USD's on another lens. I have some metering problems. Images are bright and I often need to dial the EV-comp. to -1/3 to - 1stop. With Sony 28-75mm I have the EV-comp. to 0 or +1/3-stop. I will probably buy a replacement when I feel the need for something new and better(I hate CA).

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: JamesAlpha850 review date: July-05-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta AF24 f2.8 Sony AF50mm f1.4 Sony AF100mm f2.8 macro Minolta AF28-85 f3.5-4.5 Minolta AF28-135 f4-4.5 Minolta AF35-105 f3.5-4.5 Minolta AF35-105 f3.5-4.5N Tamron AF28-300mm XR f3.5-6.3
price paid:	85.00USD
positive:	f4 availability, all focal ranges Renders lovely saturated colors and contrast Nice bokeh Great IQ Is ideal FF companion to 28-135 Has a solid construction and balances well on FF AF is sharp Availability on e-bay
negative:	CA in high contrast Weightier than some comparable zooms Not coated for glare. Don't shoot directly into sun unless you seek flare. Invest in a hood.
comment:	Another gem of Minolta 1985 vintage, built with premium materials, the Minolta Maxxum AF70-210mm is a must-have lens for FF owners. First impression handling the Beercan was puzzling. I found the ribbed zoom grip ring movement and tension to be comparatively loose. Am convinced now that this is somewhat expected and not a problem at all. While it's not as positive a zoom movement as the 28-135, the Beercan's action may be a trait. This lens does not extend itself as other zooms, so it is not prone to go creeping out. I like it that it has this action. As with the best of these old Minoltas, you must appreciate the Beercan for what it is, even today, another well-crafted optical. It was built to last with good care. The range is a perfect complement for the 28-135. Its rich saturated colors are uniquely Maxxum. I use other lenses sharper than the 70-210, but these are primes, or in the case of the razor sharp AF100mm, a true macro. CAs appear in the images of the Beercan. For example, they are detected between strands of hair with contrasty back light. These anomalies can be handled nicely in post processing with Lightroom 3. The Beercan holds its own against the increasingly rare and uniquely stellar 28-135. The Beercan is not nearly as sharp in the corners and across the image at all focal lengths, not as versatile, but nevertheless, it remains the most sought-after lens with its cult-like following of bargain buying admirers. Their praises appear in preceding reviews and in many forums. As a user of vintage medium format film cameras, I can say that these 1985 era lenses produce lovely images on the full-frame DSLR. The Beercan is one of the essentials in my ideal array. This lens will stay in the ready bag along with the others listed above as one of my Minolta Maxxum keeper lenses.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Tomodo review date: July-05-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
positive:	Solid build Smaller than a f2.8 zoom Great IQ for the price
negative:
comment:	This lens has stopped me from getting a 70-200 f2.8 so far. All my other lenses have been upgraded/swapped over the years such as my move to the Zeiss 24-70 and 85 but this one still stays. I rarely use it for low light work now (the 85mm does a fine job ) but its possible to get away with 'only' f4. It works great for the music festivals and outdoor events I cover where light isn't so much an issue.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: grzechoslaw review date: July-04-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SAL 18-70/3.5 - 5.6 MAF 35-70/3.5 - 4.5 MAF 24-50/4 Some m42 lenses (58/2, 135/3.5, 200/4)
price paid:	Equiv. of 200 USD
positive:	+ very sharp + very solid build + fantastic colours! + great contrast + very good IQ in all range (and especially on 210 mm, wich I use the most) + 55 mm filter (the same, as my other lens, 24-50/4) + does not change size, when zooming
negative:	- maybe a little bit slow autofocus - some CA, when shooting in specific situations - there aren`t any more, for me! :)
comment:	This lens is absolutely fantastic for me! All that comments, saying about the magic of the Beercan are really true - colors, contrast and sharpness are very good, and sometimes I haven`t got to make any larger corrections of colors and contrast of my shots. This lens can give very impressive results, even at long end, which I use the most - all dragonflies in my posts at the damsel/dragonflies thread are made with Beercan at 210 mm. Overall, I think, that the Beercan is one of lens, of wich Minolta should be very proud, and today, when You can get it for very nice price - it`s a fantastic choice, giving really lovely results :)

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: kozmo review date: June-28-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	TAMRON 70-200 2.8 SONY 55-200
price paid:	$138
positive:	BOKEH SHARPNESS CONSTANT F4
negative:	FLARE IN BRIGHT LIGHT AF COULD BE FASTER (GETTING PICKY HERE)
comment:	I WAS READY TO SELL THIS LENS, HAD NOT USED IT TO MUCH. THEN I TOOK IT SHOOTING ONE DAY AND WOW WAS I SURPRISED. SHARP PICS WITH GREAT BOKEH. THE SONY IS NICE SHARP, AND CHEAP ALTERNATIVE. THE TAMRON IS A BEAST, BUT A GREAT LENS. THIS LENS IS HARD TO FIND A FAULT ON ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING MY INVESTMENT AMOUNT. I THINK ITS BOKEH IS BETTER THAN THE SONY BUT IT IS BIGGER. I THINK ITS COLOR IS BETTER THAN THE TAMRON AND IT IS SMALLER. I WILL NOW BE KEEPING IT FOR SURE.HARD TO SAY ANYTHING HERE THAT HAS NOT BEEN SAID BEFORE ABOUT THIS LENS. GREAT VALUE FOR SURE

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: PAF3PHOTOGRAPHY review date: June-17-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	55-200,100-300xi Sigma 70-200 2.8
price paid:	150
positive:	Build quality, bokeh, sharp, great colors fast A/F fixed f/4 on A700 For the price of this lens you can't go wrong with it.
negative:	Bad CA
comment:	I bought this lens based on all the reviews on Dyxum as well as other sites. I was intrigued that a lens of aproxx. 25 years old was so popular.This lens will not dissapoint you. You get alot for your money

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: SChurchill review date: June-17-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta - AF 75-300 F4.5-5.6 Sony - AF 75-300 F4.5-5.6 Minolta - AF 100-300 F4.5-5.6 Sigma - 135-400 F4.5-5.6 APO Aspherical Minolta - AF 100-200 F4.5
price paid:	120 GBP
positive:	Sharpness Colour Build quality
negative:	Bad chromatic aberration in high contrast situations
comment:	I got a copy of this on ebay that had a small scratch on the centre of the front element which the seller kept quiet about. I think the scratch deterred me from using it seriously for sometime and initial tests indoors left me unimpressed. However, once used outdoors I was blown away by the sharpness and the colours. I have not noticed any detrimental effects of the scratch by the way.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: PaulaDawn review date: June-17-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	107GBP
positive:	Sharpness Colour Contrast Build Smooth internal zoom
negative:	Auto focus tendency to hunt & slightly noisy. Rotating front lens.
comment:	Managed to pick one up in absolute mint condition c/w original end caps & lens-hood. So far am unable to find fault with it. No visible CA and appears to be sharp at all zoom levels & apertures. Am well pleased!!!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	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:	28-135 35-105 org. 70-210 F/3.5 - F/4.5 Big beercan 75-300 'new' 135mm prime
price paid:	85 euro
positive:	legend lens. F/4. Sharp wide open. Even sharper stopped down. Build quality.
negative:	Prone to flare at direct sun.
comment:	Another must have next to the 50mm prime. Well deserved legend status and looking very sexy on a 7D body. Already sharp wide open and even better stopped down a stop. Lacks some micro detail compared to my 135mm prime. The IQ and bokeh are excellent. I had several samples which were all comparable in sharpness and IQ. Won't rate the sharpness a 5 since I expect the 80-200 and 70-200G to be sharper.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: sonyalpha review date: April-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:	255 US
positive:
negative:
comment:	Amazing lens!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: krazyboi review date: April-21-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	All others in the same range group..
price paid:	325 USD
positive:	Sharpness Excellent Minolta Color Built Like a Tank Attractive Bokeh Constant F/4 Aperture Smooth Autofocus
negative:	Weight Price
comment:	I was able to buy a like new copy of this lens. I paid a premium on the price, but it was worth it to get one without any wear and tear. It handles like it should and the resulting pictures are crisp and eye poppingly sharp. It is quite heavy compared to lenses with plastic builds, but it is not as heavy as some other telephoto zoom lenses in this range. If you are going to buy this lens, make sure you buy one in excellent condition. From my experiences with other beercans, the picture quality really depends on the condition of the lens. Do not settle for anything less than perfect!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: britdaveg review date: April-16-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 70-300 Tamron 55-200 Sony 18-250 Sigma 28-200 Sigma 70-300 Apo DG Sigma 70-300 Non Apo Sigma 28-300
price paid:	100 GBP
positive:	Sharpness Build Quality Constant F4 Bokeh Image Quality Natural colours
negative:	Sony don't make a new version.
comment:	Many moan about the weight and a lot moan about the focussing speed, weight; here’s a revelation; it’s made of metal, not cheap plastic and even though mine’s about 20 years old, it’ll still be here in 20 years time, can anyone say the same of the latest Sigma APO DG ?. Focussing Speed; on an A500 it’s miles faster than both the 70-300 Sigma Apo & 70-300 Tamron & does’nt hunt anywhere near the amount they do either. Image quality is in a totally different league, bokeh is smooth & creamy, colours are natural and as for sharpness, my beercan is far sharper than any of the cheap lightweight plastic lens I’ve used up till now, (f5 is way sharper than f8 on my Tamron). Here’s my run down on the 5 zooms I’ve had thus far; Sigma 70-300 Apo great value & good IQ, but cheap parts means it’ll last weeks on decent camera (mine lasted just 2 weeks on an A500 before the Camera stripped the gears). Sigma 70-300 Non Apo, cheap and not very cheerful. Tamron 70-300, excellent value (got mine for L99 from Jessops), good macro, looks gr8, very good IQ when stopped down (f/5.6 – F/9), long end not great. Tamron 55-200, excellent value & image quality, shooting way above it’s price range. Minolta Beercan; constant F4, smooth bokeh, excellent IQ, very sharp @ F/5.6 natural colours, only L100-L150, no lens creep & silky smooth operation. How long have I had my Beercan ?, A day and with the exception of the Sony 18-250 it makes all the others look stupid, overpriced, & lightweight plastic has beens. Put a L100 beercan up against a brand new sigma apo (L170+) & it won't even be close, A new version would cost nigh on a grand, got one yet ?.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	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:	Minolta 28-135 F4-4.5 Tamron 55-200 F4-5.6 (APS-C) Sony 70-300 G CZ 85 F1.4 Sony 100 F2.8 Macro Minolta 100-300 F4.5-5.6 APO Minolta 135 F2.8
price paid:	GBP 110 I think
positive:	+ As sharp as 70-300 G, sharper than 100-300 APO + Great colour + Great bokeh + Works well with Kenko Pro 300 1.4x TC + High availability used, and still a bargain
negative:	- CA - Soft wide open F4 (but usable and improves tremendously by F5 - Slow AF
comment:	I think I got lucky and my copy of the beercan is sharper than average. Anyway, I sold my 100-300 APO as the beercan was sharper and had better bokeh. I tested this lens vs a 70-300 G, took about 50 shots with both lenses and realised the only real advantage of 70-300 was in the 210-300mm range :-) Impressive full frame performance. Images have a similar look to 28-135.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: Pirate 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 100-300mm F4 EX DG (IF) SAL 70-300mm SSM G Sigma 70-300mm APO DG Macro (red ring) Tamron 55-200mm Di II LD Sigma 55-200mm DC Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG
price paid:	L75.00 (used)
positive:	Build Buttery Smooth Bokeh Constant F4 Weight Classic Minolta Colours IQ
negative:	How much better could this lens be if Sony re-introduced it with 21st century technology and optics akin to the SAL50F18?
comment:	Having just bought this lens, I was sceptical about the reviews and ratings but all that changed after using it for the first time. Weight is featherlight compared to Sigma 100-300mm F4 EX DG, so I don't understand why it's reported negitavely as it's not 'heavy' at all. It's not plastic people . . . it's made of metal and glass, get over it! It does what it says on the tin very nicely with smooth bokeh, classic Minolta colours and great IQ. Tactile feel of the lens is nice as you can feel the quality of build. Though I don't use it extensively, it's an absolute joy to use and I can now understand it's following. If you can bag one of these at an affordable price, the investment is well worth it. Not much of a 'review', but one of those gems much like the revered Minolta AF 50mm f/1.7, though with the introduction of the SAL50F18 prices for that lens will plummet.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: mikejhart32 review date: April-01-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 70-300 Tamron 55-200 Minolta 100-300xi Sigma 70-300 APO
price paid:	L90
positive:	Beautiful Built like a tank Nice colours Handles well Doesnt change length when zooming
negative:	noticable CA not always sharp, particularly at 210mm A bit too heavy A bit too long
comment:	In these days of plastic, throwaway lenses, the beercan is a wonder to behold, but I am not sure it lives up to its awesome reputation. Firstly, I was shocked by the purple fringing compared to the others. Secondly, it is not as sharp as the Tamrons, particularly the 55-200. Thirdly, it is much bigger and heavier than all the others. Fourthly, it is limmited in its range. Ok, it is easily the best built and best looking and the fastest, but I think it is showing its age now. Maybe one for the purist or collector, but not for me, and it will have to go, reluctantly.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: vaughaag review date: March-30-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 75-300, CZ 16-80, Minolta 35-70, Sigma 55-200
price paid:	L32 and L160
positive:	Solid Build, Really nice Bokeh, Sharp (even at f4), accurate AF
negative:	A little heavy, Mid-slow AF, Focus ring rotates when focusing,
comment:	I have two copies of this lens, both are very good clean examples. I have used them in varied light and situations and been extremely pleased with the results. Although it is a fairly heavy lens, the build quality is superb and it feels right in the hand. The large focus rubber enables you to easily use then lens with gloves on in cold weather. I would recommend the beercan to anyone.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: profhankd review date: March-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 75-300 F4.5-5.6 D Sony - AF DT 55-200 F4-5.6 Many others, and M42 lenses
price paid:	160 USD (used)
positive:	Sharp, great bokeh, F4, classic Minolta color, internal zoom
negative:	Slow focus, front turns with focus
comment:	I have been very happy with the Minolta 75-300 covering this range, but I wanted to see if there is anything to the Beercan legend... there sort-of is. The build is actually slightly inferior to my 75-300, but it zooms internally and is thus better sealed, so it is still a 5 overall. Internal zoom makes it a tad larger to carry; it isn't heavy by M42 lens standards. Focus is slow, but seems reliable. However, the IQ suits the legend, even at F4, with sharpness, very nice bokeh, and Minolta color. Sharpness notably improves on stopping down a little, with f/5-f/5.6 bringing it very close to the 14MP sensor resolution limit. Unlike other reviewers, I have not yet seen problematic CA... but I am using it on APS-C, not full frame. Bottom line: for what I paid for a clean copy with the hood and shipping, this has no AF peers. However, that is largely because it is a usable F4. My 75-300 starts at F4.5 and becomes F5.6 early, and it is not quite as good, especially at 300mm. However, it does go to 300mm, so I will keep it. The 55-200 has only size in its favor, and that's not really enough.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: terenz review date: March-28-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 75-300mm kit lense Maxxum 75-300mm "big beercan"
price paid:	160 CAD
positive:	solid build smooth focus/zoom good colours
negative:	weight CA bit slow
comment:	SOlid lense. Have a lot of CA on this one. Weight for some reason dictates that MLU needs to be used on an A850 even if used on a tripod with remote trigger.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: hashbrown review date: March-25-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 100-200 f4.5 Minolta 75-300
price paid:	L180 GBP (used)
positive:	Great build quality Sharp F4 Stunning picture
negative:	quite big and heavy
comment:	One of my favourite lenses. I got a good one and it produces beautiful results. Technically it may not be perfect but the pictures speak for themselves. Colours, depth and richness is just lovely. The only downside is that this is a big, heavy lens compared with plastic modern APS-C lenses around but not compared to something like the the Canon 70-200 F4.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Terpret 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:
positive:
negative:	-heavy
comment:

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: StormK 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:	18-70 kitlens 70-210 kitlens Big beercan 100-200 F4.5 55-200mm SAM
price paid:	110GBP
positive:	Sharp at F5.6 Very sharp at F8 build design very smooth zoom F4
negative:	A bit heavy on both 5D and A700 Not as contrasty as 16-105
comment:	Once i removed the uv-filter that was stuck the lens really delivered. It's amazingly sharp at F8 from wide all the way to tele and ok sharp at F5.6. F4 can be bit soft. I love how it looks and feels. It's much sharper than my big beercan which needs to be stopped down to F8 for the same sharpness as F4 on the beercan. Highly recommended. "Edited": It's sharp but I must say it gets a bit heavy on the long run. I replaced it with the 100-200, wich was way more portable, but not nearly as sharp. The beercan was much sharper up to F6.7 and just a tad sharper at F8. I then got the 55-200 SAM which is at least as sharp as the beercan, and below F6.7 actually sharper with next to no CA and it weighs nothing compared to the beercan. It's still a beautyfull lens though. It's still recommended, but try the SAM too.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: lupinehorror review date: February-04-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	L101
positive:	F/4.0 Sturdy (VERY) Classic looks Captures great colours
negative:	Bit weighty Bit long
comment:	just paid L101 for one of these (on ebay.co.uk) in mint condition with with caps and the hood...to say that i'm happy is an extreme understatement. love the colour that this lens produces.

sharpness: 2 color: 3 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 1	user: Apocalypse_later review date: January-28-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 50 1.4 Tamron 17-50 2.8
price paid:	150€ mint
positive:	f4, very solid, very nice bokeh.
negative:	Big and heavy. Sharpness falls a lot in longer focals (f4 "real", but 210 mm not so real). AF very slow, heavy problems with CA. Focus ring is a disaster, and it moves during AF.
comment:	It´s big and heavy for its quality. f4 is good at 70 mm, 100... but sharpness is very, very low in the longer focals. Focus ring and CA control really bad. AF very sure, and veeery slow too. I like its soft bokeh. Good quality and luminous for the price, but the "beercan legend" is too big in my opinion.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: derekw review date: January-26-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 55-200-2 (SAM) Minolta 100-300 APO D Minolta 75-300 (Big Beercan)
price paid:	L135
positive:	Build Sharpness Colour
negative:	Weight PF at larger apertures
comment:	Lovely lens but needs hood to minimise flare. Both of my beercans have been relegated to occasional use mainly due to portability issues. I tested this and the three lenses above and IQ was virtually identical upwards of f7.1. Below this aperture PF becomes noticeable on this and the big beercan. Prices appear to be falling for this lens and a good copy under £100 is still a good investment.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: 12AMS review date: January-24-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 100-200mm f4.5 Tokina 24-200mm f3.5-5.6 Sony 55-200mm SAM
price paid:	120 USD (used)
positive:	Build (excellent) Image color Bokeh
negative:	Build (too long) CA Sharpness only mediocre compared to the 100-200mm
comment:	I love the build of this lens. I have a like-new copy with hood, and its looks and feels great. I don't find the weight an issue, but the length of the lens makes it a little awkward. This lens is a dream to use with a great range and a wide aperture. It has the same tank-like build of the Tokina, but much superior image quality. The bokeh is the best of any consumer lens you would be able to find, but then again, so is the 100-200mm. My copy is a little soft at 210mm and max aperture, and has a fair amount of CA, but nothing that would ruin a print. The 100-200mm beats it in both sharpness and CA. I tend to test these lenses at max aperture because why else would you want a f4 lens vs a f5.6 lens?? UPDATE 11 June 2011: I recently obtained the Sony 55-200mm SAM, and it beats the Beercan in every aspect that matters to me. The build and internal focusing of the Beercan are great qualities, but contribute nothing to image quality. Therefore, I'll be reluctantly selling the Beercan.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: yannick review date: January-23-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tokina SD AF 70-210
price paid:	80 CHF (used)
positive:	Price Color Bokeh
negative:	Slow AF Heavy
comment:	Got my lense really cheap (75$) So I should not crticise. It was my first Tele Lense, i bought it just after having bought my Camera with the Kit Lense. I heard about it, but I did not knew so much about it. I got it from someone who used it with his Minolta camera for some 20ish years. I used It for some days, then I started to realise what deal I got. I like this lense, because of the f4, i use it a lot outside, so it is bright enough, i like the bokeh. It is lots better than the Kit lense I have. Unfortunately the AF is slow and really loud! (Probably it is just my copy, due to the age)

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: LyleG review date: January-18-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	minolta 75-300 sony 75-300 Sony 70-300G Minolta 100-200
price paid:	$120 Canadian
positive:	Very sharp from 5.6 on great color great bokeh at long end constant aperture
negative:	heavy and tad awkward because of length a hair soft at f4 but still very usable
comment:	I went through 7 copies of this lens, and can honestly say that I now own a perfect one. It has perfect focus on my a300, and this copy seems to have next to no CA or purple fringing. A few of the 7 copies I had were horrible in this regard. Sharpness seemed to vary a bit between copies as well, especially at or near wide open. This copy is as sharp at 5.6 as many of the copies I had were at f8-f11. Color is excellent, and at the long end for zoomed in close-ups the bokeh is terrific. Search for a good copy as it can be a terrific find, it may require some buy and selling it it will be well worth it in the long run. I was so happy with this copy I sold my 70-300G as i could no longer justify it.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 4	user: JeremyT review date: January-13-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- SAL 55-200mm - SAL 75-300mm
positive:	- Constant F/4 - Internal zoom - Sharp (mostly) - Should work with the "paired" 2x TC, and is fast enough for AF to work
negative:	- Nasty CA - Flare, at least if you don't have the (somewhat hard to find) hood - Bulkier than modern alternatives - Filter ring rotates on focus - Overpriced
comment:	On my A200 it's pretty sharp at f/4, though it can't quite keep up with the 10 MP sensor; stopping down to f/5.6 helps, especially at 210mm where it's at its softest. Sharpness is similar to the SAL 55-200mm f4-5.6. "Bokeh" looks OK. Nothing magic, but F/4 at 210mm gives a pretty shallow DoF so you can coax a bit more blur from this than with slower lenses. Otherwise it's mostly comparable to the SAL 55-200m (though the latter has a circular aperture for round OOF highlights). Colors are similar to other Minolta lenses of that era. CA is bad on the long end in high contrast shots, as bad at 210mm as the 75-300mm is at 300mm. Stopping down to F/8 or so helps somewhat but you can't get rid of it all. Plan to fix this in PP if you're cropping such an image, although small prints should be fine. Flare is troublesome, but I don't have the hood so I'm uncertain how to rate it.* My copy has clearly been around the block a few times, and my manual focus ring is not very smooth or well dampened. Manual focus feels (and autofocus sounds) rather "grindy." I'm unclear whether this is just a problem with my copy, so I'm not penalizing the score. Bottom line is this: do you need a constant f/4 zoom that gets you to 210mm? If so, this is one of the few options out there. If you can handle f/5.6 on the 200mm side, then I think modern entry level SAL zooms (55-200mm or 75-300mm, depending on your range preference) are better (and, oddly, cheaper) options. * If you buy this lens, be sure to note whether it includes the hood or not and value it accordingly. You'll have a lot of trouble finding a replacement if you don't get one with it.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Bob Socko 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 DT 55-200mm f/4-5.6 Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Minolta 100-200mm f/4.5 Minolta 80-200mm f/2.8 HS G Sony 70-300mm f/4-5.6 SSM G Sony 70-400mm f/4-5.6 SSM G
price paid:	200 USD (used)
positive:	* Solid build * No extension while zooming * Classic Minolta colors * Constant aperture * Full-frame compatible
negative:	* Soft wide open with chromatic aberrations * Heavy
comment:	I love this lens. The focal range is great, long enough to be a meaningful zoom but not so long as to be unusable hand-held. Though image quality isn't great at f/4, I've taken plenty of great shots at f/4.5 or f/5. Colors are fantastic, with nice tones and saturation. Given how cheap and common this lens is on the used market, it's a very nice alternative to the Sony 55-200mm f/4-5.6. Though I have picked up "nicer" glass since buying this lens, the Beercan has a certain look to its shots that I just can't describe. For that reason, it still finds its way into my bag from time to time.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: lowcost4dslr review date: January-03-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Big Beercan Minolta 135 AF 2.8 Minolta 35-105 old Jupiter 21M (M42 200mm f4.0) Jupiter 37A (M42 135mm f3.5)
price paid:	120€
positive:	internal zoomin mecanism Sharpness is OK at 70 constant f4.0 slow AF in low ligh
negative:	my 2 copy of this zoom are not very sharp particularly at the long end.
comment:	This lens is a legend. It is really a beautifull object. But I have been disapointed with my first copy which was certainly faulty. So I purchased a second one in mint conditions. The results were goods but not as I could expect considering the hype there is on this zoom. The constant f4.0 is a nice feature, but for low ligh or DOF management I prefer the minolta 135 2.8 The sharpness is not as good as with the minolta 35-105 old (same era) The big beercan is better also I compared it with a few M 42 lenses particularly the jupiter 21M wich is a 200mm f4.0 prime mf lens. The J21M is far better in all aspects (color, sharpness, 3D effect bokey). I think it would be intersting to compare it with the tamron 55-200

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: mz-n10 review date: December-26-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	24-70z 50/1.4 17-80kit canon 70-200/4 L IS
price paid:	180
positive:	great color great bokeh solid build
negative:	heavy rotating filter soft at f4 but sharpens up
comment:	Great lens for the price sub 200 dollars. It is not the sharpest lens, and theres a bit of CA and flaring but nothing horribly bad. Stopped down it is sharp and with great colors to boot. Probably has the best bokeh out of all the lenses I have. But it does show its age. When compared to the canon 70-200/4 IS, AF is slower (could be due to a200 vs 40d), and sharp wide open is significantly worst. Tho, I personally like beercan colors more then the canon.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: gizmo_pony review date: December-26-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	kitlens A200
price paid:	150 USD (used)
positive:	- sharp focus - fast autofocusing in daylight - nice colors - nice bokeh - constant F/4.0 is good
negative:	- slow autofocusing in a low-light condition - quite heavy - chromatic aberration
comment:	This is a very good lens for you to try, maybe for a beginner. I love the bokeh very much. It's quite heavy and big too. The built is good, sturdy. Chromatic aberration is a problem. If you can get this lens for a cheap, go for it, you won't regret.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: zhihui review date: December-25-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	55-200 mm f4.5-5.6 17-50 mm f2.8
positive:	1) very good color 2) contrast and saturation also very good control 3) f4 from 70-210mm 4) sharp
negative:	1) focusing a bit slow 2) heavy
comment:	this is consider very good lens... excellent build up quality... very nice and natural color produce... can use it for full frame and aps-c... good for portraits also.. high recommended...

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: kawung review date: December-24-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	sony kit 18-70
price paid:	180 USD
positive:	solid built excellent for portrait/close-up internal zoom focus window indicator
negative:	heavy soft, CA at full length
comment:	this is my first tele-lens also my first 'other' lens! perfectly complements the kit lens in focal length, although i want longer zoom (big beercan) but after reading some review and price consideration i finally pick this. i'm a bit shocked about the pictures i've taken at full length, it's quite bad! very soft, and CA is annoying. but well, maybe i'm just new to photography world. it shows excellent result taking some portraits/close-ups. bright color, nice sharpness (just to remind, definitely not at 210mm)

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Bydand review date: November-26-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	10 USD most recent
positive:	Build colors build range build
negative:	None
comment:	I have owned a beercan or two since they came out back in 1985. It is a great lens that has a decent zoom range and my copies have been tack sharp. Taken photos with Maxxum 5000, 7000, 8000i bodies as well as a Sony a-200 body. focus is slightly quicker on the digital body than the film bodies. It can get a bit heavy to carry around all day, but the quality makes it seem a small trade off.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Wordfreak review date: October-28-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 100-300 4.5-5.6 xi Minolta 80-200 2.8 Sony 70-300 G 4.5-5.6
price paid:	179 USD
positive:	f4 throughout range Internal focusing all-metal build Colours are typical Minolta: beautiful Bokeh is gorgeous
negative:	Hunts a little in low light Noisy auto focus
comment:	This was my first tele-zoom and well worth the money. If you can find a decent copy of this classic Minolta lens, snatch it up. You won't regret it. Much more useful than the new Sony 70-300 G 4.5-5.6. The constant f4 will help you in low-light situations. Sure, it's a tad noisy in auto-focus mode, but for one quarter the price of the Sony with it's fancy SSM, you're getting a solid, all-metal built lens. I've shot some truly awesome concert photos with this lens back when I just got my a100 and it really shines outdoors as well, shooting sports. Decent for portraits as well. All-round most useful zoom. Especially for the price. Did I mention the bokeh is gorgeous?

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Rusty review date: October-14-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 70-300 APO Min 135/2.8
price paid:	160 USD
positive:	-Built like a tank -Sharp -Internal zoom (see below) -Constant f/4
negative:	-Can become heavy after a while -CA !!! -Internal Zoom (see below) -Rotating Filter
comment:	Got this used from a Dyxum member, to replace my busted-AF Sigma 70-300 APO. Range is a little short, I miss the extra 90mm sometimes, but the constant aperture is really nice, and it's sharp enough wide open. Internal zoom is a 2 sided blade... I like the fact that it does not extend when zooming-in, but it makes for a pretty bulky lens that BARELY fits in my bag. Build is amazingly solid, all metal, which makes for a pretty heavy lens to carry around all day. AF is rather slow, but still acceptable in good light. A nice lens to use, operation is buttery smooth, IQ is good and built can't be beat !

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: vadang review date: October-07-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	-Sigma 70-300mm APO -Big beercan
price paid:	$50.00 USD
positive:	-Great color -Great build quality -Zoom doesn't extend lens
negative:	-A bit bulky
comment:

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: spada review date: October-02-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 55-200/4-5.6 Tamron 70-200/2.8 Minolta 100-300/4.5-5.6 APO Minolta 75-300/4.5-5.6 New
price paid:	$110 USD with 50/1.7
positive:	Solid feeling Constant f/4 aperture Accurate AF, very little hunting Sexy looking
negative:	Bad focus ring design (see comments) 210mm is soft
comment:	I am judging this lens on the fact that it is just a lens, and I won't let the legend of the Beercan influence me. Sharpness I would rate a 4, because it is a 5 between 70mm and 135mm, falls off to a 4 at 150mm, and falls to a 3 at 210mm. It is wonderful at f/8 for the entire range of the lens, but it seems to me that the sharpness at infinity never got to be as sharp as the 100-300APO. F/4 is nice to use at a MLB baseball game, but using it at 210mm was not an option, I had to stop down to f/5.6 and ISO1600 for a night game, and there was still plenty of purple fringing on the numbers and names of players. My pet peeves about the build of the lens: The focus ring travels with the front element. That is the weirdest thing to me. I have never encountered that on another lens, so it's just weird. The snap on lens hood is just weird too, because it isn't the most secure and seems like the clips could break easily. Aside from those flaws, the build is great. You know you are holding a solid lens the moment you touch it. There is NO zoom creep, and it's amazing how smooth the zoom ring operates. The rear element stays put during zooming action, so there's less of a chance of dust being brought into the lens. I know I will be shunned for making this comment, but I wish the colors were more true to the actual scene, instead of the Minolta colors. You can definitely see a difference in color when looking through this lens, and it's the only lens of mine where it was a pronounced difference. I prefer using the Sony 55-200 over the Beercan because of the 55mm end, and the Sony carries f/4.5 deep into the focal range (to about 150mm). And when absolute sharpness and speed is needed, the Tamron 70-200/2.8 is up to the task.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: mystainsane review date: September-23-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Big Beercan.
positive:	Fast AF. Good picture quality and great color.
negative:	Heavy, I can never get this thing steady without a tripod.
comment:

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: jfabrizio review date: September-16-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 135mm F2.8 Minolta 28-135mm
price paid:	50 USD
positive:	Sharp Great color Solid build Bokeh
negative:	A touch of CA on occasion
comment:	I purchased this lens at a steep discount because it has a bit of fungus inside the front element. Despite this, its been a great lens, very sharp with great Minolta color. This is my go-to lens at sporting events, or with the dogs at the beach. The AF is pretty fast once oriented, and generally pretty accurate on my A300. The build is amazing. My girlfriend dropped it from 5 feet and, despite my horror, it was unaffected! This is the best telephoto lens in that focal range that I can afford and I'm very content with it.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Dynaton-DK review date: September-14-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta AF100-400 Minolta AF100-200 Minolta AF28-135 Sigma AF70-300APO
positive:	Sharp within its limits Excellent saturated colours Constant F4 Nice bokeh
negative:	Heavy and large lens Slow autofocus
comment:	A fine lens - however, current prices reflect the hype around this lens to an extend that is not really justified. None the less especially the colours are very nice and well saturated meaning that close-up shots (isolating a person or an object in front of the background) always looks very appealing to the eye. Used as telelens at long focus distances e.g. at infinity it's nothing "special" - it's okay, but not excellent. The main advantage is seen at relative close focus distance with a lot of bokeh out of focus (low depth of image) - this is what this lens is excellent for.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: stan_pustylnik 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 135mm f/2.8, Tamron 90mm f/2.8 1:1, Minolta 100-300mm xi, Sigma 70-300mm DL
price paid:	80 USD (consigment)
positive:	Nice bokeh, beautiful colors, sharp detail for zoom lens, built like a tank
negative:	Heavy
comment:	Colors and bokeh produced by this lens are beautifil. Detail sharpness is good from f/4 up to f/22. Of course, detail is not as good as prime lenses produce, but as good as zomm lens can go. If you find good copy, colros, f/4-5.6 bokeh quality at 210mm end, will please you big way. For reasonable pice this lens is worth of buying.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Churst review date: September-09-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-70 kit lens Minolta 50mm f1.7 Minolta 28mm f2.8
price paid:	128 GBP (used)
positive:	- f4 all the way through - Tank like construction - Pretty sharp all the way through - Great range for APS-C sensors
negative:	- some chromatic aberration (red/cyan) - Fairly slow AF - Really quite heavy
comment:	Well for the price you can get it for it really is extremely good. It can be amazingly sharp at f4, but other days the AF won't quite do it justice and it'll sit there hunting for ages. I generally stop it down to around f7 to keep it as constantly sharp as possible. The weight really does ruin any chance of balance on the grip of my a300. Hopefully that'll change as I upgrade bodies. All that said, I love it...

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: photoBear review date: September-07-09
	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 minolta 18-70 minolta 28-80 (on canon) kit 55-200?
positive:	Sharp all the way through constant apeture good build satisfying weight sharper than the tamron 28-300
negative:	slow af filter rotates when focusing
comment:	I miss my beercan, I might be the only person who has had one fall apart. I got it for $150 au some years back so it was cheap I found it to be a great portrait lens. and much sharper than the tamron I replaced it with. Af was pointles on my old 404si but not so bad when i got it on my 5d. One day I may own one again.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: nitrosyl review date: September-02-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- Minolta 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 APO - Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 SSM G - Sony 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6
positive:	- built like a tank - f/4 all the way
negative:	- chromatic aberration - mediocre AF speed - a tad soft wide open, stop down for max resolution
comment:	What a beautiful piece of equipment built by Minolta in the 80's! A major step-up from the 75-300/4.5-5.6 kit lens, imo the beercan is even better than the Minolta 100-300/4.5-5.6 APO which by itself is a nice piece of glass. But both are outpaced by the 70-300/4.5-5.6 SSM G now. Pity, no modern equivalent from Sony so far.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: michaelg 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:	Tokina 19-35 M35-105 M50/1.7 M135/2.8 Sigma 105Macro M28-85 Vivitar Series1 105/2.5 Sony 75-300
price paid:	239 USD
positive:	Sharp Colors Fixed Aperature
negative:	Heavy Slow
comment:	Wow! Stopped down to f5 this lens becomes a marvelous tool for taking lovely photos. Yes its heavy, but so what. I wish the focus was faster but i bought this for the lovely colors, bokeh & sharpness. & they are all there. I have had no problems with flare but i do use the hood always.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: wolfy review date: July-27-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 80-200/2.8HSG Mini Beercan Sigma 70-300DL macro
price paid:	240AU (used)
positive:	Fairly sharp Built solidly
negative:	Some CA at long end
comment:	I still own this lens, so thought I would do a review. If you can get one cheap, its well worth it, better than kit lenses. I would say its sharper than the Mini Beercan but not sharper than the 80-200/2.8HSG. Much sharper than the Sigma 70-300DL macro. Softens a touch as it gets closer to 210mm. Can suffer from a bit of flare and CA with strong lighting, but generally the colours it produces are very good. It seems to be built well and I have found it to be reliable. If you ask would I buy the beercan or the new 70-300G, I would say buy the 70-300g if you can afford it, otherwise get the beercan if on a budget.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: Gianni-xxl review date: July-23-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	16/105 - 50f1.7 - 100/200 - 75/300New
price paid:	128 €uro - 156 €euro
positive:	Colore - Contrasto - Costruzione - AF abbastanza veloce considerando l'etr
negative:	A f.4 non offre il meglio - Aberrazione cromatica a tutte le focali - Peso - Ingombro
comment:	Ok!! la fidelizzazione e l'amore per Minolta (tanto di cappello e oso anche inchinarmi), Ok!! il fatto di prendere un F.4 a buon prezzo ma francamente con un comunissimo 55-200 di Sony o Tamron si ottiene la stessa resa senza il problema del peso e dell'aberrazione cromatica (bordi viola). Avere un F.4 che non offre la migliore resa a quel diaframma equivale a rinunciarci, anche perche con le nuove fotocamere tipo la mia Alpha700 uno stop di diaframma mancante fa solo ridere se coniugato anche all'antivibrazione. I fedelissimi del marchio avranno tanto da ridire su quanto affermo ma all'atto pratico e senza troppe pippe mentali la realtr corrisponde a quanto descritto sopra.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: rnijholt review date: July-20-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 17-50, Sony 70-300G, Minolta 80-200G APO, Tamron 11-18
positive:	sharp, nice color, creamy bokeh
negative:	focus not so fast
comment:	I use this lens a lot for portrets. There is just something special about it. I also take the beercan with me when I want to travel light and I don't want to carry the Minolta 80-200. I think I will never sell this lens.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: rvonner review date: July-18-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	18-70mm Sony kit lens 28-135 4.0-4.5 Minolta beercan 50mm 1.7 Minolta
price paid:	40.00 USD
positive:	Very sharp photos, overall an real good lens
negative:	heavy, hunts in low light
comment:	I got this lens along with the 28-135 and 50mm for 40.00 USD at a pawn shop. All three lens were in mint condition. I thank God for getting such a great deal.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: Morten 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:	KM 28-75 2.8 D Minolta 50 1.7
price paid:	100
positive:	Bokeh is nice. When everything works it makes very emocional images
negative:	I think there are too few keepers with this lens. Flare.
comment:	I'm not sure if I got a bad version or not. But I get many blurred images with this lens - even at 70mm. Some seem fine, but not that sharp compared to images taken with the two others. The focus time is fine with my a300 - actually quite fast. I daren't use this lens for weddings since there are way too many misses. The two other lenses gets the job done with very few misses. The feel can be quite magic - but the magic of the 50 1.7 is stronger :-) KM 28-75 2.8 is just shaaarp and really fast. Kinda dissapointed with the mighty beercan...

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Combatmedic870 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:	Sony 55-200 4-5.6 KM 75-300 (big beercan)
price paid:	165
positive:	Fixed length! Very sharp! Constant aperture! GREAT boken! VERY well built!
negative:	No Internal focusing. Flare
comment:	I love this lens! But now that I have a KM 75-300 Big Beercan it has seen a little less use(I do mostly birding.). This lens is sharp from F5 up! Its sweet spot is F8(about as sharp as it gets!). I am what some people call a "pixel peeper". If the photo isnt sharp...I wont use it. Now that I have went from my sony 55-200 to this...I have alot more acceptable photo's! If you dont need the 300mm and your shooting in a lower lit enviroment then this is the lens to have! But for birding I find that my Big Beercan is just as sharp (I usually on shoot at F7.1-F9 when birding). But I LOVE the internal zoom! When im walking around...I have this lens and my 28-75 2.8 with me! This lens has never flared on me, But I also ALWAYS use the hood(even indoors).

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: pavbcm review date: July-15-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- Sigma 70-300 F4-5.6 Macro Super II
price paid:	130 EUR on eBay
positive:	- Built like a tank. - Very sharp. - Fantastic bokeh. - Internal zoom. - f4 all around.
negative:	- Bulky & Heavy. - Slow focus on my A100. - Purple fringing on highlights.
comment:	Ahhh the beercan, the lens that is so mythical that everyone should have one... Bought it on eBay without the metal lens hood... bought the lens hood on eBay separately; never had any flare issues with it. You'll have a hard time finding a lens built like this one, it really is a tank and to prove it mine is mint condition and is probably 15-20 years old. Very sharp results on 70 or 210, extremely good bokeh which makes an excellent portrait lens. Although f4 at 70 is nothing specially, f4 at 210 is; but I do tend to stop it down a bit from f4. I only have to issues with it: - If the camera misses the focus point, it takes a very long time to cycle back to the focus point... can be frustrating in a Airshow for example. - In my lens I have a noticeable amount of purple fringing on high-contrast highlights (sun reflection on metal surfaces for example). The lens is known to suffer from that a bit and also happens to the beercan of friend of mine but to less extent... Guess I just got unlucky with the purple fringing bit.. Strongly recommended.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: DB7 review date: June-20-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	gift
positive:	Very sharp in good light Great color and bokeh. Build like a tank.
negative:	Hunt a little in low light
comment:	This was given to me by my Dad and this lens is everything you read about. An awesome lens for 25 + year sold. For flower pictures, the colors are great. I wish it had a shorter MFD but its workable. I found it too slow for hockey pictures in dimly lit rinks so I purchase a Sigma 70-200 f2.8. In bright light, the beercan is every bit as good as the sigma without the weight.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: OisinP review date: June-02-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	100-200mm F4.5 100-300 APO
price paid:	125
positive:	Bomb proof Constant F4 Sharpness
negative:	It's a bit like a full beer-can Occasional cold cast colour
comment:	Good lens overall and a very satisfying step up from kit but the similar reach 100-200 F4.5 got more use. It was easier to carry, didn't sacrifice much if anything in terms of IQ. This was closer focussing though which can be handy. AF on the 5D in poor to average light was slow (prob more due to camera than lens) but for objects in decent light this produced the goods. The danger of hyping this lens too much is that similarly good lenses of the first AF generation become under valued.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: FarmerJohn25 review date: May-31-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	100-200mm f4.5
price paid:	120 USD
positive:	Great Bokeh Excellent Metal Build Sharp good zoom range Love the colors
negative:	May hunt a little in low light really heavy Macro
comment:	Both the 100-200mm and the beercan are great lens, I would recommend both to anyone. I love both lens and got it for a good deal and you can too if you look hard enough. Beercan: I paid 300 for 2 beercans, but sold one for 180. -pros: slightly Sharper(not by much), Superior bokeh, love the macro even though it isn't true macro, wider zoom range, F4 -cons: more expensive, and heavier 100-200mm: Paid 80 bucks for a like new copy. -Pros: cheaper; lighter; better for long hikes; Sharp; I think this lens produces better colors then the beercan, but that could be b/c I got a good copy. -cons: would like more range. Thats about it, not many negatives. If cost is an issue, go for the 100-200, you will not be sorry, but if you have money get the beercans, you will not regret it.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	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 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:	250 USD (used)
positive:
negative:
comment:

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: harbinger review date: May-20-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	18-70 kit lens
price paid:	$238 (used)
positive:	- Amazing Bokeh - Built for defending yourself - Internal telephoto extension - Macro
negative:	- Slow focusing on low light
comment:	Great piece of glass for the price I paid for. I cannot afford any G lenses and this is as close as I can get to a G. Bokeh for portraiture at full telephoto is just amazing. Set the A200 sharpness at +1 and beercan at F5 and viola! Sharp subject with strong details and blurred background. What more can you ask? 3D effect can be achieved by setting beercan to around F8, but you have to step back a little. This little gem will never be sold. It will stay with me until the end of its life. My next lens would be the 50mm 1.8, that will be the last one for my arsenal. My dream lens would be the Minolta 100 F2... I'm still wishing and hoping and praying for one!

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: chrishurley review date: May-17-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 70-300g, Tamron 18-250mm, Tamron 28-200mm, Tamron 28-300mm
positive:	Inexpensive f4 zoom
negative:	Slow and heavy
comment:	This lens has a legendary reputation, and I'm not sure that it is entirely deserved. The main thing it has going for it is "what you get for the price." For about 200USD, you get great build quality, great color and bokeh, fixed aperture, non-extending zoom, It is painfully slow to focus, even on the A700. It is most certainly an outdoor lens and it isn't blisteringly sharp. But I think you might be hard pressed to find a current lens that delivered better results for twice the money. That's what is special about this lens.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Derek review date: May-16-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 75-300 New
price paid:	L150(used)
positive:	Sharpness Colour Bokeh Build
negative:	Value for money
comment:	Top quality lens but overpriced. The 75-300 New equals this lens in almost every respect between 75 and 210 except the sharpness at maximum aperture and the beercan controls flare a little better. Nevertheless a quality lens if you dont mind the price tag.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Botbijltje review date: May-09-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 18-200 Minolta 28-85 Minolta 50mm 1.7 Minolta 24-50
price paid:	75 EURO
positive:	Color Sharpnes Bokeh Build strong
negative:	None
comment:	This lens is 2 hold on for, i would not sell this lens. Also i bought it for a very nice price :-)Very good lens strong build , i like a heavy lens. When i look at the sigma's they are much lighter in weight. I hope that i will make much more good pictures in the future with this "Beercan"

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Milan33m review date: May-07-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	MAF 100/2,8 Macro, MAF 28-105/3,5-5,6, MAF 100-300/4,5-5,6 MAF 50/1,7
price paid:	110 EUR (used)
positive:	Very good sharpness, even on a big distance, takes goods macro pictues from a larger distance (1:4), very nice colours, very good bokeh!
negative:	A bit too heavy, not very good flare controls, makes sometime light blicks, a bit slowly AF, sometimes have problem with red flowers -colours are flooding each side, sometimes hounting too much
comment:	Great lens! takes great pictures, worth its price, great for taking picutes from long distance, abit better for evening low light photography than other zooms MAF's due to stable 4 aperture, ready to take great evening and day pictures. very nice colours, very good bokeh! Even now after more than 20-years of production end, I think it is much better than most manufactured now (plastic ones), a must experience for all Minolta and Sony Alpha users, not to miss that!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Heyckendorff review date: May-02-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta - AF 75-300 F4.5-5.6 (Big Beercan)
price paid:	200 Euro
positive:	Razor sharp Very good build quality Superb Bokeh Vivid colours
negative:	Heavy On my Dynax 7D, AF is to slow in many situations ....better on my Dynax 7
comment:	This is my number one lens for portraits. Every time I use it i´m amazed about the crisp sharpness and the creamy bokeh this fine piece of glass produce. The colours is of course as vivid as you expect from original Minolta glass. I haven´t tried any G lenses, but when I look at 100% crops from the Beercan, it´s hard for me to imagine anything that could be sharper.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: Mr_Canuck review date: May-01-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Min 200/2.8 Min 135/2.8 Sony 16-105
positive:	That smooth Minolta look. Constant f4. Colour. 55mm filter size. Widely available.
negative:	Flare control. Weight. Slow focus.
comment:	Ah, the beercan. You can't go wrong with the smooth and natural 'Minolta' look of its images. The constant f4 is great and a nice affordable alternative to big and expense 2.8 zooms; this includes the advantage of a cheaper 55mm filter ring. I've had two, and many of the shots with my beercan compared to the 200/f2.8 and 135/f2.8, particularly out shooting flowers and such. But the beercan lags when you get into higher contrast settings and exposure to harsh lighting and flare. But it's cheaper by miles. I just wasn't using mine because of the other lenses I have. It's a lens formula that would be a winner if Sony updated it with new coatings and faster focussing. Everyone should try one out at least once, and they're easy to find.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: herr_woelfchen review date: April-28-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 28/2, Minolta 50/1,7 Minolta 18-70/3.5-5.6
price paid:	140 €
positive:	f4 through price
negative:	heavy
comment:	I like this lens very much and I think its a must have for beginners. Its quite cheap and you get a lot for your money: The Bokeh is nice and it is a lot of fun working with this lens. Even though its an AF lens I use it in MF all the time as AF is hunting sometimes and not that precise @ f4. So if you dont have a tele zoom lens get this one, its worth it. The size and wheight is a drawback for me. Its quite hard to hold the camera with this lens attached for longer. Sharpness rating 4 as it is quite soft @4. But its perfect on 5.6 and f4 of course is still very usable.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: joel22484 review date: April-21-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-70 Kit Minolta 70-210 4.5-5.6 Minolta 50 1.7 Minolta 75-300 (BBC and non-BBC) Minolta 35-70 Sigma 17-70
price paid:	$150 USD mint
positive:	Nice range Easy to find Good bokeh Sharp Constant aperture Build
negative:	Heavy Old Rubber grip is prone to the white 'stuff'
comment:	This is a very nice lens that is pretty easy to find. The prices seem to keep going up (staying around $200 now), but you can find a good deal every now and then. This lens is very hyped up, especially on this site, so I think I am biased towards it a little bit. I have the 70-210 4.5-5.6 lens as well and aside from the slower aperture, I'm not sure which one I would like more. The other one is much lighter and smaller (when not zoomed out), but the beercan is....well it's the beercan! It has great sharpness, great bokeh, and good range. It is also built really good, so I feel confident mine will last as long as I stay with the a-mount system.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: berlin steve review date: April-09-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta Beercan AF 70-210 1:4 Minolta AF 35-70 1:4 Minota AF 50 1:1.7 Sony (Kit) AF DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6
price paid:	eur 100.17 ebay
positive:	nice, nice, nice =o)
negative:	Big and heavy
comment:	If it hadn't had been for the forum, I'd still have been happily using my Sony 18-70 kit lens unaware of other much better lenses that I now own. I may have also bought some lemons had I not taken the reviewers' advice first. My wife can also blame all you reviewers for talking me into spending the housekeeping on all these older Minolta lenses... What I like about this lens is the the Bokeh, the range, the build quality and the general picture quality. Without wanting to sound naff, you can really take some nice pictures with this. Of course all the Canon/Nikon owners are going to make fun of you with this antique drainpipe wrapped around your neck. However you can sleep happy with the knowledge that you stiff neck and back you are going to get will keep the orthopedics in business despite a world recession, as well as netting you some really nice photos. There is nothing that I can say that hasn't been said already by one of the real experts in the forum. If you can live with the weight and size of this lens, you will love it from day one. As far as optics go, I can't fault it. And if you don't like it, you'll probably be able to get your money back by selling it again on Ebay without a problem. It is great as a zoom, and also makes a great portrait and macro lens. If it wasn't for those other users who convinced me in their reviews that I should also get a 50mm 1:1.7, I would even say you don't need another lens for portrait if you have this. However the great Bokeh achievable with the Beercan is blown away by the portrait Bokeh of the 50mm. However if I had to decide to part with one or the other, the beercan is too versatile to lose, and the slightly pricier prime would be the one to go. Basically, it gives great macro and great telephoto with creamy Bokeh without much effort. As portrait it is also good, but the 50mm 1:1.7 has the edge on that by a long shot. Tip... if you can pick one up for a fair price, you'll be happy as Larry for what you get. I love this lens despite its dated looks, size and weight... but with this lens beauty really is in the eye of the beholder, as well as in his (or her) viewfinder. Finally, a huge thanks to all who contributed to the lens reviews. I bought all my Minolta lenses as a result of the advice and tips picked up by reading this great web site. Having found another 2 Sony Alpha users at my workplace, they are now also avidly scanning such reviews to upgrade their kit.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Happy Hour review date: April-09-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	70-200 F2.8 APO G 70-210 F3.5-4.5 80-200 F4.5-5.6 Sigma 70-300 F 4-5.6
price paid:	can't remember
positive:	Sharpness Color Bokeh built like a tank
negative:	bit of flare in direct light
comment:	great lens! It was a lens i used daily until it was stolen.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: DeX review date: March-22-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	sony 75-300mm minolta 135mm F2.8
price paid:	110 €
positive:	- superb bokeh - sharp - heavy metal - F4 all the way - did I mention bokeh? - price
negative:	- really heavy metal - slooow AF - purple fringing
comment:	This is one superb lens. Built like a Panzer but also moves like one. The photos have really dreamy bokeh making this lens perfect for candid portraits, sports or even concerts considering that digital cameras have better and better ISO performance. Image quality: - bokeh is simply indescribable. The photos look very natural. - colors are just amazing, minolta classic. - the lens is sharp... very sharp. Wide open it will give you excellent results until 200mm where it gets a tad softer. It has better results than the 75-300 at every focal and marginally worse than the 135mm. - puprple fringing and longitudinal CA's are visible so I hope you either have a good RAW converter or a lot of patience. Handling and build: - it's all metal, which means it's build like a tank but it's also heavy and very slow to focus. Even the almighty Dynax 7 has some trouble spinning the beast sometimes. - it's F4... this means just 1 stop from F2.8, so it's a fast lens in my book, very usable in concerts with the A700 + SSS + ISO 1600 - 3200. - Internal zoom - big yay but it has front element focus... so it rotates when you focus... which is not particularly pleasant (especially when using polarizers ) All in all a pleasant lens to use if your job doesn't depend on it. It's miles away from the built quality of a canon 70-200 F2.8 L or the image quality of the sony equivalent but for about 200$ (10x less) you sure do get your bang for the buck. A must-have.

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:	130 € (used)
positive:	sharp f4 size build price
negative:	weight (not really)
comment:	Not much to say... very good lens, one of my favourites. Smooooth zoom-ring. In my opinion this is the 3rd „must have“ lens (1st =17-35mm 2,8-4; 2nd =28-75 2,8D)

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: mewe review date: March-03-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony AF DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6
positive:	Sharp Smooth zooming
negative:	Heavy Slow AF
comment:	I've had this lens for a long time now, and it's still working perfect. Since the lens seems to be sold fairly cheep, it's definitely worth gettinge one.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: cruiser review date: February-28-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 70-210 F2.8 APO Minolta AF 100-300 F4.5-5.6 D APO Minolta 75-300 F4.5-5.6 New
positive:	sharp even wide open, colors
negative:	weight and size
comment:	Great lens. Very good even wide open. Sharp and good colors. It is build like a tank. And it is hard to beat. I tried three other lenses before I found a more compact but equally good lens. It beats the Sigma 70-210, 1:2.8 (older version) by far in every aspect and is better than the Minolta 75-300 concerning sharpness and flare. I didn't like the size and weight, so I was looking for a more compact lens to replace it. But I wanted at least the same level of sharpness and the Minolta colors. So I bought the Minolta 100-300 APO D and I'm settled now. Sold my beercan recently.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: pegelli review date: February-26-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 28-200 Minolta 80-200/2.8 HS Sony 18-250
price paid:	180 USD (I think)
positive:	sharp as of f 5.6 mfd 1.1 meter ~1:4 close focus Build like a tank
negative:	soft at f4, especially at long end Heavy CA, especially wide open
comment:	Got a nice copy from a fellow dyxum member about a year ago Very happy with it, allthough hesitatnt to use it wide open. Much lighter than 80-200HS and in print not distinguishable IQ as of f5.6. Pixel peeping you can spot the difference. Can have heavy CA with high contrast, mostly recoverable with PTlens I found (but not all) Will keep it for cases I want to travel light and or need the closer focus. A real classic at low cost

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Kayzer review date: February-17-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	M-200G, among many other..
positive:	Get one and make up your own mind.
negative:	too cheap..
comment:	I might have a good copy of this lens, but she has surprised me more than once. The sharpness is on top score and the OOF is to cry fore. The colour is outstanding. I for sure not gone buy the SAL70200G, but I have bought the SAL70400G which seems to have some of the same qualities. If you don’t have to have a white leans in this range and you are shooting with A-900, get a good copy of the beercan and you will love this leans forever.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: The mighty terrier 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:
price paid:	L149
positive:	Build Sharp Colours Bokeh quick AF Smooth action
negative:	None
comment:	If you can get a nice copy of this lens you won't be disappointed. I picked up a boxed mint one from LCE Manchester with a 6mth warranty, a bargain compared to ebay stuff. The feel of this lens is outstanding, the focus and zoom are like silk and the image quality, even wide open is excellent, nice bokeh as well. Yes i'm sure that there is 'sharper' glass out there but at a far sharper price, for quality per pound you can't beat it. Only given it a 4 for flare as i've not had chance to try it in sunny conditions yet. A very worthwhile investment that won't be leaving my collection anytime soon. Get one quick, they don't make 'em anymore!!!

sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: DonSergio review date: February-12-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- 100-300 APO - 70-300G - 70-200G - and primes 85, 100, 135, 200
price paid:	150 USD (used)
positive:	+ Image quality at 70-150mm + bokeh for zoom very good + colors + feeling lens in hand and on camera
negative:	- Slow AF - A lot of CA - rotates front lens - narrow focusing ring - extends on focusing
comment:	Must have lens in cheap lineup for portraits work and as walkaround lens. Produces very good images, colors and bokeh are very good. Sharpness excelent at wide end even wide open but after 150-170 this lens soft wide open. Slow focus on a100 and some faster on a700. Produces a lot of CA wide open but stoping down solves this.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: sjinouck review date: February-05-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	minolta 100-300 Tamron 28-200 Sigma 28-200
price paid:	145 EUR
positive:	solid sharp nice colors bokeh
negative:	too popular too expensive nowadays only available used it's becoming a hype slow focus
comment:	Finally, i got one... The beercan is becoming a true cult-lens, and for that, prices are rising, and rising...and rising!! Flawless beercans are much too expensive (in my opinion, as it is still very old ), for it's age..Bought mine for 145 EUR, it had sticky aperture-blades, zo i brought it away for a thourough cleaning.. It's worth it, because i'm gonna keep it forever.... Very, very heavy build, a nice must-have lens, sharpness is very good, when stopped down to F/8, but i do this with almost all of my sony/minolta lenses..I feel sorry, that a lot of salesmen are now buying almost all beercans away from e-bay or marktplaats, and after a few weeks they sell it again for a lot more...

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: mattsonylover review date: January-31-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	sigma 18-125 sony 18-70
price paid:	80L
positive:	solid as rock sharp if stepped down to f8
negative:	slow focus in low light no focus limiter
comment:	great sharpness if stepped down to f8 in the 210mm and f 5.6 in the 70mm. I think it's worth each penny paid for it I bought this lens 3 weeks ago and after many test shots I decided to keep it. if you can afford it with cheap price, give it a try, you wont regret it

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: zoidberg review date: January-16-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony/Minolta 75-300 Tamron 55-200
price paid:	90 EUR (used)
positive:	Sharpness Bokeh Build quality Colors Constant f/4 MFD
negative:	CAs wide open Flare
comment:	One of the most lovable lenses you can own. This lens has been raved about everywhere, and it's almost pointless to add more to that. But one thing is certain: if you get hold of one, never let go of it. It has two downsides though: 1. Chromatic aberrations are quite pronounced wide open. To make things worse, they are blurred in character, making them hard to completely eliminate in PP. However, stopping down to f/8 almost completely eliminates the problem (and if it should be noticeable in a scene, it is very easily removed afterwards). 2. Like all lenses with many elements and old coatings, it is prone to flare - but mostly when the sun is in the frame. In normal shooting conditions, it isn't a problem.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 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:	Vivitar 70-210 F4.5-5.6 Minolta 75-300 F4.5-5.6
price paid:	135Euro
positive:	Sharp Colors Constant F4
negative:	Bought it to late
comment:	Mine has a loose front end (i can't fix it as my screwdrivers are to big for this tiny work). Still it performs making very nice warm shots! Altough i don't use it at the moment because i'm to scared the screws inside drop out locking the lens (fortunatly i'm the lucky owner of a Big Beercan too)! Mine didn't have a lenshood (i'm using my Big Beercan lenshood (wich is the same?) and use an 70-210 F4.5-5.6 for that one....lenshood database anyone?). Wish i had bought one much earlier (and new!)!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: wesleysa review date: January-09-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-70 kit
price paid:	240 USD (used)
positive:	Range Build Sharp
negative:	Weight Narrow focus ring
comment:	this lens is alot of fun! I use it for many things: portraits, flowers, insects, birds and landscapes. Got mine for $240, maybe I paid too much but I'm still happy with it. It will be in my bag for the forseeable future until I can afford faster or G spec glass. UPDATE: I'm still in love with this lens! took it to the beach yesterday morning to shoot horses in the waves, the detail it captured is incredible.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: cjlethal review date: January-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:	150
positive:	excellent sharpness good bokeh
negative:	fairly heavy
comment:

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3	user: Kurd Jam review date: January-01-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	-Kit zoom 75-300 -Sony 70-200G -Sony 500 F/8
price paid:	0 €
positive:	-Amazing Build, even more amazing simple design. -Color Rendition. -Price! -Peter Ganzel's guide will guide you through solving most of the problems you could find with this lens.
negative:	-Flare Control. -AF Speed. -Chromatic Aberration. -Rising Prices.
comment:	I was given this lens for free, and I had the chance to try it, dismantle, fix and try it again before selling it for 270 euros (w00t!). The quality of the build is out of the question seeing as how this lens seems to resist the past of time pretty well. It does feel solid in your hand, and not too heavy on the camera. My sample had a bit stiff focusing ring at first, as well as some AF problems. However, there are several resources online where one can find a DIY solution for the more recurrent issues. The best point in favor of this lens, price aside, is the color rendition. The tones tend towards the warmer end of the spectrum and that shows on the pictures, of course. They have what's often defined as the "minolta color" in them, which is a nice balance between color, contrast and tone. The problems of this lens come from the obvious. The lens' coatings of the sample I tried seemed to do extremely poorly when trying to fight CA and flare; with or without the hood on, stopped down or not. I guess 23 years weight a bit on a lens. That being said, the lens offers a lot for the price you may pay for it. I wouldn't call it "perfect" by any means, but if you look for a budget friendly zoom you may want to consider this one.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: Petronix review date: December-14-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 70-210mm 4.5-5.6
price paid:	70€ 2hands
positive:	well known lens.. built massive
negative:	sunhood system not so good to stay on the lens...
comment:	Like the other reviews! A+++++ you find them on ten internet....ebay etc.....for a nice price Good results on the circuits (cars) Not so fast AF, but good for me!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: perslucht review date: December-11-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 75-200mm f2.8-3.5 Sony DT 18-70mm f3.5-5.6
price paid:	€ 115
positive:
negative:
comment:	I think it's very clear how this lens performs, I do not have to repeat what everyone is telling here. I bought this lens a while ago for € 110 (incl. filter). The lens hood was missing, but I went to a shop I didn't know yet just to take a look around. All their Minolta stuff was sold, except a Beercan lens hood! So I bought it immediately for just € 5! I really recommend this lens to everyone! But I'm amazed about the prices people are paying. I think € 170 is too high for a lens from the 80's! Compared to the Sigma 75-200 f2.8-3.5 the Beercan is the absolute winner! The sharpness and the contrast are a lot better.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Chr_Bra review date: December-11-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	75-300/4,5-5,5
positive:	Sharp Build like a you now what Heavy
negative:	Non worth mentioning so far
comment:	This is my favourite lens so far, the first one I put on my 7D and it was love at first sight. The only downside is that´s it´s a beast to carry around on the camera, but that´s a price I gladley pay for the superb balance when in action. I use it for pretty much everything but now it´s going to get some competition from my 28-135 (I´ll get back to that one when I´ve tested it properly)

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: mattman21 review date: December-11-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Promaster 70-300mm Sony 17-70mm
price paid:	100 USD (used)
positive:	Sharpness DOF Build quality Bokeh Price
negative:	Weight Hood
comment:	I really love this lens. Yes, it's heavy and, hey, it might not be a 'G' lens or be particularly fast. But even my wife, who knows very little about photography, calls this the 'beer can'. Great for portraits and candid shots of the family when they are unaware. I really have to crank down the ball head of my tripod to keep it from slipping when this is on. Can't wait to get an A700 and slap this on!

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: jumoyolin review date: November-27-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- tamron 70-200 f2.8 - mino 100-300 APO D
price paid:	220
positive:	- strong solid built! - excellent bokeh - good color
negative:	- bad CA and flare - front element rotates and extends when focusing
comment:	its built like a tank so strong i think you can defend yourself with it if someone tries to rob your photo gears! i don't know what more to say about this legendary lens as there are so many reviews already. amazing bokeh and at the same time some strong CA and flares. its a "must try" lens if you have never had one on your alpha. i also own a tamron 70-200 f2.8, but i will still keep a beercan!!!

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Mestari review date: November-25-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	24-85/3.5-4.5 RS 75-300/4.5-5.6 70-200/2.8 G SSM 200/2.8 G
price paid:	600PLN used (220USD)
positive:	Build Good minimum focusing distance bokeh
negative:	Weight Slow AF Strong CA on digital on high contrast scenes
comment:	Very good mid-range zoom. When I first took this lens in my hands (previously owning 24-85 only) I was surprised that you can actually produce so well build peace of glass. It's all metal, all rings turn smoothly. I had to buy it and I did ;) This build comes at a price of its weight, but it's worth it. It's not damped in any way - hence 4 for build. The AF is clumsy, but - believe it or not - on A700 beercan was faster than 70-200/2.8 SSM (I tested central AF sensor only, as that's what I normally use). Sharpness - no revelations here like in 70-200/2.8 SSM or 200/2.8 cases, but it's good. It's very hard for me to rate colour - I have never complained, and I like the results that this lens is giving me in general. CA - BAD on my A100 when shooting high contrast scene. But it's still better to what I got from my friend's 75-300 on film. Beercan on film is very good. It is clearly at home there. There is some distortion on tele end, but you won't notice it unless you shoot straight horizon in the upper part of the frame. It doesn't really disturb. I cannot give 5 because it's there if you look for it, but I wouldn't worry about it. Flare - if you try, you'll catch it ;) But it's not a big problem with the hood on. Overall a decent peace of glass worth more than it's sold for when shooting on film. If you shoot digital and like high contrast pictures - skip it and get anything else. But if not - it's a great lens for everything else. You may wonder why I gave all 4's then - well, it's not a G or Zeiss, right? :P We've seen better glass :)

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: aformaphoto review date: November-24-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- Minolta AF APO Zoom D 100-300 4,5-5,6; - Minolta AF 100 f/2; - Minolta AF Zoom D 28-75 f2.8; - Minolta AF APO Zoom D 24-105 3,5-4,5;
price paid:	200 euro used
positive:	- surprisingly very sharp at all focal lengths and apertures - surprisingly beautiful bokeh - useful in close-ups - relatively fast lens but very portable yet
negative:	- there isn't a depth of field scale like the older manual version MD Zoom 70-210 f/4 - fiter mount rotates when focusing - some CA at corners at 210mm
comment:	This tele-zoom, with an optical design coming from Leica-Minolta collaboration era, is a true gem. The (legendary) beercan is surprisingly very sharp center to corner at 210mm, even at f/4, on Sony A900: at this aperture only vignetting is a visible issue. This is very impressive for a zoom. The bokeh is the best among the Minolta AF lenses I own: I found beercan bokeh better than Minolta AF 100 f/2 or AF Apo Tele 300 f/4. I think this tele-zoom could be on pair with lengendary MC Rokkor 58 f/1.2, talking about bokeh. I loved very much the older manual version MD Zoom 70-210 f/4 and this AF version too on film, but on Sony A900 the beercan really shines. Praise to Minolta for this strong perfomer.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: fjbyrne review date: November-15-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- Minolta 75-300 - Tamron 70-300 LD
price paid:	200 USD (used)
positive:	- Sharp at shorter focal lengths - Nice bokeh - Constant F4 - Good build quality
negative:	- Rotating front element - Focus ring small - A little soft at max focal lengths (but can actually be good for portraits) - AF speed isn't the best but usable
comment:	I like this lens and I think it was a great deal at $200. I've used it for all different applications - sports, portraits, landscapes - and it has performed well in all of them.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: chthoniid review date: November-13-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 75-300 D Minolta 300 G Sony CZ16-80
price paid:	$200 NZD (used)
positive:	Robust build Colour rendition
negative:	Rotating front element Small manual focus ring
comment:	This is a nice zoom lens. It's sharpness is not however on par with the more excellent G and Carl-Zeiss offerings. Nonetheless, it is typically a noticeable step up from most budget-level telephotos. At the long end the fall off in sharpness becomes more noticeable. Distortion is negligible at the long end. Smooth, rich colours are nicely generated in both film and digital format. It is not a lens that is prone to flare, but is not immune either. Flare is a risk in bright conditions. For some reason I haven't been overly bothered by chromatic aberrations (purple fringing), but that is probably due to the subjects I take (not high contrast). I ended up getting a lens hood from KEH for $25 USD. It's a useful adjunct. It is a bit slow to auto-focus, which is why the small manual-focus ring can be an annoyance. The build is solid and reassuring, if a bit heavy.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 2	user: borjomi review date: November-12-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 100-300/4.5-5.6 APO Minolta 75-300 new Minolta 24-85 new Minolta 85/1.4G Minolta 200/2.8 HS APO G MC APO Telezenirar 135/2.8 (M42) Helios 40-2 85/1.5 (M42)
price paid:	129 EUR (LN in 2002)
positive:	Good bokeh Constant size when zooming Cheap portrait lens f/4 at 210 mm !
negative:	Big and heavy Very slow AF Bad flare control CA Rotating front element
comment:	Very good lens for beginners - portrait and telephoto all-in-one lens with reasonable price (IMHO bit overpriced now). Nice bokeh, but only f/4 :( Practically does not work against light sources. I'd used it for 5 years and change to 85G and Minolta 200/2.8 HS APO G to separate portrait and telephoto functions.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Dave2006 review date: October-14-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	L70
positive:	Build and great colours
negative:
comment:	The best L70 I have spent on photographic equipment, I have this lens on most of the time now. Portraits are just so much easier to take with this lens, backgrounds just melt away. Colour reproduction is amazing. If you haven't got one then you are missing out!!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: tomiZG review date: October-12-08
	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 35-80 Cosina 19-35 Sigma 24 2,8 Sigma 28-80 Sigma 70-210 Sigma 400 5,6
price paid:	114 € + 45 €
positive:	beautiful colors and bokeh great at f4 already build quality - like a tank indeed feels simply good in the hand
negative:	slow AF, esp. in dark surr.
comment:	After reading all the reviews, I am glad I followed the suggestions and got myself a copy, too. Everything said is true about this lens. The build quality is fantastic, as everyone says, it comes from a time when things were produced to last. Solid like a tank. My copy arrived in good condition, bought on E-Bay, unfortunately the aperture blades were smeary and the lens needed disassembly (could use it only wide open). Following Pete Ganzel's GREAT guide, I made it to the blades but did not dare to go furher myself. Paid 45 € for the cleaning and now the lens is in mint condition. Quite heavy and big, this actually helps keeping a steady hand. The AF is slow, not every picture will be sharp therefore. But taken that this lens is from the mid-80s, it still is a fantastic lens even on the newest Alphas. Bokeh and colors are flawless.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	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:	Minolta 100-200 f4.5 Minolta 100-300 xi Rokinon 75-200 f4.5
positive:	Results
negative:	Heavy
comment:	I find it a bit bulky for general use, so it tends to just get used for sports (football and mountainbike races). It really does give some nice results.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: tobyjay review date: September-30-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Modern zooms, Minolta AF tele primes
price paid:	L100
positive:	Colours Bokeh Range "macro"
negative:	Mine was not a sharp copy Only useful outdoor Bulky and heavy
comment:	Maybe I've been spoilt by more expensive Minolta primes, and maybe I got a duff copy, but I never found the kind of sharpness (particularly at the long end) which I wanted. CA was a problem too. I'll buy another one soon , because I hear so many good things about this bargain lens. but in the meantime I'm replacing it with a new-in-box 100-200 f/4.5 until a mint Beercan comes up at the right price. For the price, the colours and contrast are terrific, and it produces very good bokeh too. But I guess it sounds like you have to be choosy, and try a few for a good sharp copy and have a good look at the CA it produces. Big heavy build not really a problem for me. It's a very substantial lump.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	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:	T17-50/2.8 Kit len S70-300
price paid:	160 USD (used @2006)
positive:	Great build, all metal Great optic, all glass Sharp image with decent price
negative:	nil, with this price
comment:	great len if you don't have $$ for 80-200/2.8. Just 1 stop less than that. With the development of latest sensor, F4 should be sufficient. Great minolta glass with minolta colour. Mean less photoshop is needed :) 20+ year old len but still work like a jewel... why... all metal build. no worry about that the len will spoil. sharper than sigma zoom and kit len. A len that you should not miss is you are using alpha mount.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: wallyb review date: September-07-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tons of stuff.
price paid:	~200 USD
positive:	- Super classic "Minolta colors" - Great sharpness, even at the tele end, even wide-open - Internal zoom - Fantastic build quality - Macro range is very useful - Constant f/4 is great
negative:	- External focusing - Really quite big and heavy - Internal zoom makes the lens very long, too, and can get in the way with flash on the wide end - F/4 isn't terribly fast for the wide end - Sometimes flares, even with the hood
comment:	This is the only tele-zoom lens many Minolta and Sony users will ever need. It is just about as good as all the reviews say. It's definitely not without its flaws, and I don't just mean in the way that every lens has some kind of flaw, but for all the factors combined together, it's one of the best lenses ever made. I have had literally dozens pass through my hands, and thanks to the great vintage quality-control at Minolta, they've all been super performers. If you don't mind a big and heavy (but very, very sturdy) lens, and shoot most of your shots after 6am and before 6pm, you'll never want to look for anything else!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Wedge review date: September-02-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tammy 200-400 F5.6 Minolta RS 50 F1.7 Minolta 35-70 F4 Konica Minolta 17-35 F2.8-4. Minolta 135 F2.8. Minolta AF 100-300 F4.5-5.6 APO Sigma 70-200 F2.8 EX APO IF
price paid:	350 AUD
positive:	Sharp for what you Pay Built like a brick dunny Quick focus
negative:	Getting pricier Sony isnt making them! outer glass rotates CA
comment:	Great Unit if you can find one for a decent price, quick focusing on the a100. CA can be bad a high sunlight times. This is probably due to the outdated coating on the glass.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: madecov review date: August-30-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 70-300 f4-5.6 LD DI Minolta 75-300 f4-5.6 big beer can
price paid:	$165.00 USD used
positive:	Great build, fantastic sharpness, decent autofocus speed. Pleasing colors. constant speed aperture.
negative:	heavy, my copy has a zoom ring with a bit of wobble (early model,CROSSED xx).
comment:	What's left to say. You have to get one. Images are crisp and very sharp right out of the camera even without PP, contrast is just where I like it Color is very nice and pleasing to the eye. Focus seems to be reasonably fast and precise. stop her down a few stops and even at 210mm it is very sharp across the frame.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: janek review date: August-20-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	130 USD (like new)
positive:	Sharp Bokeh Colors Constant f4 Bulletproof
negative:	CA Flare
comment:	I bought this lens just to see what all the fuss was about. I was pleasantly surprised. It is sharp especially above f/4. The colors are just beautiful. The bokeh is great too. At this price I would say it's a must have. The build is very solid. I took some macro shots that astonished me. The CA and flare can sometimes be very bad, but stopped down it's gone.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: algernon review date: August-18-08
	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 (used)
positive:	Sharpness Build quality Colors Bokeh Price
negative:	CA & flare Focus ring too slim
comment:	I just love this lens - I tend to keep it all the time on my A700. Very sharp wide open on film and 6MP, still sharp on A700's 12MP, gets even better stopped down a bit. CA and flare at f/4 can be a real problem though; in bright light, pay attention to metal objects, water reflections and any sharp contrasty edges. The good news is that once you stop it down to f/5-f/5.6 these problems seem to disappear. Colors are pretty neutral and pleasing and bokeh is smooth IMO. Build quality is very good, you can defend yourself with it :-) Being made almost 100% from metal (except the zoom ring) it's a bit heavy too, but it ain't gonna break your hand. Focus speed is ok on A700 since it seems to have quite a powerful motor; on KM5D is so-so. Focus and zoom rings are well damped and I didn't notice any zoom creep. Focus ring could be larger, though. To sum it all up, go for it :-) Although the price has upped a bit on these, it's still worth it IMHO. UPDATE: Today was a really bright sunny day and got some CA even @ f/7.1 on some white objects :) Well, camera should be on holster in these conditions, anyway :)

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: gouldina review date: August-10-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony Kit lens Minolta AF 28-85 F3.5-4.5 Sigma UC 28-70 f2.8-3.5 M42 CZ Jena Flektogon 35 f2.4
price paid:	L90
positive:	Sharp Neutral but very pleasing colours Superb build quality
negative:	Heavy Slow autofocus
comment:	Disclaimer: I'm fairly new to the world of DSLR photography but... This is a lovely lens. Someone below said that they found that they tended to keep more of the shots they took with this lens. I've found exactly the same thing. I love the colours it produces - not ultra-bright but warm and neutral and pleasing to the eye. The bokeh is also very nice. For a zoom at this price, the sharpness is very impressive. I did some very non-scientific test shots recently with the lenses listed above (all I have currently) all at f4 and it comes very close the the flektogon prime (when I get the manual focus of the m42 right - which is tough!). The Sigma is not in the same ballpark. Which is why I've just bought a beercan-a-like AF 28-85 f3.5-4.5 to replace it. Highly recommended but going up in price quite fast it seems. Not had any problem with flare so far but I can only really rate it 4 because I don't think I've used it in enough challenging situations yet.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: ICE29 review date: July-26-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 75-300 New CZ 16-80
price paid:	220 USD
positive:	Beautiful pictures (color, bokeh, contrast), very good sharpness, tough build
negative:	A bit heavy, paint comes off a bit, AF could be faster and drains batteries
comment:	I got beercan at last! Not a mint copy (glass is excellent, lens metal barrel with some scratches), but even with scratches, this lens seems to be a perfect self-defence tool! Compared to my old minolta tele zoom, beercan produces much much nicer pictures. Sharpness @210/f4 is ok, stopped down to 5.6 its perfect. Colors and bokeh beautiful, very good portrait lens! I expected slower AF, to my surprise it's not that bad (but could be even faster), but it drains A700 battery much faster than my Zeiss zoom. I'm planning to buy new Sony 70-400 to get perfect sharpness and long reach, but I will keep beercan for portraits for sure!

sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: godsakes review date: July-25-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	tam 17-50, minolta 50mm, 24-50mm, sony 18-250mm, min 100-200mm
price paid:	gift
positive:	nice bokeh colour Build quality
negative:	CA front element rotates very slow AF sample variation
comment:	The beercan does have a certain x-factor to it a lot of the pics are just nice straight out of the camera and f4 gives you a little more DOF control for outdoor candids. It's sharp but not quite as crisp as many would have you believe. My sony 18-250mm can edge it on sharpness and CA control, which is a pity as the image quality isn't strong enough to combine it with a 1.4x teleconverter. Never the less the beercan produces a very nice picture it's main weakness is CA if you have a image with a lot high contrast, purple fringing will distract from the image it simply cannot match the CA control of even inexpensive modern entry level lenses. Note however with a good copy once stopped down to f4.5 most of the CA is gone the build quality of the beercan can be summed up as "they don't build them like that anymore" it puts to shame most of the expensive modern day lenses. That said there is a lot of sample variation and there are poor copies which have stopped down to f5.6 to control CA. It's not that large a lens really but can only fit in the main section of a camera bag. The problem with the beercan is most copies need stopping down to keep control of CA the other weakness of the lens is the slow AF meaning you will miss moments because the beercan hasn't locked on.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: FransvH review date: July-13-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamrom 17-50 2.8 Sigma 10-20
price paid:	130 (euro used)
positive:	IQ, build quality, feels solid like a tank. No lens creep, well it it does it's a internal zoom anyway
negative:	some, but minor. large and looks vintage (so what), frontlens rotating while focussing.
comment:	Just bought this babay second hand, it is in stunning condition. If your looking for a telezoom for your Sony Alpha I think this is the best choise. It beats the Tamrons and the Sigma's. To bad that Sony not renew this one with modern coating and redused weight an size it would be a winnar.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Edinator review date: July-10-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 70-300 "G" KM 28-75 F2.8
price paid:	160 (used)
positive:	Love the Build Great Colours 55mm Filter thread Bokeh
negative:	Rotating front Element
comment:	If you consider weight a negative then you might have a problem with this lense. I got mine used and it is in amazing condition for such an old lense. Bokeh is truly amazing.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: LECHER review date: July-05-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	70-210mm f:4 Beercan Sony 18-200mm
price paid:	50.00 USD (used)
positive:	Solid Build Sharp Wide Open Bokeh Colors
negative:	Focus ring turns filter
comment:	Bought this lens in pieces. Pete Ganzel has once again made owning Minolta lenes a good thing. Was easy to reassemble and no parts missing. Glass is exceptional and the colors are of quality compared to Sony 18-200. Good balance on the A700 and actually much, much faster focus than on Max 7000. Flare is minor when shooting Sunrises on the Massachusetts coast and CA is negligable. I can't believe that a lens as good as this has not been remade since the 90's. Sony would do well to re-introduce the same build in all their lenses. Alas, that will not happen until we get a large enuff group to complain about the cheap plastic that they are useing now. This is my second Beercan, the first one was purchased new in 1990 and it is still in beautiful condition. I have compared the two of them side by side and can't tell the difference in quality. This makes me believe that I will always have at least one of them in my kit.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: philpugh 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:	Sigma 70-210
price paid:	~L70
positive:	Good Colour reproduction Sharp focus Not too heavy Good for 'macro' type shoys
negative:	low focus in low light Small amount of vignetting at f4 on film
comment:	Bsically a very good lens that can still be obtained (second hand) for a very reasonable price. I had a DYNAX 450i film camera and bought this lens in about 1999 (second hand) and had no real concerns using it - except for some vignetting when using wide open. I then obtained a Sigma 70-210 (new) as a potential replacement. However I sold the Sigma two years later. It just didn't come anywhere near the sharpness and colour rendition of the beer-can. If you don't have one yet - get one if you can - you won't be disappointed. Focussing speed on my A100 is more than acceptable (in good light). It can have problems in low light. As a 'macro' lens: (it doesn't have a macro setting) but on a tripod it produces very sharp closeups of flowers etc. Stop it down a notch or two to get the best results.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: NetQwik review date: June-15-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 80-200/2.8 G
price paid:	220 USD (used)
positive:	Solid build Sharp Excellent bokeh
negative:	Filter ring rotates when focusing
comment:	This is a great lens and was one of my favorites. It's reputation is well known globally. You can't get more bang for the buck. The only reason I sold my mint copy was that I acquired a gorgeous 80-200/2.8 (G) which guaranteed the beercan always got left at home. I've also read that the high MP of the pending A900 will show the flaws in this lens which were not discernable with film or 12mp and below. If you're just shooting for fun and don't want to make a huge financial commitment this is the lens for you. Minolta produced a lot of these so there are still excellent copies available. Update 11/30/2008 - Although you can force the issue, this lens is best used in ideal conditions or with a flash. High ISO shots are very noisy on an a100 so if you're going to shoot in low light conditions without a flash, this lens is probably not for you. Compare these two night shots. One with flash at ISO 400 and one without at ISO 1600. http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll87/netqwik/DSC00116.jpg http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll87/netqwik/DSC01544.jpg

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: alpha_in_exile review date: June-05-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 75-300/4-5.6 non-APO Minolta 28-85/3.5-4.5 macro KM 18-70/3.5-5.6 "kit lens"
price paid:	$159.00 USD (used)
positive:	Sharp wide open, even sharper stopped down 1 to 1 1/3 stops. Great contrast. Fantastic bokeh, esp. for a zoom. Focuses faster than the Sigma 75-300 (non-APO ver.). Heavy build quality, smooth zoom/focus.
negative:	Noticeable vignetting at f/4 at 70mm. A little CA with my copy, not as bad as some have reported. Average to slow AF on A100. Heavy (heavier than other copy of beercan I tried).
comment:	I've had the chance to try two used beercan lenses -- but the first had fungus, so I returned it -- the one I kept is definitely heavier and of better build quality (or perhaps was more gently used). The lighter one had a slightly loose zoom ring and turning the zoom and focus rings felt like the gearing inside was not as refined. But the lens I kept has extremely smooth zoom and focus movement, like a Swiss watch! I believe this heavier beercan is an older copy ('original' design?), for, among other things, it has a metal hood. It might be noteworthy that the lighter beercan, with the fungus, had much worse CA. Perhaps the newer copies are more prone to CA? Or was the extra CA a result of the fungus? Don't know. Edit: further investigation has convinced me that the difference in CA was not that pronounced, and the little extra harshness could've been due to sample variation, or the fungus that was in the lens. That the older beercans are a few grams heavier, was verified for me by a Dyxum member who owns several beercans of different vintages; the same person pointed out that the lens coatings vary in color from one lens to another. I was a little surprised to note there is significant vignetting at 70mm, wide open. Much less at f/5.6, and disappears after that. I have not noticed vignetting at 210mm, so far. I have not seen many reviews that mention the vignetting, but it does seem to be a characteristic of this lens design. Otherwise, despite others' complaints of slow AF, I find it is significantly faster than the Sigma 75-300/4.5-6.5 (non-APO). Of course, the beercan is still quite slow, but it has a long focal range to travel and the A100 has a slow AF motor. The beercan is sharper than my other lenses at f/4, and gets even sharper stopped down to 5.6, and sharper still at 6.3. The great contrast this lens produces makes image detail stand out, as well. Colors may not be neutral, but they are pleasing and sufficiently saturated without adding saturating in camera or in PP. The Sigma's colors were more neutral, but I don't mind making the adjustment. The bokeh is outstanding, maybe even better than that of the Minolta 28-85 macro.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: sparky81 review date: June-05-08
	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 nikon 70-200 2.8 VR
positive:	build sharpness bokeh range size/weight colors brightness
negative:	not a 50-210 ;)
comment:	After long time spent on looking for best lineup, I discovered something, that was known for very long time... If You need portrait/tele lens with A-mount, YOU SHOULD BUY BEERCAN!! Now, as new sony 75-300 SSM has arrived, there would be people who will say "go for new lens". I won't listen to them.... Why? Because beercan is a legend and it is for a REASON!!! I never had better build lens in my hand. And yes, I had a LOT lenses in my hands, mainly Nikon very top shelf ones... It ALWAYS produce photos that are unique and beautifull, full of colors and with well ballanced contrast... On A700 it focuses fast as hell, and I would risk and say, that it is quicker than 70-200 nikon lens on nikon d200 body... What else to say... I just felt in love in those old minolta glass and for the first time in my life I'm sure that lens I have is lens that never dissapoint me, when I need it the most. For the first time in my life I don't have thought like "maybe I should sell it and buy....." This lens and minolta 24-50 makes me happy, very happy... And I recommend those two as masterpieces of optics, that only A-mount users can use :)

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: petesidewalk review date: May-13-08
	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:	165.00
positive:	Sharpness Build Bang for Buck Amazing Color Not Difficult to Tune Out Negatives
negative:	Probably a 4.5 for flare Diminishing supply
comment:	Wow. This lens has an amazing ability to produce great shots on auto, seemingly accidentally. The sharpness, as previously mentioned, is stellar above F6.3 or so. Wonderful for taking pictures of outdoors if flare is controlled properly.The colors reproduced by this lens are 100% Minolta, really attractive. I would recommend one to any one. I have used it to do everything from portraits to flowers and have always been happy with the results.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: skarke review date: May-10-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony kit Sigma 24 60 (returned) Sigma 24 70 2.8 (ok)
price paid:	230
positive:	Exceedingly sharp for a zoom. Way faster than I expected based upon other reviews (on an A300 at least). Great bokeh, and built like a tank.
negative:	Rotating front glass, wish it was a little faster, though it isn't bad at 4.
comment:	What a GREAT lens for the price. I sent the seller a quick pic of a flower that blew him away, given that it was a 2 minute test photo. Ditto to what most say about the beer can. Great lens for a great price.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: peyotl review date: May-10-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	MAF 70-210/3,5-4,5 MAF 75-300/4,5-5,6 NEW Sigma 70-210/3,5-4,5 APO Macro Sigma 70-300/4-5,6 APO Macro Vivitar 60-300/4-5,6 Tokina 24-200/3,5-5,6
price paid:	190 euro (as new)
positive:	All optical aspects Build quality QUALITY!
negative:	AF slowish in unperfect light conditions AF very slow in dim light AF tends to hunt in above situations (tested only on Dynax 5D)
comment:	Great lens, built to last, above average optics. I had many lenses in similar range before i took my beercan (perfect condition). I must say I never really belived in this greatness and all that cult around it. But it is deserved in 100%! IQ is great in all aspects, even CA is MUCH MUCH lower than I could ever expect! It is almost non-existent in my sample. AF speed seems to be a problem on older bodies only - on A700 its alright. I heard of people that didn't leave Minolta System ONLY becouse of this lens, now I think I can belive it :)

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: krca review date: May-09-08
	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 Minolta 24-50 f/4 Minolta 28-85 f/3.5-4.5 Sony kit 18-70 f/3.5-5.6
price paid:	~50 euros
positive:	+built like a tank +very cheap +nice bokeh +constant f4 +sharp
negative:	-using of polarize filter is tricky -maybe a little slow AF
comment:	I really like this legendary lens. I've bought it with pile of other Minolta lenses in my backpack. Actually it was a steal (I've paid four Minolta lenses in mint conditions about 200 euros...) and I was almost shaming after baying, but I saved this jewel from forgetting and at the end I could not hide my happiness. I'm a mechanical engineer and I prefer metal lenses like this one. I was very pragmatic, I think, for similar Canon lens with F4 and stabilization I need about 1000 euros (of course, beercan is not sealed but I'm not pro and I can stay at home during rainy days...). Considering that, I think it is a dirty cheap and I'm free to recommend this lens for everyone.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 4	user: N_Raged review date: May-08-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Compared to: Minolta 135mm f/2.8 Minolta 35-105 f/3.5-4.5 (N) Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5
price paid:	borrowed
positive:	+sharp +cheap +great build +colour +good bokeh up to 135mm +metal hood +55mm filter diameter
negative:	-rotating and extending front element -frustrating focusing ring for a lens of this size -slow and loud AF -pincushion distortion towards long end -some zoom creep at the wide end -all sorts of lateral and longitudinal chromatic aberrations
comment:	This is my general consensus after using three copies of the Beercan: From 70-135mm this Beercan is sharp throughout the aperture range. At f/4 contrast is a bit low and there's some mild pink fringing but all is good by f/5.6. Stopped down to f/8 to f/11, the lateral chromatic aberrations are really pronounced, making this lens useless for studio and product shots. Bokeh at this range is pleasant and smooth. Around 200mm is where this lens is weakest. Corner softness is an issue and there are all sorts of Lateral (pink) and Longitudinal (green) CA that barely goes away when stopping down. The LoCA really interferes with bokeh by making it very busy. Backgrounds just do not blend well. Also pincushion distortion is an issue the closer you zoom to 210mm, especially on fullframe. Avoid shooting subjects with straight lines. This lens is a great piece of kit for those who don't need to spend a lot on a 70-200. It's relatively compact, sturdy, and affordable. And most importantly it produces beautiful images.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: solar_sea 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:	SAL-1870
price paid:	$300 usd (used)
positive:	* Really sharp for a zoom * Build quality is superb (read - metal) * It might be older than me and it's still working fine :)
negative:	* Build quality again, it's heavy and pretty large * Flare control is poor, always use the hood * Minimal focus distance, this isn't a macro lens * Not that fast AF * AF hunts on a200 * Purple fringe
comment:	I love this lens, It beats both the kitlens and my previous panasonic fz7 in sharpness. As said above, it's built like a tank, steady rocking :) It displays some CA (mostly orange in color) as well as a considerate amount of purple fringe, but both are dealt with easily in Gimp/PS.

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: minfansony review date: April-25-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	10-20mm Sigma 16-80mm Sony 18-70mm Sony 28-85mm Beercan 90mm Tamron 70-300mm Sigma Apo 100-300mm Minolta Apo 50mm 1.7 Minolta 24mm Sigma 500mm Reflex Minolta
price paid:	L70
positive:	Sharp F4 throughout range Build quality Doesn't extend much when zooming
negative:	Heavy Long Filters rotate when focusing
comment:	One of my favorite lenses, sharp when you stop down to f8. Got mine 2nd hand, looks like it's been through the wars, but still handles well. Silky smooth focusing (if slow). Sharper than my 16-80mm at 80mm. Built like a tank, which is not something you can say about modern lenses.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Tenrec review date: April-01-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-70 Kit lens Minolta AF 35-80 F4-5.6 Sigma 24 2.8 Canon 18-55 Kit lens
price paid:	Don't remember
positive:	Colour Sharpness Unbeatable in Portraits Outdoor Versatile
negative:	Heavy weight Big size Slow AF in low contrast or specially hard conditions
comment:	I own this lens since 1985, and it has been a hard-worker, from my begginings in photography, and until date it always worked well, even with some scratches in the front glass (A fall from my father hands at Iguazú Falls) It works normally quite well but from time to time it makes historic pictures, specially in portraits (maybe light conditions, or personal inspiration, don't know) that no other lens could beat. I use it also for nature pictures and macro, with good results. My collection best, undoubtedly.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: gnatsum review date: March-31-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	18-70 sony kit lens 50mm f1.7 Canon 100mm Macro f2.8 USM
price paid:	$150 CAD
positive:	Sharpness Bokeh Build quality Good aperture (f4 straight)
negative:	AF speed Older lens coating technology Purple Fringing
comment:	Just unbelievable. Sharpness: Amazing from f4.5-6.3 I haven't really tried it past that and at f4 it's not super. However the sharpness goes through the roof once you stop down any bit. I would even say this lens is sharper than my 50mm f1.7. Bokeh: Is amazing at close-focusing, between f4-6.3. I usually use this lens in aperture priority and set it to f5 and forget it. f5 is very sharp and retains some shallower depth of field, as well as this lens' excellent bokeh. After f5 you see the need for circular apertures. Lens coatings: I rated this lens a 4 on flare not because of flare, but because the coating technology is older and it shows. Flare is dependent on coatings so thats where I docked the mark. This lens will show "sensor reflection", I was shooting the moon in october (when is it brightest) and in some of the images there would be a ghost white circle beside the moon. This would be because the rear of the elements aren't coated. This can also cause problems with using low quality filters, where the image loses all sharpness (this is more to do with filters though) and looks like its a crayon drawing and your sleeve ran over it by mistake. Also in this category I would like to say, purple fringing is married to this lens. It's everywhere in bright situations, not so fun to see actually... Auto Focus speed: Is a little on the slow side when using a slow body, on my a100 it's manageable, though when shooting sports games it can be tricky to work with. On my maxxum Htsi (dynax 505) the AF is as slow as I would ever want to go, anything slower is too much. This is because of older gearing in the lens and big heavy elements. I would like to see this on an a700 or a maxxum 7. Build quality: What can I say, all the original maxxum lenses have excellent build. I would never worry about how I handled this lens, except for the fact that it's probably older than I am because I have the crossed XX's which means it's 24 years old now? The zoom glides so smoothly I love it. Focus has a rotating element, but really I don't care too much. I would recommend this lens to anyone who is on a budget and has a camera with a fast AF motor. I would recommend it for it's good aperture, extreme sharpness, great macro ability due to the 1/4 reproduction combined with excellent bokeh. And it's easy to find and cheap!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: BMW_M3 review date: March-14-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony - AF 75-300 F4.5-5.6 Sony - AF DT 18-200 F3.5-6.3
price paid:	70 US$ (used)
positive:	Very sharp stopped down. peaks at ?8 All metal construction, sturdy and rigid internal zoom. Beautiful colors. magic minolta
negative:	A bit soft wide open, but that has it uses. can hunt a bit in low light. Focus is a bit slow, but ok on A700
comment:	I was lucky to find this lens used in a store for only 70 US$. my copy is in absolute mint condition. it looks/feels new. both zoom and focus is perfectly smooth and NO dust inside it. I use it as my telezoom, since it's the only telelens I have at the moment. I find it very useful for my wildlife photos. Only major drawback as I see it, is the green/magenta fringe, especially in the winter/spring when the sun is low. other that that, I love it. I'm waiting for the new 70-300 G lens from Sony, but I will still use this one in time to come. I will never sell it. It's a must for all Sony/KM/M users, new to SLR or not. A true gem with very little competition, regarding IQ vs. money spent. I like the fact that you don't "own" a beeran, you're merely taking care of it for the next generation..

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: Asiir review date: March-01-08
	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 - Min 70-210 3.5-4.5 - Min 50/1.7
price paid:	$150 USD (used)
positive:	- Great image quality - Amazing bokeh -- see it to believe it! - Build quality - Internal zoom - Cheap for the image quality it delivers
negative:	- Heavy & big! - VERY Slow AF - Some Chromatic aberration & Purple/green fringing
comment:	Legendary, and well deserving of the title: excellent sharpness even from f/4 and superb bokeh (probably enhanced by the sharpness of the in-focus area). This lens makes great photos. But this is a lens from a different era, and it definitely shows its age in some areas. Focus can be agonizingly slow at times -- you're not going to use this for sports or wildlife unless you use manual focus. The bokeh is also well-renowned, but I've also noticed some green-fringing in the background of certain images. This definitely detracts, especially if you are shooting against a differently-colored background (in my case, sand, where the green fringing was sometimes quite pronounced). All in all, a wonderful lens for the price that every Sony/Minolta owner should try.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: PBnbaByJ review date: February-26-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 75-300 Zeiss 85 Zeiss 16-80
price paid:	$100
positive:	Built like a tank great colors Super sharp
negative:	Heavy as a tank slight CA
comment:	This lens handles great in combination with the A700. Fast focusing, no hunting at all. Sure, newer lenses focus faster, but for a 25-30 yr old lens, this is a gem. Vibrant lively colors, excellent contrast, one of the best values for the WOW factor. Under certain lighting combinations I get a tinge of CA. This lens is absolutely the best bang for the buck, a must in any camera bag.

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: fute77 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:	Minolta 28 2.8 Minolta 50 1.7 KM 18-70 (kit lens) Sigma 28-70 2.8
price paid:	80€
positive:	Great build quality (all metal) open at 4 best quality at that price
negative:	sometimes problem with color (rarely)
comment:	I always use that lens for photo of judo competition As I have seen it still work great with 10, 12 and 14 Mpix, I will keep it for a long time Passing from the 5D to the A700 boost this lens I can't stant waiting fot november 8 & 9 to have a result in a gymnasium

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: womprat4 review date: February-15-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	18-250, 50 f1.4, 28-75 f2.8
positive:	- sharp - excellent build
negative:	- heavy to carry around neck - awkward size - green fringing sometimes
comment:	Excellent build quality. Even after 20 years of continuous use, my copy is still in great shape mechanically and optically. Zoom ring is very very smooth, and focus is accurate albeit a little slow, but not a big deal. Outstanding for portrait work, even wide open, results are impressive. Sometimes, in high contrast situations, there can be green fringing in the defocussed areas, but this is not very common, and the excellent performance otherwise more than makes up for this. On the downside, it's rather long physically, and can be a beast to carry for the day around your neck since it's fairly heavey. Conclusion: A must have. For the price, it's a steal. Very nice addition to any collection.

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: ronin review date: January-25-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	lots an lots
price paid:	60 Euro
positive:	SHARP, SHARP, SHARP
negative:	AF not as fast as newer lenses but still acceptable
comment:	I picked this up so cheap I couldn't say no. Haven't taken it of my Alpha 700 since I got it edit 02.06.2009 every Sony/Minolta user should have this lens in their camera bag.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Kaishi 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:	Minolta AF 28-85 F3.5-4.5 Minolta AF 50 F1.7 Sony 18-70 (SAL1870) Sony 75-300 (SAL75300)
price paid:	$150 (great condt)
positive:	Very sharp. Internal zoom (no length change). Solid construction. Aperture does not change with focal length.
negative:	Colors are washed out. External focus (length change during focus). Front element rotates during focus. AF-performance is a slow and noisy.
comment:	The beercan is a very respectable lens. I initially thought there were some color issues but some more shots taken tonight have confirmed that something else must've been a problem in my first few batches. No problems now. Build quality is very high. The lens has all metal-construction, smooth operation, and is very durable. Little to no distortion from what I've observed. Less than that of my favorite lens, the 28-85 F3.5-4.5. I have observed no CA. Flare control can be a bit of a problem from what I've seen and heard. If you get one that includes a lens-hood, you'll have less trouble. Very good for taking portraits.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: p0larbear review date: December-24-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma DG 70-210 f4-5.6 Sigma DG 75-300 f4-5.6
price paid:	90 USD +tax
positive:	Price Build Quality Portrait Use
negative:	Slow on focus Does not always lock on first try. Small focus ring
comment:	Love this lens, gives me excellent dependabe bocah on almost all shots. This thing is built like a tank!! I bought mine for under $100 before the sell to sony. Lens does hunt alot if no good contrast to lock focus on. Smll focus ring can be awkward at first tryng to manual focus. overall, one of my favorite lens to shoot with.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: dctrkaushik review date: December-13-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	sony 75-300: sony 18-70 , sony 50mm F/1.4
price paid:	320 USD (used)
positive:	excellent sharpness , color saturation, build quality
negative:	sometimes CA is a problem
comment:	I am extremely happy with this lens.It's sharpness and color saturation are amazing. AF of my copy is surprisingly fast. May be my copy is nearly new ! I do not think that now I need 70-200mmF/2.8 . My claim about this lens can be confirmed by viewing two shots I have taken yesterday.(1) http://www.pbase.com/dctrkaushik/image/90283469 and (2) http://www.pbase.com/dctrkaushik/image/90238919

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: genjer review date: December-12-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 70-300 Sigma 70-300 Canon 75-300 USM III Nikon 70-300 G-ED
price paid:	200 USD (2nd)
positive:	very sharp even at f/4, produce very appealing color, especially when obyect's under shade, the color's still very nice.
negative:	noisy focus, f/4 is the softest (of course...!) but still amazing compare to other brands mediocre tele-zoom.
comment:	i love this lens.. great sharpness! amazing natural color!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: silversurfer review date: December-11-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 100-300 D APO Sigma 70-300 DG APO Macro Minolta 75-300 Big Beercan
price paid:	200 USD
positive:	Bokeh Constant f4 sharp for a zoom
negative:	weight length
comment:	My version doesn't even have "Maxxum" stamped on it. Maybe that's why it's such a good copy? Anyway bokeh and sharpness are outstanding. Although not the fastest lens, the F4 aperture helps. Macro feature is useful, but if serious macro is needed, I'll grab the 100 2.8 This is a heavy lens, but metal construction will do that. It's also kind of long, but that hasn't been a problem most of the time.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: rhy7s review date: December-09-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 75-300 f/4.5-5.6 Sigma 75-200 f/2.8-3.5 KM 18-70 Kit
price paid:	139 USD (used)
positive:	Colour Bokeh f/4 Build Internal Zoom
negative:	Soft at long end Purple fringing at long end
comment:	Great bokeh and colour rendition running wide open with just the right amount of softness for pleasing portraits but with enough contrast to give things a bit of punch. Long end isn't as useful on my copy, seems a bit softer and suffers a bit of chromatic aberration. Focus speed at similar subject distances is fine, picking your moment judiciously and taking care to keep a high contrast edge near a focus point is advisable though as hunting to infinity and back if you miss is pretty slow.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 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:	Minolta 75-300 Sigma 70-300
price paid:	270 cdn new
positive:	F4 speed throughout the zoom range. Cheapest F4 lens in this range you will find. Sharp pictures. Nice colour. Classic well made quality construction.
negative:	Size, weight. Rotating front element when focusing.
comment:	One of the few older Minolta lenses that I have hung onto. Definitely a bargain in the used lens market for it's speed and zoom focal range. Although it is heavier and bulkier, compared to today's modern compact 200mm zoom designs, it is far faster with a constant F4 throughout the range. Focuses quickly because of it's faster speed in lower light. Extremely well made lens that has been reliable for over 20 years without a single problem. I've used it on Minolta film cameras, Sony A-100 and now the A-700. I have had no problem with the focusing accuracy or focusing speed, as mentioned by a couple of other reviewers. A great classic Minolta lens, worth keeping or picking up used for a Minolta film or Minolta/Sony digital.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 2 flare control: 4	user: Yemble review date: December-02-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 100-400mm APO
price paid:	L95
positive:	Build Colour & bokeh Constant aperture
negative:	Imprecise AF on A700 Weight Purple fringing
comment:	Given all of the hype, I must admit to being somewhat underwhelmed by my Beercan! I have tested back-to-back with my 100mm-400mm APO, expecting similar results over the 100-200mm range. However, in none of the flower shots that I took on a wet November day, did the Beercan produce a better result than the APO. Using AF on the A700, the Beercan shots were all softer. Only when I switched to MF could I product a decently sharp photo, but even then, the APO still had it beat every time! AF on the A700 is reasonably fast with the Beercan (if a little imprecise) and much faster than with the APO. However, the main problem with the Beercan is purple fringing. It is there (and noticeable) on virtually every shot, whereas the APO never has any. Maybe I have a duff copy, but it is clean, unmarked and appears to have had an easy life. There is a lot of evidence that this lens is generally better than I have found it, however, for me it remains a bit of a disappointment. In hindsight maybe I should have spent my money elsewhere...

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Oleg_K. review date: December-02-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 17-50\2.8 Minolta 50\1.7 kit KM 18-70\3.5-5.6 Sogma 100\2.8 macro
price paid:	$260
positive:	Sharp from f4 Bokeh!!! Built
negative:	Slow AF Rotating front element Large and heavy Some CA
comment:	Nothing to add! It's a must have lens for every minolta\konicaminolta\sony fan!!!!! It is LEGEND! I have got a crossed "XX" version)))))) In comparison with the Sigma 100mm, Minolta has yellowish tint, but focuses faster.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: dreamlandd review date: November-25-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	75-200 f2.8-3.5 sigma 100-300 4-5.6 apo minolta
price paid:	50£+ 50/1.7 & 28/2.8
positive:	sharp, heavy, bokeh, build
negative:	discontinued, AF speed.
comment:	i hope someday beercan will reborn :)

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: SeanPH review date: November-20-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- 70200 G
positive:	- sharp - superb IQ - nice bokeh - build solid (battle tank) - macro 210 nice - focus average
negative:	- none
comment:	I am one happy owner of this beautiful piece of glass. This will take a permanent space in my dry box.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: RDoe review date: November-19-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- Sigma 70-300 APO - Big Beercan
price paid:	135 Euro
positive:	- Buid like a tank - Very nice colors - Very nice Bokeh - Fixed length, internal zoom - Sharp from F4 - Good IQ for this oldie
negative:	- AF tad slow, but not as bad as sometimes described - Second hand, no new examples anymore
comment:	I bought this lens from another enthousiast and as he did I absolutly love this lens. It's good build, not as heavy as the Big Beercan. It had a few scratches, but all in all a very good second hand lens. I like the constant F4 and the sharpness at this F-number. I also like the zoom control and the fixed length of the lens, so no extending zoom. The AF is a bit slow compared to new lenses, but it has good IQ. It does the job just fine. Colors, bokeh and sharpness are excellent. Nothing to add... This lens is more neutral in color reproduction than the Sigma. The Sigma has a yellow/brownness thing going on. In the end I have to recommend this lens to anyone. Shop for this lens first before looking for a new lens in this range. It is absolutely fantastic.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: ssssssssssssss review date: November-10-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	CZ1680, CZ135/1.8, Minolta 75-300 Big Beercan
price paid:	USD 280 (Used)
positive:	Sharp, Beautiful colours, Smooth bokeh, Size
negative:	AF is a little slow compared to the CZ1680 and Sony 75-300. Hunts in low light but manageable while focusing using ISO1600
comment:	It is a lens that I have been craving for after looking at sample images from this superb lens. I had often lost bidding for a good copy. But finally, I decided to offer a dyxumer at USD 280 plus shipping for a good copy that he could not resist and ended up owning one. It is a sharp lens with sharpness as sharp as the CZ135/1.8 and CZ1680. Sharp at f4 wide open too and no doubt about it. So the beercan compliment the CZ1680 very well for the longer reach. Colours are 'minolta great and legendary'. I love the smooth bokeh too. I have been using this lens more often compared to the sony 75-300 unless I want the extra reach. It is the next budget lens after the more pricey 70200/2.8 SSM and 80200/2.8 APO HS

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: jgiles review date: November-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 Minolta 50mm 1.7 Tamron 28-300XR Tamron 17-50 2.8
price paid:	225 USD
positive:	Sharpness Build Color
negative:	AF speed
comment:	I looked at beercans forever before purchasing one, then paid a premium to get a pristine copy. I'm so glad I did, because I'll be using this lens for many years to come. I'm using it to shoot football, which I previously had to attempt with the Tamron super zoom. With the Tammy, I could only get good shots in full daylight, when I could be very selective about aperture, shutter speed, and ISO. With the beercan, I get better shots (color, sharpness) in these perfect conditions. And when the light dims, I can get usable shots long after I had to quit with the Tammy. When I realized that 200mm cropped from the beercan was much sharper than 300mm straight out of the Tamron, the Tamron left for ebay. With the beercan, I can even shoot flash under the lights in a badly lit lit stadium, and still get decent results. The autofocus usually keeps up, but I do miss a number of challenging shots that I'm sure I would get with a faster focusing lens. Given the lack of affordable 70-200 2.8 options at this time, this lens will remain a workhorse for me, and do a very decent job of it. In fact, if I had the money to spend, I'd probably invest in an a700 to get the improved hi ISO performance, rather than invest in a 70-200 2.8 for a single stop of speed improvement (albeit with much faster focusing); I'm that pleased with the optical performance of this lens. Update: Even better on A700. Faster and more accurate focusing even in low light (still wouldn't call it fast). Also, my guess about the need for a 2.8 has proven true. Unless you shoot sports in bad light, or need the narrower depth of field, it's hard to justify the expense of a 2.8 because the beercan/A700 combination is so good.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: al_1571 review date: November-09-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 70-300 DG APO, Sigma 70-210
price paid:	127.00 (US)
positive:	Very sharp and focuses better than I thought it would
negative:	Heavy and can be a bit tricky to hadle at first. It does also hunt in some lower light situations.
comment:	So far so good with my beercan mated to the A100! I 've had it for about 3 weeks now. I'd say it's been a good investmenbt so far. Like to comeback and repost again in a year to see how I've adjusted to the Can.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: eccles review date: October-21-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	75-300 (D) 18-70 (Sony) 35-70 F4
price paid:	L77 with 50mm prime
positive:	Sharp Built like a tank
negative:	Built like a tank
comment:	I bought this lens in a job lot from an ebay dealer that should have been shot for non-disclosure. I had intended to sell it on but it was shabby to say the least, with a terminally slow aperture, multicoating on the front element scratched all over the place, scuffing around the front barrel, missing hood and front cap, and even the little red pimple for attachment gone AWOL. But after partially dismantling it as described in links found in these very pages and fixed the sticky aperture leaves, my goodness, despite all the abuse it had received, it still takes superb pictures! In initial testing I found that at 70mm it bettered the 35-70 F4, the Sony 18-70 and the 75-300. At 210mm the 75-300 was sharper, surprisingly, but this lens does have a sweet spot at that focal length. But take the beercan out and just take photos with it and you'll hate the weight but love the pictures. Here's an example, reduced from full frame, shot using my A100 with no attachments from about a meter or so away (that's about 3 feet 3 inches in old money): http://images.fotopic.net/fullsize/yqdxdv.jpg and 100% crop from the same image: http://members.lycos.co.uk/majorbludnock/red_admiral_crop.jpg Aperture was F8 I think. For me, this is a peerless lens, and despite the interest in it on ebay you can still pick up a pristine example for a little over L100UK. With my example, shame about the front optic damage, but for my part I got a bargain despite the rather shifty seller, and as long as it still takes good pictures, you ain't having it. :) By the way, with regard comments about the actual zoom range, I would say that it DOES appear to be a bit longer than 70mm when compared with the 35-70mm F4, but it's definitely shorter than 75mm when compared with the 75-300 (D). So perhaps it should be called a 70 and a bit to 210. Edit: I've knocked the sharpness rating back 1/2 point, not because this lens isn't sharp, but because I now have a Sigma 105 macro that is sharper still, and I can't mark that as 5.5. :) Edit2: Worth adding that a friend has recently purchased a Sony 70-300 f4.5/5.6 'G' with his A350. We did a quick pixel peek comparison from raw images from his A350 and my A700 at 70mm f8. Optically, there was no noticeable difference on my A700. The extra resolution of the A350 14MP sensor showed a very small difference, with the 'G' lens being marginally able to resolve more shadow detail. On the basis of this quick comparison, the beercan isn't quite as good as the 'G' but it's not far behind. If you don't need the extra reach or quiet AF of the 'G' a beercan gives a lot more bang per buck. It also seems to focus quicker than the 'G' on my A700. I have tracked dragonflies and large birds quite effectively with it. EDIT3: Since writing the first and second edits of this review I have had to strip the lens right down twice to clear sticking aperture leaves. Not having the ultrasonic cleaning kit that Pete Ganzel recommends, I inevitably left a smear or two of oil behind during my first attempt that eventually worked its way back into the leaves. It's not a difficult job to do provided you take your time and take extra care that you don't lose small components. The lens is still taking superb pictures and well worth these small setbacks. I only hope that I have cleared the problem for good.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 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:	100-300 APO, 70-200/2.8G
positive:	Constant f/4
negative:	Shape, dimensions CA
comment:	Great original lens. Well worth it if you can find one at a fair price.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 2	user: 1hander review date: September-27-07
	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 sigma 75-200 2.8-3.5 18-70 kit lens
price paid:	165.00 USD used
positive:	incredible colors great sharpness photos with personality super bokeh
negative:	kinda heavy a little slow on focus hunts in low light did i say heavy
comment:	I bought this on ebay for 165, it had some slight scratches which were not mentioned in the sale. Even with the scratches, i love this lens. The colors are incredible, and if you have the light and stop it down a bit, the sharpness is really something. It beats every other lens i have easily (if i have the light of course), but i know there are sharper lenses out there. It does have a tendency to lose focus and hunt in low light. I got an aftermarket hood for mine and i does wonders with flare control. I havent noticed any CA yet. If you learn how to exploit its strengths and avoid the weaknesses, and use the camera features well... you can take pictures in almost total darkness, (got some great shots at the circus) The build quality is extreme on this thing. I love it, when you hold it in your hand, you know you have an original minolta in your hands. Built like an M1 tank. There are plenty floating around, im in the process of hunting down a Big Beercan. Get one!!!!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: leitnor review date: September-17-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- Minota AF 50/1.7 - Minolta AF 28-135/4-4.5 - Minolta AF 24-85/3.5-4.5 - Konica Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 - Sigma 90/2.8 Macro
price paid:	120 €
positive:	- great built quality - sharp - bargain buy - nice bokeh
negative:	- heavy - slow AF
comment:	I think it is the one of the best tele-zoom for its price. Very sharp, good quality lens, as like his "brother", the 28-135/4-4.5.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: yellowballoon review date: August-23-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	35-70 f4, 28-80 f4-5.6 xi zoom
positive:	A ledgendary lens Great for collectors Awsome price for fixed apature Brilliant Optics Built like a tank
negative:	Autofocus is a little to slow, although it was one of the first ever autofocus lenses. Lens hood restricts focus when back-mounted.
comment:	I would not part my beercan for the world. It is my pride and joy, (that is aswell as my 9000!) It performs so well for its age and is a genuine classic. Mention the word "beercan" and instantly any camera-adict will know what your talking about. For 21 years this lens has served me well and even when I dropped it off a tripod onto tarmac it was fine! (a little nick out of the filter thread said by-by to the hood though). If you want a brilliant telephoto zoom for a low-price, this is the best! yb

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Thoppa review date: August-21-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 70-210 f3.5-4.5
price paid:	US$110 used
positive:	Sharp
negative:	Slow focus
comment:	Comparing the beercan to the Tamron - the differences are minor : The beercan is lighter, ever-so-slightly sharper, with a tad more contrast, and has a fraction less CA. It is longer (slightly more bag space needed) but then it has a constant aperture and doesn't grow when it zooms. Identical macro, filter size, focusing distance, number of elements etc etc. The Tamron feels very solid but the zoom action on the beercan is a little smoother at the tele end and it doesn't creep when pointed down which I can get the Tamron to do, so the beercan has better build quality. I can't tell colours apart. Neither are digitally optimised so sunsets can produce a ghost reflection from the sensor going back into the lens - and this is a major flaw to me. Unfortunately neither are a 'travel light' lens or an outstanding performer (optics are good overall but focus speed is just too slow). But they are a good compromise if your budget can't stretch to both an f2.8 and a travel lens. Personally the focus speed and ghosting are a problem to me so I'm going to trade them in for the travel lens and wait for the Tamron and Sigma f2.8's.

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: paulofessel review date: August-20-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 100-300 f:4.5-6.7
price paid:	200 USD (mint)
positive:	- Constant aperture - Sharp wide open - Great bokeh and colors - Not expensive
negative:	- Excessive CA - Size - Weight
comment:	What else to say, this is the famous beercan. It has a range that matches perfectly to Sigma 17-70 or even the kit lens. It is sharp wide open througout its entire range, and has great color rendition and bokeh. However, you may have lots of CA, particularly at 210mm when you shoot high-contrast subjects in color (mine has) which are really difficult to get rid of. Also, its size and weight don't make this a "discreet" lens in no account - if you paint it white you'll be taken as pro-photographer, no doubt about it. Anyway, this is a great lens for the money in any way. Think about it: Canon has 70-200 f:4 L, which is much like the Minolta version, costs around US$ 600.00 and has no image stabilization; on the 5D/7D/Alpha you spend like 1/3 of the money, have the same coverage AND still have AS/SSS for stabilizing the lens - something the Canon version does not have. If you don't have neither the money or the access to the more expensive 80-200 f:2.8 G or the 70-200 f:2.8 G SSM, go for it. You won't be disappointed.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: ricardovaste review date: August-08-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	minolta 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6
price paid:	60 GBP
positive:	excellent bokeh good range constant f/4 internal/smooth zoom solid contruction nice weight
negative:	I have given it a rating of 4 for build because i believe the focusing mechanism of the lens is a part of the build, and this is a negative. it does not focus particularly quickly, even on my dynax 7, it will only to in very well lit condition and will often struggle (hunt) in many conditions when its at the long end.
comment:	I find the sharpness of this lens to be excellent. Its a brilliant portrait&candid lens or even just as a carry around lens, which is where its 1:4 macro reproduction comes in handy. The contrast and colour of this lens is excellent! Just put some reala in your camera and do some candid type shots and you will be thrilled. Flare is rarely a problem at all, but it can be present in mid day type conditions. Sometimes hampered by chromatic aberation wide open, but not VERY noticable. And this can easily be avoided or negated through simply stopping down. For the price that i payed, i wouldnt hesitate one bit! Iv had this lens for well over a year now, and have enjoyed every picture i have taken with it. Most of my favourite photos are with this lens. Though, now im setting my sights higher, and im after the tamron 70-200 SP macro f/2.8 when it comes out, as i believe this will forefil my requirement more so.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Jabba review date: August-03-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	kit 18-70/3.5-5.6 Jupiter-21 (200/4) Jupiter-37 (135/3.5) Tair-11 (135/2.8)
price paid:	8000 RUR (~300 USD)
positive:	CHEAP Sharp enough Big and heavy (solid) Constant f/4 Smooth bokeh Accurate focusing
negative:	Veeery slooow focusing Big and heavy CA and purple fringing (sometimes) Flares (rarely)
comment:	I like it. It's not ideal of course, but very good for the price. In fact the only problem is AF speed. All other disadvantages are not serious. The IQ is not much worse than my primes' one. Very good for portraits, of course: a bit soft wide opened, smooth bokeh etc. I also like one funny thing about it: the bokeh is colored. It's full of green and purple spots even if background is actually black and white. I know that's OK, but none of my lenses makes background THAT saturated. This effect is very useful for shooting pigeons, stones and other gray/blue stuff. P.S.: But I still love my "Russian Tanks"... :)

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Dinostrich review date: August-01-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	24-105/3.5-4.5D 28-80/3.5-5.6D 35-70/4 75-300/4.5-5.6D
price paid:	L42.50
positive:	Build Colour Range
negative:	Little heavy CA ( but rarely )
comment:	What can one add - it is just a very, very good lens especially for a zoom. Gave it 4.5 for sharpness as just can't give 5 for everything and it would not let me put 4.5 for distortion :). Do get get CA sometimes in extreme conditions but never had flare problems ( I think it depends on how you use the lens ). There is one thing however that it is NOT - IT IS NOT A 70-210 BUT IT IS A 75-210. I have checked this on the data on my 7 and had it checked on the EXIF ( ? ) of a 7D digithingy. The possible reason for this is that it's heritage comes from a previous MF lens produced during the Leica liason period but this can't be verified - it was the best idea a few of us could come up with so who knows.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: rrozov review date: July-27-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	100-300 APO, kit
price paid:	~125 USD
positive:	sharp, non-extending zoom, great colors, awesome build, CHEAP relative to F4 equivalents in other mounts
negative:	bulky, slow and noisy focus, small manual focus ring
comment:	I love this lens. I think it was my first acquisition for this mount. It showed me the kit is not the way to go. Lately I have been using it as my macro lens, coupled with a diopter mounted in front. For that I think it's perfect because it does not extend when zooming like other newer designs. Also its sharpness and beautiful colors shine through. This basically doesn't leave my 5D.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Evgeniy review date: July-08-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 75-300 F4.5-5.6 Tamron 90/2.8 macro
price paid:	180 USD as new
positive:	Sharpness, color, bokeh,F4, the filter of 55 mm
negative:	Heavy CA
comment:	My favourite lens. Very sharp - http://foto.ixbt.com/photo/371738/6299ipXD8IKjvr/100186w.jpg with beautiful bokeh, color. That stirs the only thing - СА. Excellent Build. Very sharp.Beercan -really legend Highly recommended lens!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Mike Torello review date: July-01-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta AF 24/2.8 Minolta AF 28/2.0 Minolta AF 35-70/4 Macro
price paid:	6800 RUR
positive:	- Color - Sharp - Bokeh - Contrast - F4, effective from F4/F5.6
negative:	- Weight - Little CA - AF slow in lowcontrast scenes
comment:

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: BrownJenkin review date: June-12-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma AF 100-300 Minolta AF 28-105 RS KM AF 18-70 DT Minolta AF 100 f 2.8 Macro
price paid:	150 EUR (like new)
positive:	Built to last Bokeh Range Constant aperture Constant lenght from 70mm to 210mm unexpensive
negative:	Weight Some flares Some CA
comment:	A great old lady. Looks like a tank lens, with a full metal body. You must get used to the weight of this zoom lens, but after that you'll have a wonderful tele-zoom glass. Bokeh is simply amazing, sharpness stopped at 5.6 is quite good, just a little soft at 210mm and f 4. AF speed is slow in low light but not-so-much as i thought. One of the most common Minolta lenses, one of the most useful, simply the best in quality-price. 02/13/2009 After almost 2 years of use my copy seems to have developed a bad "illness". The central portion of the image is still ok, the rest of it is soft at every aperture.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: cgl88 review date: June-05-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tokina 70-210mm Sony 18-70mm Kit Minolta 50mm f/1.7 Minolta 28-80mm zoom xi
price paid:	0 (Gift from Uncle)
positive:	Solidly built lens with excellent sharpness and color saturation
negative:	Somewhat heavy, auto-focus can get 'lost' at 210mm or in lower light
comment:	This lens reminds me of the good old days: products with quality performance that are built to last. The legendary 'beer can' lens is a treat to use on film and on digital. It works very well with the Sony a100. I have not taken enough shots on the a100 to experience CA (I avoid it anyway because its a known issue with the other lenses). The lens is heavy, but then again photography is a trade-off. A heavy lens comes with a solid build and excellent glass. It is a real bargain if you can snap one up for under $200 on eBay. No wonder the other brands love to bash poor KM/Sony: such cheap glass cannot be had with their cameras unless they pay 4x more! This lens is great for portrait, nature, sports (learn the workarounds due to slow focusing though), bokeh.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: nathan_68 review date: June-05-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 200/2.8 HS G Minolta 135/2.8
price paid:	125 Euro
positive:	bokeh build like a tank focal range constant f/4
negative:	weight like a tank CA
comment:	This lens has confirmed what has been already said about it. Positive: It has one of the best bokeh I've ever seen. It's really amazing, both with digital camera and film. The lens has been build to last. All metal body, it can be used and abused and still works perfectly. Neutral: AF is not fast, but is not so slow. I knew it, and I'm quite pleased about the performance. Nevertheless, it fails to focus and hunts a little bit more than expected. It's a heavy lens, but ergonomics is good, so it's not a problem for me. Negative: With digital I can see some CA, especially in bright areas. This problem doesn't exist with film. Sharpness is not as good as I would like. At f/4 it's soft, much better at f/5.6, but not as sharp as my tele primes. Overall: A very good deal for the price. Performance is good/very good, considering that it's a lens designed more than 20 years ago. Personally I find that it performs better with film cameras. Digital is unforgiving and it shows all the little flaws of this old wonderful lady.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Komo review date: May-27-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 100 f2.8 macro Minolta 50 f1.4 Sigma 28 f1.8 (old model)
price paid:	~Aus $200
positive:	Great range Sharp Usually fast enough Bokeh Close focusing
negative:	Weight & size
comment:	This lens usually ends up as my "walk around". I usually start out with either the 28 or 50 on the camera but end up using the beercan for most of the shots I actually take. I can't expect it to be as sharp as my 50 or 100mm primes but its probably better than the old Sigma 28. If Sony release a smaller, lighter version with equivalent or better IQ and reasonable price I'd probably get it, but in the mean time I'm getting great shots and huge value for money!

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Konradas review date: May-26-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	300
positive:	All like
negative:	Sharpness f4
comment:	All super except sharpnesses on f4

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: awaken77 review date: May-26-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	minolta 75-300/4.5-5.6
price paid:	270 USD (used
positive:	Sharp wide open Usable telephoto range on 1,5x crop Nice bokeh Internal zooming mechanism
negative:	Slow focusing CAs wide open Prone to flare Rotating front lens Hood locking mechanism and lens cap
comment:	I bought this lens primarily for portraits, to cover "traditional" 100mm and 135mm portrait telephoto range. I like it's nice bokeh and 3D-look of the image, which is especially good for close-up facial portraits. However, it is not as good as conventional telephoto lens, for shooting sport or other fast action. AF is slow and chromaric aberrations are noticeable on some conditions. Hood lock and lens cap are disaster. It is impossible to attach hood with cap on, and vise versa.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: sooner review date: May-26-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 75-300 Sigma 28-200D
positive:	Sharp in center wide open and at f/8. O.K. in corner.
negative:	A beast to lug around.
comment:	I have tested this lens, and those listed above, using the Koren, 2003, (5mm) test charts to determine the resolution based on MTF-50. The following information is based on results from two of the sine-wave, test, strips; one horizontal near the center of the frame, and the other, diagonal, very close to the corner of the frame. The tests were made with a KM5D, hand held, image stabilization “on”, ISO 100, in bright sunlight so that the shutter speed was quick enough to satisfy the reciprocal of the focal length criterion. Results: (focal length/f-stop/lines per inch on an 8” x 12” print at center/ditto-at corner). (210/8/169/80), (210/4.0/165/66), (70/8/197/82), (70/4.0/137/53). My understanding of photo resolution quality is: >150 lpi=excellent, >110 lpi=very good, >80 lpi=good. I believe the corner results represent a pretty severe test since the test strip extended radially, and the region of interest was very near the corner. These results are further confirmation of the optical sharpness of this lens. The Sigma can match it (but, looses an f-stop at 200mm), is more compact and has a larger zoom range. More details on this and other lenses can be found at: http://www.geocities.com/royanddee/lens_test_results_mtf50.htm

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: TangoJetta review date: May-24-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 75-300mm D Sigma D 28-300mm KM 28-75mm f2.8 D
price paid:
positive:	Built like a tank Sharp as my pirme lens great price Heayduty build great colors
negative:	Got watch out for flares
comment:	My copy seems to have fast AF in low light, It's as fast as my Km 28-75mm f2.8 D and have none of AF hunting like my Sigma. This beercan was only use twice according to the orginal owner. I have tried out other Beercans and those took forever to focus in low light conditions. Well I really this lens and would never sell it.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: yariv review date: May-06-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 28-135 f/4-4.5 Minolta 50 f/1.7
price paid:	100 USD (used)
positive:	Sharp Bokeh Color constant f4
negative:
comment:	Got this Lens last week and tried in for a day. Noticed one thing for sure . . . what a great bokeh ! ! !

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: Arkku review date: April-28-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm f/3.5 mark 1
positive:	- Excellent colours - Constant aperture - Nice bokeh for a zoom
negative:	- Heavy - Focusing ring is too small - Filter thread rotates when focusing
comment:	Overall I've been very satisfied with this lens. My only real gripe is the rotating filter thread, placed on a focusing ring that's way too small (and doesn't have a lot of travel). Manual focusing is made a bit better by keeping the lens hood attached and using that as an extension to the focusing ring, although then it becomes very difficult to attach/remove filters because they are so deeply recessed inside the hood. The image quality, however, is excellent, sharpness is sufficient, colour rendition is superb, bokeh very nice for a zoom, and I haven't had issues with distortion. As no viable alternative seems to exist among AF zooms in this range for the Sony/Minolta mount, the Beercan is highly recommended.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: chych review date: April-19-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	km 50/1.7 km 24-85/3.5-4.5 km 35-105/3.5-4.5 sony 18-70/3.5-5.6
price paid:	140
positive:	Fast aperture, great build, 55 mm filter, sharpness, bokeh, colors
negative:	CA, weight, hunting AF
comment:	I got this lens off ebay for a good price. Unfortunately a month later the lens developed a sticky aperture! Fortunately I was able to repair this myself (thanks to Pete Ganzel). This lens is very good for outdoor shots and portraits, the image quality is superb. There is some flaring and ghosting however, especially considering that the hood is too small (for APS-C the hood can be bigger). My main complaint with it is that, on my copy, the sharpness and CA is just terrible at f4 from 150-210mm, and becomes good only at f5.6. However at 70mm, it is very sharp even at f4. CA is a big issue on this lens, and I see it more than I see it on other lenses.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: danieljansson review date: April-14-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	50mm 1.7 km 11-18/4.5-5.6 km 17-35/2.8-4 km 28-75/2.8
positive:	sharp constant aperture bokeh colors
negative:	big tiny focus ring that feels poorly placed CA
comment:	Gotta love the beercan. It was my first telezoom and it has served me well for half a year. Just sold it for L220! 100% profit. Eventually the size made me want to get another lens and I wanted more reach. I am waiting for my 100-400 APO to arrive next week (which I bought here). The first thing that hit me when using this lens was its natural colors. They feel very real and alive. The bokeh is very very smooth. The constant aperture is a really nice thing that I will miss in the replacement lens. It is also very sharp, even at f/4. Just as on the 50mm prime, the focus ring is very small. And because of the big size of the lens it is not very comfortable to focus manually with it. Nearly impossible with the hood on. It is very sensitive to purple fringing/CA I have noticed. All in all a very nice lens that everyone should own at one point. I can understand why it is a classic. Much bang for the buck. But time to move on to APO land...

sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: eldonito review date: April-13-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta AF 75-300 F4.5-5.6 D Cosina 100 F3.5 macro Soligor 135 F2.8 (m42) Sigma EX DG 85 F1.4 HSM
price paid:	80 GBP (used)
positive:	build, internal zoom f/4 aperture bokeh 1:4 "macro" works nicely
negative:	Weight Focus hunting CA
comment:	A classic. The all-metal build and internal zoom features ooze old-skool class. The f/4 max aperture can be very useful at low light, though it is confounded by chromatic aberration (CA). The latter is noticeably decreased at f/5.6 and mostly absent from f/8 onwards, where my copy performs at its best, hence 3.5 for sharpness. CA tends to be most apparent in high-contrast situations, so if you use f/4 because the light is low, CA won't be so evident. I have taken many nice shots at f/4, just don't forget to stop down in daylight! Also lovely colour and bokeh. The one I bought didn't come with a hood; however I used it to take photos of my friends skiing/snowboarding in bright sunshine. Colour and contrast were intact, and not a hint of flare! 1 point off the build because, even though it's "built like a tank", it's also as heavy. In a nutshell: Simply, it's a must.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: dA100vor review date: April-13-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	af28-105 f3.5/4.5
price paid:	290AUD w/ new uv
positive:	Oh so sharp Zooming doesnt extend lens Very quality built
negative:	Auto-focus slow/hunts eg. in darkness, with very close colours (not really a negative, just considering certain conditions with lens)
comment:	Found this lens in the camera trading post (forgot the name) and I went off the gut feeling and numerous reviews on here to check it out. I felt the price was a bit too high, but there were two lenses in store so at least I had a choice. The lens I got doesnt seem like it was used much or at all. And... Its everything that the 100+ reviews mention and more. Sharpness, bokeh, build... The negative above I would say just comes with such a lens... If the AF starts playing up just go to manual focus which is quite decent to use as well on the lens. A classic lens for sure.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: heith review date: April-12-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	70-210 4.5/5.6 2(kit), Tamron 28-300, Tokina AT-X 28-70, 70mm Sig Macro
price paid:	190.00
positive:	Bokeh
negative:	Long
comment:	Nice lens and not as heavy as I would have suspected. Comparing to the Tokina, now thats a heavy lens. Sharpness- the lens is better than the kit and almost as good is the Tokina at 70mmF4 but the beercans bokeh is better so it appears to be better.Color is better on the beercan than the Tokina too. But the Tokina AF is faster. @70mmF4 the Sigma 70mm macro is on another planet than the other 3 and shouldn't really be compared. Anyways I think it's a good lens for the meantime as I save for the 70-200ssm.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: GattoBros review date: April-11-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	sigma 70-300 f 4.5/5.6 minolta 50 f 1.7 minolta 28-85 f 3.5/4.5 konica minolta 17-35
price paid:	15 €
positive:	sharpness AF not so slow as aspected
negative:	too long and a little bit heavy
comment:	excellent lens. great sharpnes and vivid colors.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: isutherl review date: April-11-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	75-300D 4.5-5.6
price paid:	90.00 USD (USED)
positive:	good everything
negative:	a little heavy, not too bad
comment:	Bought it at my local camera shop, I actually traded in an extra 50mm 1.7 O for it and only paid $70 for the Beercan after trade in. I think this lens is great and would tell anyone to pick up one of them.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: TimSchuler review date: April-06-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	132€ on ebay
positive:	-super build -image qualitiy -nice price
negative:	-slow AF in low light
comment:	I own this lense since Wednesday and I am totally in love. Its great buildquality compared to the low cost lenses is great.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: wimski99 review date: April-04-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony AF DT 18-200 F3.5-6.3 Minolta AF 75-300 F4.5-5.6 Minolta AF 100-300 xi F4.5-5.6
price paid:	pack.deal (+/- E45)
positive:	SHARP Built
negative:
comment:	I have been looking for a BIG Beercan for quite a while... but since yesterday, I've got him! So I took some time today to compare the results of my four tele-zooms to decide which one(s) to sell. Not an easy decision: all zooms are GOOD, but different. The Beercan and the BIG Beercan are both very SHARP, with the Minolta-glass CoLOURS. The xi is very light and small (nice for travel), and the Sony is very versatile (and light). Don't forget the Sony is a full-range zoom, starting at 18 and ending at 200. There are also con's: The Beercan's are heavy, the xi has a (quite slow) motorized zoom and the Sony is not that sharp at both ends (particulary at 18). I'm glad i finaly own a BIG Beercan. So this one is going to stay. Not only is it as sharp as the Beercan (or sharper), it is also faster due to the focus limiter. The Sony also stays. Ideal for traveling "light". So I'm afraid the xi has to go. If I can sell it for a decent price (probable together with my 3xi and 28-80xi). And the Beercan... Although i won't use it that often anymore i'm pretty sure i'll keep it. As a "collectors-item".

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: teejay review date: March-31-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	sigma 70-300 APO, 70-210 3.5-4.5
price paid:	120€ mint
positive:	Sharpness colors constant f4 1:4 macro at long end build quality bokeh
negative:	focus speed weight and size prone to CA
comment:	A mythical old school minolta lens, which shines by its sharpness, colors, bokeh, build quality and constant aperture. On the downside, focus speed is pretty slow and CAs are visible. Size and weight are substantial, but it balances well on 5D and this gives stability. Makes a good portrait lens and general telephoto lens except for fast moving subjects. Sharper than its sibling the 70-210 3.5-4.5, equivalent to sigma 70-300 APO in the overlaping range (in sharpness).

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: sporky review date: March-31-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	MinRS 50mm/1.7, Sony kit 18-70/3.5-5.6
price paid:	185 USD (used)
positive:	3x zoom at useful focal length Works well hand held Good sharpness for a low price
negative:	Slow autofocus, hunts in low light Some Chromatic Aberration (CA)
comment:	Great lens. Having a relatively wide aperture (f4) and 1:4 macro at 210mm is great. Despite occasional CA and the disappointing AF, the lens is very usable and well worth the price. Perfect lens for a photographer on a modest budget to complement the 18-70 kit lens. The lens is fairly heavy, but built well and still not too big to use hand held. I've noticed that on sunset photos flare is more of a problem with this lens than on the kit lens.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: nikola_konsulov review date: March-30-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Konica Minolta 28-75 f2.8 (D); Sigma 100-300 f4 EX DG
positive:	Sufficiently sharp. Great Build. Smooth zoom ring and focus ring. Usually fast AF.
negative:	Front element rotates. Clip on lens hood is kind of hokey (but it does the job). Chromatic aberration at f4 and high contrast scenes. Sometime AF has problems while doing Macro work or when shooting in dim light.
comment:	The 70-210 f4 is sufficiently sharp wide open through the zoom range, but f5-5.6 is better. I also find that it can not match my Sigma 100-300 f4 EX DG zoom lens. Chromatic aberration can be a problem with the "Beer Can." Something that the Konica Minolta 28-75 f2.8 (D) and Sigma 100-300 f4 EX DG does a much better job with. Auto focus sometimes has a problem depending on what you are trying to shoot. I have problems when trying to do macro work with the lens at 210mm. I believe the "Legend" will remain a legend. It was a good lens back in the day, even currently. However, it is not some mythical wonder. You would be better off to get a Sigma/Tamron 70-200 f2.8 or a Sigma 100-300 f4 EX DG.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Entropy 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:	Sony 18-70 f/3.5-5.6 Sigma 30mm f/1.4 Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro Minolta 200mm f/2.8 HS
positive:	Sharp Beautiful Colors Nice Bokeh Built like a tank
negative:	Slow AF in low light
comment:	A classic for a reason - but don't go blindly. This lens is excellent if you don't mind lugging around a big piece of glass and metal. That being said, the next step up is the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, which is $800, or the Sony SSM ($2300) Update 3/19/08: Compared to the 200mm f/2.8G, all the positives of the beercan are met and exceeded by the G lens. The G has a significant advantage in terms of sharpness and color at all fstops below f/8. This doesn't mean that the beercan is a bad lens, but it has lead me to drop its sharpness and color ratings by one half and one point respectively.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: arthedains 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:	Minolta 17-35/2.8-4.0 (D) Minolta 28-70/2.8 G Minolta 28/2.8 Minolta 135/2.8 Minolta 100/2.8 (D) Macro
price paid:	160 €
positive:	Sharp. Solid build. Beautiful bokeh. Constant aperture. Cheap.
negative:	Slightly slow focus.
comment:	One of my favorite Minolta lenses. Always a pleasure to take photos with this as it fits so well in my hands and looks good too on a Minolta 5D! Produces sharp photos with lovely creamy bokeh and wonderful contrast. Acceptable sharpness even wide open. Focus is not blazingly fast but adequate for my needs but people doing birding or sports might find it to be slow for their needs. The build is top notch with the old Minolta all metal build quality. A little on the heavier side. My copy is only a few years younger than me but still functions without a hitch! A steal when one considers their price on the used market. If you cannot afford the many times more expensive 80-200/ G or the 70-200 SSM then go for this. You will not be disappointed. I wasn't! I hope Sony will upgrade this and come out with a G version. Will definitely be a big hit.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: HelmutK review date: March-11-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28-85 50/1.7 28-105
price paid:	150 EUR
positive:
negative:	AF-speed Size and weight CA's
comment:

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: sdblanchet review date: March-10-07
	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
price paid:	100 USD (used)
positive:	Sharpness Color bokeh
negative:	slow auto focus (better with a700)
comment:	The sharpness of this lens is what impressed me the most. In low light situation the AF is slow but thanks to a dyxum member (sorry don't remember who) when used in continuous focus the lens is easier to use (but forget about re-composing after focus) Tried this lens with a700 and it is faster and hunts a whole lot less.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: King-Frizzy review date: March-08-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 75-300 (D)
price paid:	150 usd
positive:	Build Quality Quick AF Sharp
negative:	None
comment:	I have heard all about this lengendary lens the Beercan since i got my KM 5d and i wasn't sure what made it so good. I was selling something at a ebay retail store and someone had brought in an old box labeled camera's. So i opened it up and it was filled with minolta lens i spotted a 70-210 f4 box and i opened it up! It was brand new orignal manual in wrapper. I was in aww! The build quality was amazing and it felt right. We walked outside and i told him 150 and he okayed it. Great lens quick af. Sharp wide open and must have lens. Price has shot up lately due to sony but keep an eye out for a cheap one.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Looleylaylow review date: February-23-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 18-200 Minolta APO 100-300
price paid:	$145ish USD (used)
positive:	- Razor sharp - Reasonably bright for the price and range - Great color - Great bokeh
negative:	- Extremely pokey AF - Heavy and long
comment:	The beercan is everything they say it is: sharp, colorful, reasonably fast, built like a tank (the 4 on build above is a reflection of bulk, not build quality) and a bit of a burden, more due to length than weight. The length is the price paid for internal zooming. This lens takes an eternity to focus, but when it gets there the results are razor sharp. It's worth mentioning that the 100-300 APO easily rivals the IQ of the beercan, but it's not as fast nor as cheap. A great lens.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Eclipse review date: February-15-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	70-210 F3.5-4.5 100-300 APO D
price paid:	L80 (used)
positive:	Sharp, superb build quality, colour, continuous F4, useful range, silky smooth zoom
negative:	Weight, too long for some bags when attached to body.
comment:	Looking for reviews of this lens led me to this site. I bought the lens as a result and will never let go of it again. Build quality is superb- it feels 'right' as soon as you pick it up. Though testing it with a test strip shows it isn't quite as sharp as the 100-300 APO D, it produces results which appear just as sharp when I use it in the field, -the results on film are excellent. I think this is probably to do with its idiosynchratic rendition of colour, which I personally like very much. You need a wheelbarrow to cart it around in, (it is too big for most camera bags when mounted with the hood on- I prefer to take it off when travelling to avoid its weight straining the mount)but it is worth the effort- I happily carry it around on my camera all day at race meetings. I don't find it hunts any more than the APO D 100-300- if anything,it hunts less. It may focus a little slower than some modern lenses on my D7, but focusses quickly and accurately on my D9 even in low light, possibly due to the D9 being a bit more butch in the motor and better able to cope with the beercan's weight. At the first race meeting I took it to out of about 250 shots all bar two were in perfect focus, and at least one of those was my fault...

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3	user: AndrewME review date: February-13-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	99 USD
positive:	Very sharp Great saturation and contrast
negative:
comment:	Another vote for the beercan. I picked one up for $99 in excellent condition at a local photo store despite the recent price increases. I opted for the beercan over the 70-210 f/3.5-4.5 after finding several tests that showed while center sharpness between the two is about equal, the beercan is much sharper in the corners. No regrets over the increased size/weight (which is not that bad) - after my first set of pictures I am sold!

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: calpon review date: February-08-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 70-300 APO DG
positive:	Sharp Cheap Good color Nice bokeh Built like a tank
negative:	CA and flare As heavy as a tank :)
comment:	Hard to believe this is such an old design...the results are outstanding. Very good color and the bokeh is very nice. The weight doesn't bother me because I am used to schlepping a a Tamron 200-500 around. I am finding that my images are of better quality than my recently departed Sigma, but the Sigma controlled flare and CA/purple fringing better. This will be a short termer for me until the new Sigma 70-200 2.8 is available, but I will enjoy every minute of its time in my bag.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: barroj review date: February-07-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta AF 70-210 F4.5-5.6 2634-110 Minolta AF 75-300 F4.5-5.6 II 2665-110, 2665-160
price paid:	150 USD (used)
positive:	Clarity. Constant f/4. Solid build.
negative:	Heavy. AF a bit slow on the far end.
comment:	I love this lens. I didn't think that I would have great joy with this lens...because I bought it used and thought it may be too heavy for nature photography (birds). I find the colors sharp with great bokeh. I have attached my Vivitar 2x teleconverter and although I lose 2 f-stops, the results produced with an f/8 are great. I recommend this lens to anyone and it is much sharper and crisper than my AF 70-210 f/4.5-5.6

sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: Maffe review date: February-07-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	100/2, 135/2.8, 200/2.8
positive:	Cheap, build and light compared to build
negative:	Slow AF, soft wide open, rotating front, not so compact.
comment:	Good (only?) alternetiv to heavy and expensive 70-200/2.8 zooms. This is my slowest lens and I tend not to use it that much. Results from it can be excellent, little soft wide open.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Grubeater review date: February-06-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 70-210/3.5-4.5 APO macro
price paid:	100 EURO (used)
positive:	Aperture of F4, color representation.
negative:	Hunts at 210mm in low contrast situations, no present follow-up.
comment:	The beercan, what can i say what isn't said before? ;-)

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: almassengale review date: February-05-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 18-200, Phoenix 100mm macro, Sigma 30mm f 1.4.
price paid:	200 USD
positive:	Tremendous build quailty, very nice bokeh, can focus fairly closely, nice color, and good image quality.
negative:	Heavy, AF isn't the fastest, tiny focusing ring, design of lens hood.
comment:	This is a fun lens to use. Its become a nice choice for photographing larger flowers or for some light portrait work. It really is built like a tank. An amazingly solid feel you just don't get on most modern lenses. The color is nice and the out of field areas are rendered in a very pleasing way. The down side is that its a little big for a walk around lens, the focusing ring is tiny, and the AF is much slower than on most of my lenses. But you can't beat it for the price.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Mauricio11 review date: February-05-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
positive:	- sharp. - very well built. - fast AF.
negative:	- maybe too heavy, but you can get used to it.
comment:	My copy is sharp at all apertures, center to corner, and it has fast AF (less than 1 sec. - Is this fast? Maybe I'm wrong). No regrets at all.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: nigelbrooks review date: January-25-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	L60 used
positive:	Build quality Constant f4 Sharpness
negative:	They don't make them anymore
comment:	Not really much to say that hasn't been said before. A legend. Built like a tank and renders crisp colourful results. Maybe a little slow on AF but hey, all things considered, that's a VERY small price to pay.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 2	user: xyfler review date: January-10-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	minolta 100mm f2 minolta 135mm f2.8 minolta 200mm f2.8
positive:	pretty good color and reasonable sharpness from f5.6 onwards
negative:	- a bit soft wide open - a lot of ca - slow AF - flare
comment:	A pretty good all round lens , with good color and reasonable sharpness from f5.6 onwards. Sharpness cannot compare with a good prime. There is also too much CA on the a100. Still havnt used it much on the a100, I noticed the flare when using it on film. havnt really looked at the distortion either, so I just entered an average number.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: richad_b review date: January-04-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	189 USD (used)
positive:	Constant f4 aperture Very sharp in f8-f16 range Beautiful bokeh
negative:	A little soft at f4 Focus can hunt some in low light Some CA in high contrast areas
comment:	Beautiful lens, I have been very happy with mine. There is a little flare on into the light shots, but not really bad. Very little evidence of distortion. Good performance center and edge of frame (on APS sensor.) I ran a test series (f4, f8, f18, f22 at 75mm, 130mm and 210mm, 100% crops) Click here to view test. For some real world sample shots, click here

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: alve review date: January-03-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 70-300/4-5,6 DG Minolta 75-300 (first gen)
price paid:	110 €
positive:	Very sharp Nice colors Good buildquality Internal zoom
negative:	Quite small focusring Rotating front element
comment:	I like this one better than the "big beercan" do to the constant f/4 and the sharpness. I highly recommend this lens, it's the best preformance/price I have.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: fmajor review date: January-02-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta Rokkor Lenses (many) Minolta 50mm f1.7 Minolta 28-85 f3.5-4.5 Minolta 35-70mm f4
price paid:	100 USD exc. cond
positive:	- magnficient color rendition - sharp - Internal focusing - superb build quality - Constant F4 - Excellent tele range on digital - CHEAP, CHEAP, CHEAP!!! - Excellent outdoor portrait lens
negative:	- It "hunts" for a focus lock in low-light - A bit flare-prone - Manual focus ring too small - miniscule purple fringing
comment:	EDIT: 18Nov2008 After a few years of use, i still find this lens to be an excellent performer. There are faster lenses (i.e., usually they are the expensive f2.8 variants). There are sharper lenses (for more money of course). However, these caveats notwithstanding, this lens has permanently cemented it's place in my camera bag. Given my experience with this lens, i would buy another without hesitation. INITIAL REVIEW: These old lenses are a pleasure to use and while i don't use my 70-210mm's (the "beercan") everyday (almost though!), both of mine give beautiful, consistent results. Sharp, rich colors and contrasty images are the norm with them. These lenses also make for exceptional portrait lenses. Incidently, one of 70-210's has some front element coating scratches and the other does not. The images from them look identical - even at 400% magnification. The "beercan" feels like what ALL lenses should feel like - in a word - SOLID. They are reasonably sharp and have beautiful colors - neither overly saturated/rich or flat. As pertains to colors, the legend lives up to the name!!! The out-of-focus exposure rendering is smooth/creamy with nice colors - ESPECIALLY when employed in outdoor/"natural light" portraiture. The constant F4 really helps to provide a nice background. These lenses are not what i would call fast focusing. Not slow, but not fast and the MF ring is really a bit too small to use very well for quick-switches from AF to MF. Also, they "hunt" for a focus lock in lower light/contrast situations. These lenses also do not have the truly magnificient attributes of Minolta G-Series or Sony Zeiss lenses such as constant f2.8 (or wider) aperture, FAST focusing, HUGE price tag, etc. Staying within the Minolta manufactured brand, the Minolta (now Sony) "G" lenses and the Sony Zeiss lenses are the obvious next step up. IMHO, the Minolta CONSTANT F4 70-210mm (beercan) is the best "bang-for-your-buck" lens in the Minolta (now Sony) A-mount lens lineup.

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Innox review date: January-01-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
positive:	Sharp. Good Build. Constant f4. CHEAP!
negative:	Some bad CA wide open. Rotating front element.
comment:	A great telezoom, the best choice if you don't have the money for a 2.8. INTERNAL ZOOM! I love that, that's why it gets a 5 on build even though the front element rotates while focusing. Not the best colors and contrast, but pretty good, can be fixed in PP. CA on large apertures is quite bad.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Nilfisken review date: December-28-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 17-70 Tamron 90/2.8 Macro
price paid:	100 Euro (Used)
positive:	Sharp Built to last
negative:	Some CA Lousy MF ring
comment:	First of all I love this lens! It is almost as sharp as my Macro and it is solid as a rock. It works very well with a 1.4 converter (CA can be a bit of a problem in pictures with much contrast) making it a very good telezoom with almost 1:2 magnification. Great for butterfly photography! Only wished it had a little better MF ring but considering what you pay for it it is a must have in every A-mount arsenal =)

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: ravenspaced review date: December-27-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 18-70 Minolta 28-75D
price paid:	$150 used
positive:	Fast enough, great build, color, handling. Just a great lens for the money.
negative:	Chromatic aberration can be severe in high contrast areas, focus is slow.
comment:	Unless you're fortunate enough to have the 80-200 2.8 G, this should be in your camera bag. It's cheap, fast enough, and delivers. Unbeatable price/performance ratio.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: gipper51 review date: December-24-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 200-400 KM 28-135
price paid:	110 USD (used)
positive:	sharp at all aperatures and focal lengths constant f/4 beautiful colors beautiful bokeh built to last
negative:	slow AF which hunts alot big and heavy Prone to CA
comment:	This lens alone was a big reason why I bought a KM 5D. Last year I was purchasing my first SLR ever, and the quality and price of used KM glass was the best I thought. My camera budget is small, and this quality of focal range was going to cost several times what I paid for this lens in any other mount, same story with my KM 28-135. This lens may be old, slow focusing, and prone to CA, but it produces stunning images and that's what really counts. Prices have gone up since I bought mine but it's still a heck of a deal. Highly recommended.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: dimi_dinev review date: December-24-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 35-105/3,5-4,5 Minolta 35-70/4 Tamron 18-200 (Minolta A) Sigma 70-210/4,5-5,6 (FD) Danubia 135/2.8 (FD)
price paid:	50 € (used)
positive:	impressive sharpness beautiful bokeh built like a tank design of classical beauty the weight can be regarded to as positive
negative:	chromatic aberrations front lens turns while focusing for some the weight might be negative
comment:	A great lens. The price/quality-ralation is unbeatable! Its build is great. The high weight is for me, personally, a pro-argument. Optically it's better than any of the above cited lenses. At 70mm better than the old, but very nice 35-70/4, which is, as far as I know, from the same first A-generation. It's not by chance that Leitz, while collaborating with Minolta sold it as "Vario-Elmar R".

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: mark victor review date: December-22-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	90 USD
positive:	Sharp even wide open Low distortion Color is excellent Flare control is ok
negative:	slow AF and may hunt a little when focus in darker situations or close to the subject. Heavy
comment:	No complian given that I paid so little for this Leica equivalent. This is one of must have legacy in the Minolta lens system. I will buy a 70-200/2.8SSM or 80-200 G HS soon. But I don't think I will let go my beercan...

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: vtube review date: December-07-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- M 50/1.7, M 35/2, KM 17-35/2.8-4
price paid:	130Euro (used)
positive:	- very sharp - colors - price
negative:	- very strong CA in some situations, very hard to recovery in post-processing - autofocus not fast, sometimes hunts
comment:	A very good lens, sharp even at maximum aperture. You can't have more for that price. The major cons are the strong CA in high contrast photos (I have many ruined by this defect), that is very hard to correct in post-processing, and the autofocus that is not very fast, sometimes hunts. When I'll have more money, I will buy a 70-200/2.8 (Minolta? Sigma?). Recommended.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: ryanwhalen review date: December-07-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron Superzoom
price paid:	85 usd (used)
positive:	Can't be beat for price
negative:	Chromatic Aberration is an issue
comment:	For the $85 I spent on it this is surely the best bang for lens buck possible. It's a great lens that I use very frequently. It isn't too big or heavy. It does have some issues. AF is at times slow, and CA can be a problem. But really, If you don't want to drop the $ for a 2.8 and you need a zoom in this focal length and can find one of the f/4's then you should buy it.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: maxfarphoto review date: December-06-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 75-300 f4.5/5.6 (big beercan)
price paid:	€ 160 (second hand)
positive:	Sharp Color Build
negative:	Not so fast AF
comment:	Sharpnes and colors are excellent. AF is not so fast, probably it misses a focus limiter.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: keith_h review date: November-19-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28-75 50/f1.7 75-300
price paid:	165 usd used
positive:	Build, image quality
negative:	Weight may concern some CA in some conditions
comment:	Just a fine instrument. The lens of choice unless I need something wider. I can't imagine anything comes close for the price. If the new Sony glass works this well, life will be good.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: rouslanbel review date: November-19-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 50/1.7, KM 50/1.4(old), KM 28-75 2.8
price paid:	150(used)
positive:	Sharp, great contrast and color, very nice bokeh, built like a tank
negative:	discontinued, pretty heavy, not very fast AF
comment:	Great for portraits - the best portrait lens I own. Beats 50 primes

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: hooj review date: November-17-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	sigma 55-200 f4-5.6 dc sigma 105 f2.8 ex dg macro
price paid:	160 CAD
positive:	very sharp, great colour feels good on my a100 smooth zoom
negative:	nothing yet
comment:	don't know why but thought this lens was going to be a monster from reading other's comments. love this lens! the size and weight don't bother me at all, was expecting it to be bigger and heavier! have used it as my walk around lens. originally bought the sigma 55-200 back when i thought lighter would be better for me, but was very disappointed on how soft the pictures were so returned it.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Kalypso review date: November-15-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	173 USD (used)
positive:	Sharp at all ranges. Good AF in all lighting. Excellent colors & contrast. Great build quality.
negative:	None so far!
comment:	The best deal in lenses (especially if you compare it to the competitions equivalent versions).

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: bharnois review date: November-09-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 100-300 Sigma 70-300 APO Macro
price paid:	$170 USD
positive:	Feels Good Looks Good Smooth Zoom and Focus.
negative:	You won't be sneaking up on anybody with this. Just a little big for my bags.
comment:	A placeholder for more comments later. It makes a funny partner for my 'plastic' 35-70. Heck, gave it 5's because you can't find anything wrong with it. It is just simply a nice lens to use and the shots can be amazing. Sometimes I seem to get shots where the lens captures more information that a 6MP sensor can see. It can show details down to the pixel level that just disappear when you zoom out on the picture.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Sanjuro review date: November-08-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Soligor 135
price paid:	120
positive:	-Very good build quality -Nice in the hand -Very nice color reproduction
negative:	-In low light and no so low light situations,the AF might hunt.
comment:	Very nice lens for the price. f4 is sometimes slow as you need to have nice light to not get a blurry image, but I never got a problem outside. The color reproduction is great.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: seagr112 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:	Minolta 100-200mm f/4.5 Minolta 100-300mm APO f/4.5-5.6
positive:	Excellent Imaging Qualities Beautiful Build & Finish Constant f/4 Max Aperture Excellent Value
negative:	Slow-ish AF Minor Flare
comment:	Much has been said about this great lens, so I won't regurgitate all the previously mentioned kudos. I don't mind the size and weight that some feel is a detriment. I think it is a fair trade off - I like solid, well built gear that will last, and prefer this style lens over a plastic lightweight. I've shot directly into sunsets with only minimal flare noted, and my copy seems pretty good handling CA. For recently posted pics using this lens, check out: http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/forum_posts.asp? TID=7829&KW=cheetah In comparing the lens to the 100-200mm that I have used extensively in the past, the Beercan is a bit sharper and produces a better image hands down. The slightly bigger maximum aperture is an advantage, too. I only reach for the smaller 100-200mm now if I am trying to minimize my pack weight on a hike. Otherwise, the Beercan is my lens of choice, bearing in mind it sells for more than twice the price so this could be a determining factor for some. Versus the APO 100-300mm, the Beercan holds its own within the comparable focal ranges, and the extra stop comes in handy in low light at the far end. In bright light, there is no denying the APO lens performs well and has that additional reach if you need 300mm. The Beercan offers an excellent value in the medium telephoto range and is my go-to lens for great pics. You have to spend a lot more cash to get any appreciable improvement in image reproduction and it is definitely worth having one, despite a few minor limitations.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: kefkafloyd 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:
price paid:	$130 USD (used)
positive:	* Built out of metal for that classic feel. * Large, smooth zoom ring. * Uses common 55mm filters. * Superb blurred backgrounds. * Fast, quiet AF on a700.
negative:	* Soft wide open at long end. * Chromatic Aberrations. * Needs a focus limiter badly.
comment:	The "Beercan" as they call it didn't get its reputation out of thin air. A great performer - at a low price (and this is the key) is what made it so good. Some reviewers are getting a little hyperbolic with calling it a G-grade lens. It's not. Unlike the 28-135 (which could be called G-grade) this lens was not hand made and it has inferior glass compared to it. However, this lens was made in a time when cost cutting and computer automation had yet to hit the lens manufacturing industry. It's made from all metal and its heft and operation inspires a "They don't make them like they used to" feel when operating most modern lenses. This lens also uses an old-style zoom, which is unlike most modern extending tube zooms. It doesn't have any zoom creep and the ring is gravity independent for always smooth zooming. The focusing ring leaves a bit to be desired, as do all early AF lenses. The rotating front element also kills the use of circular polarizers unless you use major effort. I think everyone agrees that the beercan is a well handling, finely crafted piece of optical excellence. However, like all mass produced items, lenses especially, image quality can vary heavily from copy to copy. My beercan in particular is quite sharp except at the long end, especially at f/4. It also has limitations from its optical design. This is not an APO lens, and shooting hockey players wearing white jerseys on the ice is chromatic aberration city. We must remember that these lenses are getting older. More copies are succumbing to fungus, element damage, coating wear, et cetera. Even when they were brand new, I bet more copies than most hand their CA problems, not to mention flare. The lens hood is an absolute requirement for this lens, and if the one you're buying doesn't have one, a suitable replacement from any of the later 70-210, 75-300, 100-300 or 100 Macro lenses will work. You cannot use a flowered lens hood because of the rotating element. If you keep this lens out of situations that it will struggle with (unless you find a superb copy) it will be a trusted friend to always keep in your bag. * UPDATE - I had a chance to use my particular beercan on my a700 and the performance of the lens has improved mightily. The new AF sensor and motor transform this into a much higher quality lens. The focus speed and accuracy are vastly improved especially in dark conditions. The downside is that I think my particular beercan is suffering from an optical defect as it tends to bloom a lot in very bright conditions. Even stopping down to F/8 produces some flares/blooms/what have you that make a strange softness at longer focal lengths. I do not believe this is an issue with all beercans; just mine specifically. Eventually, this lens will be replaced in my lineup by either the Sigma 70-200 HSM or the Tamron 70-200.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: TheBeej review date: October-31-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 18-70mm Kit
price paid:	$130 USD
positive:	Color Looks sweet on my camera Sharpness Contrast Built like a tank Price Pretty Bokeh
negative:	Weight Front element/filter turns with focusing Slow AF
comment:	Bought one off eBay from a very nice lady who used it only a few times. I read most of these reviews below and decided I should pick one up for myself! Everyone has been right so far. Wonderful colors and contrast. I use this for just about everything outside - takes great portraits!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	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:	Minolta 28-135 f4-4.5
price paid:	$210US (used)
positive:	Just about everything. Image quality. Build. Ease of use
negative:	none I've found so far
comment:	Compared to the 28-135 the beercan is a tiny bit less sharp but I'm finding it a little better in every other respect. The colors are just brilliant, the build is solid, I havent detected any significant distortion, in a word its images are simply great. But just as importantly this lens is simply a joy to use. Unlike the 28-135 its easy to frame the photo I want without having to guess how the exposure will turn out. The beercan lets me trust the cameras metering to a much greater extent meaning I can pay more attention to finding the image I want to capture without phaffing about with technicalities. In this case, the item actually lives up to the hype.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: ellis49 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:
price paid:	150 usd
positive:	Sharp,build,colour,contrast
negative:	Slow AF, hunt sometimes
comment:	Very good value for the money

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: DaveK review date: October-13-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 75 - 300mm f 4,5 - 5,6 (same year) Minolta 28 - 135 mm f4 - 4,5 (same year)
price paid:	100 Euro
positive:	- sharp - range - colours - strong - solid (like al the first generation Minolta AF lenses) - price - BOKEH!!!
negative:	- weight (not realy a problem) - large
comment:	This is the most famous lens I own. And one of the most impressive lenses I own. It became a 'cultlens' and I realy wanted one after reading the reviews about it. The one I bought (on marktplaats.nl; the Dutch Ebay) was nearly as new (although it's 21 years old...). I paid 'only' 100 Euro for it, a few weeks ago. I think it was a gift. This lens made me glad to switch back from XXXXX to Minolta. I just love the colours of Minolta. On the Alpha 100 it gives real impressive pictures. I realy love this lens. It's heavy but very, very good. I hope Sony will make lenses like this in the near future. But I'm sure, I'll never trade mine! Get one if you can!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: pedrocr review date: October-11-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	100-300 APO 100 Macro
price paid:	140 USD (used)
positive:	- Good range - Good bokeh - Sharp wide open - Good construction
negative:	- Heavy - Big
comment:	I really like this lens. Sharpness, bokeh, range, contrast, it has it all. It's a bit bulky and big which is good if you want to impress people but bad for carrying around. It does help with keeping it stable though. I'd only really replace it with a SSM/APO/internal-focusing/modern version of this like the Canon one. Are you listening Sony?

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: BUNS review date: October-07-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tokina 100-300,100-200Xi,28-105Xi,
price paid:	L70
positive:	QUALITY
negative:	NONE
comment:	This is the best lens I have, it's a "must have". L70 from ebay and in unmarked condition, what a steal. I've owned it for six months now and taken thousands of pictures with it.CA can be found on some pictures but stop down a bit and it disappears.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Dumont review date: October-06-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 70-300/4-5.6 Sigma 28-300/3.5-6.3
price paid:	100 USD (used)
positive:	AF pretty accurate, image quality, sharp/good contrast and very good bokeh, built like a Panzer
negative:	Heavy like a Panzer.
comment:	I would say next to the 50mm/1.4 this is the most affordable lens that comes the closest to G quality images (IMHO of course as I am far from having used anywhere near all of Minoltas regular lenses). Of course with the fame of this lens and the amount of new Sony A100 owners now wanting one, a good lens at bargain prices is hard to come by. This is my 3rd Beercan, the last 2 that I sold came with camera/several lens/accessory package deals on ebay. The one I kept came from a local camera store. It's a must have cult lens.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: gipsy review date: October-05-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Kit Sony 75-300, KM AF 50 1.7, KM AF 50 3,5 MACRO
price paid:	120 Euro
positive:	Sharp, build, contrast, color, price
negative:	CA, AF
comment:	If you dont have it, just go and buy it. That's it.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: molasses review date: October-03-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SAL18-70mm f3.5-4.5, 50mm f1.7
price paid:	0 (gifted)
positive:	- Built like a tank - A classic
negative:	- Heavy - Large - Slow AF - Used price growing with reputation
comment:	I was given my beercan by my partners father who'd had it stuck in his top drawer unused for about 10 years. Before that it had spent most of its life in the desert and appears to have weathered quite a battering. I imagine whoever did the battering came off worse.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: samuel_k review date: September-12-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 75-300 4.5-5.6 Minolta 80-200 2.8
price paid:	100 € (used)
positive:	Tack sharp Constant f/4 Close focusing distance Internal zooming Surprisingly pleasant bokeh Built like a tank
negative:	Rotating front lens Slight CA wide open Slow AF.
comment:	An absolutely fantastic lens! Very sharp even wide open, with very nice bokeh. It's a pure pleasure to handle thanks to the extreme build quality and the smooth, well-dampened zoom ring. The color reproduction is just fantastic and it can serve as a poor man's macro lens thanks to the close focusing distance. On the downside, it has some CA issues when used wide open, and the AF is quite slow. AF tends to hunt a bit in dim conditions. I bought mine just to have something while I was saving for something better, but right now I am not sure if I ever want to give up my precious beercan. It's not perfect, but a real bargain with optical performance almost in G class.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Timbuctoo review date: September-03-06
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP