Sony AF 75-300 F4.5-5.6  reviews

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: MVKregg   review date: September-28-12  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

SAL-70300G, Tamron 70-200 F2.8

price paid:

kit package

positive:

(For the price): -Good bokeh & close focus -Reasonable IQ at lower focal lengths.
Easy to use, big grippy zoom ring. Relatively compact/discrete for FF and the FLs available. Pretty rugged for an inexpensive lens. Once it finds focus, it is reasonably sharp/accurate.

negative:

Slow, mediocre contrast and CA at longer FLs. Autofocus slow and hunts, especially in lower light.
Cheaply-made flimsy hood (required for good flare control). The plastic hood is easy to break, and a replacement is nearly $30US!

comment:

Got it as a package deal with my A100 years ago. Liked it enough that I kept it when I upgraded to FF. Have been surprised how often it is on my camera, and some of my favorite shots were taken over the years with this lens.

Great for outdoor candid shots and medium tele work, or for locations where you don't want your expensive glass to go. I also have an array of filters that I bought for other lenses with the same filter diameter, which has been very convenient: with a soft focus filter and good light, the lens works for senior/family portraits, etc. Out on the water, with a circular polarizing filter I have gotten shots friends with glass 10X the price haven't been able to get. The close focus allows it to function as a macro lens for outside flowers and bugs.

A good "jack of all trades" long lens.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: minoltista.ca   review date: September-10-12  

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 f/4
Tamron SP AF 70-200mm F2.8 Di LD IF Macro
Tamron AF 70-300 Di LD f/4-5,6 macro
Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 60-300mm f/3.8-5.4
Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 70-210mm f/3.5

price paid:

kit lens on APS-C

positive:

pretty sharp stopped down
good zoom range
small, light, discrete
low distortion
nice color et smooth bokeh
work well on FF

negative:

soft et huge CA wide open
front element turn when focusing

comment:

For its price, this lens is very good performer. Of course, the plastic construction does not inspire much confidence, but mechanically and optically, this lens is a good value for an amateur, who does not want to spend a fortune to have just a little better.

For good performance, forget the wide end. At this opening image is still soft, and CA are huge ... especially at 300mm. Close the diaphragm at least f8 - f11 and everything changes dramatically. Image is very sharp, contrasted, and CA decrease to a reasonable level, almost invisible. Between 200 and 300mm, I always use the tripod because without tripod, I've never been able to get a good picture.

The handling is easy because light weight and small size. Zoom is smooth and focus ring is easy to use. Hood is very useful and helps maintain a good contrast.

sharpness: 3 

color: 3 

build: 3 

distortion: 2 

flare control: 2 

user: alphafive7   review date: July-01-12  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

200 USD

positive:

Price
Weight
Filter size

negative:

Soft above 250
Seems to hunt too much

comment:

Bought it years ago for the a100, before I knew about the Mind of Minolta and the good glass they made. The lens is now parked along with the 18-70 kit lens.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Skoropada   review date: September-15-11  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

Kit lens

positive:

- Zoom range
- Cheap

negative:

- Sharpness
- Build quality

comment:

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 5 

user: balacau   review date: April-30-11  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 50-500mm (non OS version)
Sony 18-70mm DT (kit) zoom
Minolta 28-80mm

price paid:

£200 I think

positive:

Light-weight
Fairly compact size.
Effective lens hood.
Pretty cheap for filters (55mm)
It fits nicely with the 18-70mm kit zoom without any overlap.

negative:

Rubber grip is a dust magnet although easy to clean.
Doesn't always produce sharp images.
I'd love a wider end, 50mm maybe?

comment:

This was one of the two first lenses I ever bought for my a350. It has served me quite well although some situations have produced less than sharp pictures. This isn't always the fault of the camera/lens however.

Now, it lives on with the a580. The SAL75300 seems to manage with most weather situations that our UK climate will throw at it. The lens hood is not only effective at reducing flare, its also very good for protection against raindrops!

Although not an excellent match, I have paired this lens with my Kenko Teleplus 2x TC. Far easier to transport them both on foot than carrying a 500mm lens! IQ suffers though so you may want to watch out for that.

For the price, I suppose it was a decent buy. It fits nicely with the 18-70mm DT kit lens, giving a full range from 18-300mm without any overlap although I do curse the 75mm for not being wide enough at times! Its a keeper for my aps-c a580; I was surprised to read that its designed for Full Frame dSLR's!

sharpness: 2.5 

color: 3 

build: 2 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: edhoku   review date: March-28-11  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 70-210, 75-300, Sigma 70-300mm

positive:

Light, good for female photographers.

negative:

Very plastic...
The rubber grip get dirty easily
images sharpness un-impressive

comment:

Borrowed this lens from a old friend's daughter to shoot some images during a family outing. Very disappointed with the sharpness even that this is a Kit long Lens. Feel very plastic...

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: RedDrake   review date: March-28-11  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 50-500
Sigma 150-500
Minolta 70-210/4
Tokina 70-210 SD

price paid:

Part of kit

positive:

+ small and light
+ cheap

negative:

- CA is plentiful
- not really sharp at tele end
- front of barrel rotates during focus

comment:

So, I came across this lens by chance, got it in a kit with a used A500 and the regular 18-55 kit lens.
I've taken it for a test during the weekend on my A700 and I am quite satisfied with the results it produced.

AF speed is reasonable at the tele end and is very fast at the "wide" part of the zoom. Although once it starts hunting it can take 2-3 seconds to traverse the entire focus range.
For the record I've managed to get two birds fighting in mid flight at 280mm with an overcast sky (So not completely ideal).
As for sharpness, it's pretty ok around 70mm, but goes very bad after 200mm.
300mm and f/11 does not yield as much detail as the sigma 50-500@300mm does wide open! (although the Sigma costs about 5x as much and is expected to deliver that much more)
70-100mm does not need much stopping down, 100-200 about f/8-9 and f/9 and above for 200mm+ would be my suggestion.

Another problem is color fringing (aka CA), as it is pretty bad on anything that is high contrast. White birds against an overcast sky are a big no-no for example.

And of course there is an engineering mistake that was made by minolta I guess (this is a rebranded Minolta AF 75-300 F4.5-5.6 D I believe). When mounting the hood, the mounting mechanism is too stiff, and the barrel start to turn, which also turns the focus ring and the focus screw drive motor in the camera! I am very uneasy securing the hood on this lens when attached to my camera ...

Other than that, you get what you pay for.
A budget telephoto zoom that does more than enough for it's price.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Eric_D   review date: March-02-11  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 70 300 Di

positive:

Light
Affordable

negative:

Soft over 200mm
Slow

comment:

I sold my copy and kept the Tamron 70 300 Di. The Sony focuses faster than my Tamron But the Tamron starts at f4 and focuses closer. Both soft at 300mm.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Zony   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:

positive:

Sharp
Even tones

negative:

Heavy

comment:

I have been real happy with this lens. It is sharper and has more detail than it's price-point would suggest. Microcontrast
makes it a nice portrait lens at it's wide end on crop cams.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Jezebel_Jones   review date: October-12-10  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 75-300, Minolta 70-210 RS

price paid:

$195 au

positive:

Light, cheap, fast focusing, sharp, has Sony ADI

negative:

It has really bad bokeh, very unattractive and overpowering, a little soft at 300, but below 270 it is fine.

comment:

A good lens if you are shooting in a way that will not produce bokeh, the bokeh is so bad that it ruins shots.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 3 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: roo   review date: August-14-10  

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 Bigbeercan
-Minolta AF 100-300 Xi
-Tamron SP 300mm F5.6 Telemacro

price paid:

kit

positive:

-sharpness
-range
-lightweight

negative:

-CA!!!
-MF ring not very smooth

comment:

I have a mixed evaluation on this lens. First of all this is quite a sharp lens in my opinion. At 300mm and wide open this lens is much sharper than my 100-300 Xi and Tam SP 300mm and on par with or slightly sharper than my bigbeercan. On the other hand it suffers from quite severe CA especially when I take a bird or small object with the sky in the background. This CA seems to be the kind that is NOT correctable with software, so it must be the 'longitudinal' CA. bbc does not show CA almost at all in any situation. So am I going to sell this and keep the bbc? Probably not. This one weighs only 440g without caps or hood while bbc does 860g!!! In fact since I bought it I've been carrying this one almost all the time rather than bbc. CA does improve if not goes away when stopped down. Maybe I can live with this lens and in some occasions I will take my bbc with me until I get an ultimate telephoto lens. If only the CA problem is resolved this would be a killer lens and I would not look further in this class of lens.

So I can't understand why this lens is rated so low and Bigbeercan so high. The difference is actually minimal.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Amaceira   review date: June-27-10  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

- Tamron 70-200 f/2.8

price paid:

Kit

positive:

- Long zoom
- Good results for a entry level telephoto.
- Circular aperture blades
- Good bokeh!
- Works on Full Frame cameras!!!

negative:

- Quickly jumps to f/5.6
- Lack of a true macro feature
- Small manual focus ring
- Dust collecting rubber grip
- Front element rotates while focusing

comment:

This lens is a good performer, as an entry level telephoto lens. It's fairly well made, and takes reasonably sharp pictures.
This lens biggest handicap is it's speed. It jumps to f/5.6 at about 120mm
In low light is a no-go without a tripod... and focusing might give you a headache!
It is reasonably good from 75-250 if you stop it down to f/6.3 at the wide end & f/7.1 at the tele end but from 250-300 it is soft whatever aperature.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: Bill73   review date: June-14-10  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 70-300Macro
Sony CZ 16-80/f3.5-4.5
Sony 50/f1.4
Sony 18-55/F3.5-5.6SAM
Tamron 90mm/2.8 MACRO
Tamron 18-200/3.5-6.3
Sigma 28-200/3.8-5.6
SOny 18-70/3.5-5.6

price paid:

kit

positive:

Cheap!
Actually takes very decent (and dare I say it ... good) pictures.
55mm filter
Very sharp up to 200.

negative:

Hood is rubbish
CA can be bad - especially at long end if you don't stop down.
Auto focus can be terrible in limited circumstances.

comment:

I got this lens with my a200 and there's no way I would part with it! I know alot of folk on Dyxum like to rubbish this lens - for 80% of tele shots you're ever going to take this lens will do a good job. It's sharper at 200mm than either of Sony's 'budget' mid zoom options (the 50-200 range)! Yes the auto focus can be a shocker and the CA is pronounced in some situations. None of this detracts from what at the end of the day is a very decent lens. I also have the Tamron 70-300 Macro and I do use that lens more often (the psuedo macro function is awesome!) but I think there'll be a place in my kit bag for this lens for a long time to come yet ...

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: sora3   review date: June-07-10  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

With kit

positive:

Good starting lens to start and shoot with
Decent image once you hit within 75-150mm
Good grip for beginners to use with

negative:

Slow AF, especially if you're shooting in low light
Hunts a bit if you have large contrast in the subject
Not a good lens to use in fading light, early afternoon is probably the limit to use with
Very noisy
IQ starts to fade once you hit beyond 200mm, especially at 300mm

comment:

I initially start with this lens when I got the a200. It's a good lens to start off with. However, once you get over the basics, you'll probably want to ditch this lens and go higher. The lens doesn't allow a lot of growth after that, even more so with fast pace shots such as motorsports and the like.

I still keep this one as it has its purpose but definitely go for something better once you're over the beginner status.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Argote   review date: May-07-10  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

SAL1870DT
Minolta 70-210 f/3.5-4.5
Minolta 100-200 f/4.5

price paid:

~200 USD (Kit)

positive:

Good price
Nice reach
Non-photographers are impressed with it

negative:

Slow for indoors use
Ugly 'Bokeh'
"Soft" @ 300mm
Rotates on Focus
Hunts more than I'd like to
Strong CA near 300mm

comment:

I think that for the money this is a nice lens, it has very harsh bokeh though.
Having 300mm is very useful.
Hunts a bit in low light conditions.

sharpness: 4 

color: 3 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: fleptoeter   review date: February-19-10  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

sony 18-70
minolta 28-85
minolta 50 1.7

price paid:

Was in the kit

positive:

Nice range
Sharp enough

negative:

hate the hunting

comment:

I used it at the MotoGP, and i got some really good results, nice for sports. Above 200mm it's wise to use a tripod. It's a nice lens for me. I don't use it much, but I wouldn't want to miss it either.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: SvenJTD   review date: December-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:

Kit lens

positive:

Lightweight, good extension to the 18-70 kit lens, good range, ok sharpness

negative:

Slow AF, noisy

comment:

Pretty decent results considering it came with the camera and for that price.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 3 

build: 3 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: samjackson   review date: September-20-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Carl Zeiss - 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM
Sony - 70-200mm F2.8 G SSM
Rokinon - 85mm F1.4
Sony - 100mm F2.8 Macro
Sony - 18-70mm F3.5-5.6

price paid:

Kitlens

positive:

cheap
lightweight
300mm
sharp for a kitlens
ok bokeh

negative:

mf ring
af slow and noisy
CA
not sharp until f8
flaring in the sun

comment:

i like the range of this lens, once again its a kit lens so dont expect much, but its reasonably sharp.
af is crummy, but i actually did some photos of jetski racing with this lens with quite reasonable results! atleast better results than my old fuji s9500!

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 3 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: careyy   review date: September-17-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

kit 18-70, 55-200

positive:

good range

negative:

not sharp

comment:

55-200 have better sharpness and overalimage quality

sharpness: 2.5 

color: 4 

build: 2 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: nitrosyl   review date: September-15-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

- Minolta 70-200mm f/4 (Beercan)
- Minolta 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 APO
- Minolta 135mm f/2.8
- Sony 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 DT
- Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 SSM G

price paid:

part of kit

positive:

- cheap
- small & light
- full frame compatible
- circular aperture blades

negative:

- not sharp (esp. at 300mm)
- chromatic aberration
- mediocre build quality
- not flare-resistant

comment:

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: eugenephoto   review date: September-03-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 70-210

price paid:

92.00

positive:

Focal Range
Lens Hood

negative:

Slow Auto Focus
Fringe

comment:

The lens is great. I managed to pick one up at Circuit City before it went out of business. The lens is slow to auto focus. It's easier, quieter and usually faster to manually focus this lens. There is a considerable amount of fringe in images taken at 300mm. At 75mm the lens performs quite well. At 300mm you will need a tripod for most shots. This is a great lens, just keep in mind you will probably have to spend some time in the digital darkroom adjusting many different levels. Shoot in RAW when using this lens. IT WILL HELP!!!

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

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
Beercan
M135/2.8
Sigma 105Macro
M28-85
Vivitar Series1 105/2.5

price paid:

220 USD

positive:

Light

negative:

Not Sharp from 250-300
Slow

comment:

Bought this lens with my a350. It is reasonably good from 75-250 if you stop it down to f/6.3 at the wide end & f/7.1 at the tele end but from 250-300 it is soft whatever aperature. I ams elling this as i have a big berrcan on the way.

sharpness: 3 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: SChurchill   review date: August-13-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

18-70mm kit lens

price paid:

L176

positive:

Cheap
Light

negative:

Appalling CA
Slow AF

comment:

This was the first lens I bought for my A200 and must admit to being thoroughly disappointed with it.

Just after I got it I went to a local zoo to try it out. The purple fringing is horrific over 200mm. I have photos of black, white and purple Zebras. This is not just a faint purple fringe but deep halo that passes through purple to deep blue.

I have perservered with this lens due to limited funds and now shoot at a maximum of 200mm. At around 160mm I have found it to be very sharp.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: JeremyT   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:

SAL 55-200mm

price paid:

In kit (A200W)

positive:

- Cheap
- Light
- Good range
- Sharp < 200mm

negative:

- CA (fringing), very bad wide open at 300mm
- Not as sharp > 200mm
- MFD could be better
- Slow AF

comment:

A good yet underrated value zoom. Don't discount this lens due to the Dyxum score, which I imagine suffers simply due to it being a 'kit' lens and for being a 450mm equivalent which can be difficult to work with.

The lens does have some limitations. It's slow, already at f/5.6 by 120mm. It focuses accurately (albeit slowly), but if it misses it goes on an excruciatingly long hunting trip. The 1.5m MFD is disappointing.

Build seems fine, although the filter ring rotates on focus.

Up until about 200mm it's actually very sharp wide open, and I don't feel a need to stop down on my A200. It performs just as well as the much more highly rated SAL 55-200mm through that range.

Wide open near 300mm sharpness is reduced and it suffers from substantial CA in high contrast shots. If you shoot at F/8 it's sharp again, but the fringing is still a problem no matter how much you stop down, and that is clearly the biggest weakness of this lens.

Its second hand prices are quite nice, so if you're looking to get to 300mm on the cheap it's a great choice. On the other hand, if you don't need 200-300mm (or full frame), the more portable and faster 55-200mm may be a more practical option.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: teodesson   review date: June-25-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

- 18-70mm (kit lens)
- 55-200mm (kit lens)

price paid:

140 SGD (used)

positive:

- great range
- cheap

negative:

- slow AF and noise

comment:

This lens becomes my main tele-zoom lens for a period. AF quite slow, and sometimes I need to help with manual focus. AF also produces noisy sound. But overall I quite satisfied with the results. For high ISO (400+), this lens helps to produce nice color. Need to adjust to f8 and below to produce better sharpness. But, overall this lens passes my mark judge by its price.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: skyhook78   review date: May-26-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony Kit 18-70mm f3.5-5.6
Minolta 35-70mm f4
Minolta 50mm f1.7

price paid:

kit lens

positive:

Good zoom for kit (now only 200mm, I believe).
Decent sized hood (although plasticy and cheap)

negative:

Colour not great
AF can be very slow
Soft at far end

comment:

I don't have much to compare with this (beercan or big beercan would be the replacement for this), but this has been a reasonably good lens for me. Colour and image quality is not as good as the Minolta lenses (although this is probably to be expected), but I have taken some good outdoor portraits with this.

(For beginners - like me- note that zoomy end will probably require a tripod. I know from experience!)

sharpness: 3 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: araujo.emanuel   review date: April-12-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta AF 35-70 F3.5-4.5
Sony AF DT 16-105mm F3.5-5.6
Sony AF 18-70 F3.5-5.6
Sigma AF 90 F2.8 Macro
Minolta AF 28 F2.8

price paid:

$280

positive:

300mm,

negative:

color fringing, low light, not too sharp

comment:

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: andrewlamwc   review date: April-04-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony - AF 70-300 F4.5-5.6 G SSM
Sony - AF DT 55-200 F4-5.6
Sigma - AF 18-200 F3.5-6.3 DC

price paid:

110 USD (used)

positive:

+ Cheap

negative:

- Low resolution
- Slow and noise focusing

comment:

Acquired from 2nd hand market. Tried for 3 months but cannot reach my image quality standard. Then I sold it.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: diazmahendra   review date: March-14-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

160 USD (2nd)

positive:

Sharp in good light
cheap
good range
Not too fast AF
Showing moderately bokeh

negative:

Some CA

comment:

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: xinyang   review date: March-02-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

other telephoto

price paid:

as kit lens

positive:

nice zoom range

negative:

soft even at f11

comment:

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Wally79   review date: March-02-09  

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

price paid:

110.00 USD (new)

positive:

like the range
cheap

negative:

noisey and slow af

comment:

This lense took some great pictures of a couple job sites I worked at from the air. I really like this lens inside or out. It still suprises me on the quality vs. how much the lens cost.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 4 

user: jtmason99   review date: February-10-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

free w/ a300 and kit

positive:

good range
light

negative:

color fringing
slow AF

comment:

I got my first dSLR (a300) last week and this lens came with it (used). I like the range but have already grown frustrated with the fringing, especially when I crop photos. I recently took some shots of a red-tailed hawk and had to switch to MF because the AF couldn't decide whether to focus on the bird or branches, and so focused on neither.

I suppose this is a good lens for beginners to get used to the functions of a dSLR camera, but I am already looking forward to replacing it with a new G.

Paid 595 USD for a300, SAL-1870, SAL-75300, bag and two filters on ebay

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: RyanTheLion   review date: December-09-08  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

sony 70200G f2.8

price paid:

399 SGD

positive:

Good range
light weight

negative:

weak lens hood
color fringing
not sharp

comment:

not sharp all range wide open.
nothing much to compare with this kit lens

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: alphafreak   review date: December-09-08  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 28-300 DG

price paid:

Kit

positive:

Long Reach , Light , Quite Sharp in good light

negative:

searches in dim light

comment:

Hey who uses a 300mm zoom in dim light anyway except for Moon shooting...I feel lucky that my kit came w/this the newer kits only have the 200mm...I'm keeping it till I can afford one of those ridiculously expensive G's and CZ's

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 3 

build: 3 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 4 

user: crlowryjr   review date: November-06-08  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 100-300

positive:

+ great range
+ light
+ decent IQ

negative:

+ slow on my A100
+ muted colors
+ not very sharp

comment:

I used this lens for a little over a year on my A100. It was a decent lens...nothing stellar. The AF was slow, and in low light painfully so. When it was on my A700 it was fine. The image quality was pretty good, but nothing spectacular.

This is pretty much a middle of the road lens for somebody wanting the reach, but not wanting to spend the extra money on something better.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Rasmus Ostenfeld   review date: July-09-08  

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

price paid:

3200CZK (used)

positive:

- Fast AF
- Low price

negative:

- Some CA

comment:

I purchased this lens when I realized that my 18-70 kit-lens was not big enough for my needs. After browsing the web and the local stores I found this in a Prague store with 1 year guarantee.

The lens is fine for my beginner usage. Autofocus is fast and pictures very decent. Not extremely sharp at the 200-300mm level but good enough for the beginner.
It is a bit noisy which is not a problem to me (I actually kinda like to hear the machinery work) but might be an annoyance to some.

There is some CA, which would be the main reason for me to buy the new Sony 70-300mm if I had the money. But for a student budget like mine this is a very decent purchase. I am very happy with this lens.

sharpness: 4 

color: 3 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: maurits   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:

SAL1870

price paid:

kitlens

positive:

-zoom range
-better manual focus then the 18-70
-feels well built
-no noticable distortion

negative:

-aberration
-sharpness wide open and at the tele-end could be better

comment:

I rated 3 for colours because the colours are good in general, but getting a bit to the tele-end, shooting in abberation-prone situations (like trying to catch a squirrel through the leaves against a clear sky) will get you loads of aberration.

The lens is a nice starter tele and I really like the framing possibilities it gives you.

The wide end is remarkably sharp

I'll post the squirrel in 'examples'

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: carldan   review date: April-29-08  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 Macro

price paid:

400

positive:

light and cheap tele lens

negative:

not relly sharp on 300mm
steep up to f/10 to be relly sharp

comment:

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 5 

user: jilgiljongiljing   review date: April-23-08  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

140 (used)

positive:

Goes well with the kit
Excellent Hood
Reasonably fast
Seems well built

negative:

Macro is just an excuse, no good
More expensive compared to Sigma and Tamron equivalents
Rubber grip can accumulate dust very easily and is hard to clean

comment:

I got this lens used, and got a good deal on it as it was Like new, which is why I ended up with these. I was originally planning on getting the Sigma 70-300 APO.

At the retail price of around 230$ I think it is over-priced. Focus is fast and its not very noisy, but it jumps to f5.6 very quick. Low light is a no-no without a tripod and focusing might give you a headache.

Its pretty good in daylight however, image quality is good when subjects are well lit, albeit a tad soft, but not a big deal with PP. CA is noticeable but again, software correctable and not glaringly obvious.

Macro is useless, Tamron Di at around 50$ lesser has proper macro abilities. This is quite dissapointing. But the lens seems solidly built, rubber grip is very nice and it has a nice solid feel while rotating.

Overall, if you can find it for less than 200 bucks, its probably worth it.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: arja siebe de boer   review date: January-05-08  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

199 euro

positive:

cheap en good to start with

negative:

Somethimes to slow in focus so that i mis where i need it for

comment:

best of 2 lenses i have but still not the right one just looking on what best is for me

sharpness: 4 

color: 3 

build: 3 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

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:

Sigma 70-300 APO DG
Minolta 70-210 F4

price paid:

250

positive:

Compact.
55mm filter size.

negative:

Jumps to slowest aperature speed quickly.
Average entry level telephoto performer.
Lack of a true macro feature.
Repackage old design.
Small manual focus ring.
Dust collecting rubber grip.
Front element rotates while focusing.

comment:

This lens is an average performer, as an entry level telephoto lens. It's fairly well made, and takes reasonably sharp pictures. It's biggest handicap is it's speed. It jumps to it's slowest aperature speed of F5.6 by about 120mm, compared to a Sigma 70-210 APO DG, which reaches F5.6 at 220mm, in the same price range. It's minimum focusing distance is called a macro, which it is not. It's really it's closest focusing distance magnification 1/4, compare to Sigma and Tamron's macro 1/2 magnication in the same zoom range.
Has Sony's dust collecting rubber grip design, inferior to other manufacturers rubber lens grips. Difficult to use a polarizer, since front element rotates while focusing. I returned this poor performer, and went with the Sigma 70-300 APO DG for the same price and longer warranty and free lens pouch.

sharpness: 4 

color: 3 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Silver   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:

positive:

Cheap starter lens

negative:

Chromatic Abberations
Slow hunting focus
Horrible plastic focus ring

comment:

Got it as the 2nd kitlens with the camera, have only used it a few times.. mostly since its got slow focus, and i feel its usually a bit too short for bird photos.. it also got chromatic abberations and the manuall focus ring feel terribly plastic and unprecise..

Since im new to SLR I cant really compare this lens to much right now..

Hopefully the new G lens in this range will deliver better iq and overall build and feel of the lens.. but its sometime before that one is relesed.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: geardown   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:

70-210 f1:4 beercan, various point and shoot cameras

price paid:

came with A100 kit

positive:

Lightweight, reasonably fast, takes good shots in good light

negative:

Not particularly sharp at 300mm

comment:

This lens provides a very good introduction to SLR telephoto photography for someone moving up from Point and Shoot. While it doesn't have the sharpness or low light performance of some of the high priced SLR lenses, it has enough quality to blow you away if you are used to a Point and Shoot superzoom camera.

It even stacks up quite respectably against a 70-210 beercan, having as it does an extra 90mm of zoom. If you're into distance photography, such as birds or aircraft, that 90mm can be a shotmaker. Having said that, I find that the beercan spends more time on my camera now, unless I know I am going to need the extra focal length.

This lens won't satisfy a pro, but then it's not targeted - or priced - at a pro. It is targeted at a first time SLR user. If you are new to SLR photography and get the opportunity to pick this up for an extra $100 or so in a kit, do it.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Kjaro   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:

Tamron 90/2.8
Tamron 17-50/2.8

price paid:

kit

positive:

lightweght
wide rubberized zoom ring
useful zoom range

negative:

hard to MF - too dark
hard to MF- too thin focus ring
very dark
much CA
slow AF speed
AF hunts
not sharp

comment:

I got it with the kit lens and I had no chance or willing to use it often. I used it only 4-5 times, and got strange shots with uncontrollable CA, slow focus and bleached colours. So now it's being kept in a drawer for half a year by now, and I think that it will continue there. This lens is a keeper - for the upcoming years until I'd need and buy 70-200/2.8 or I'll have an urgent need in 300 mm (which I really doubt). Nevertheless, this lens gave me as a novice a valuable experience of long telephoto range.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: nateshow   review date: July-19-07  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

250

positive:

Works well for surf/action.

negative:

Sometimes misses focus.

comment:

I like this lens as a good starter tele zoom. I look forward to using something bigger and better!

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: David   review date: July-04-07  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta Maxxum 100-300 AF f4.5-5.6

price paid:

215 USD

positive:

Light weight.
Lens does not rotate during focusing or zooming.
Rubberized grip

negative:

Focus tends to hunt under some conditions.

comment:

Needed another lens for the SONY A100 since my Maxxum zoom is usually being used with a film camera and that model is now discontinued. The Maxxum has power zoom so is much faster at zooming than the Sony. For digital use,the SONY is slightly sharper at 300 mm f 5.6. Both have macro capability. Weights are quite similar. The AF lens does even more 'hunting' possibly because of the motorized systems. Since my principal zoom is a 28-75 Minolta f 2.8, the AF lens leaves a gap between 75 and 100 mm (not a major problem).

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Pavel   review date: May-13-07  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

sal 1875
sal 500
tamron 90 macro
Sigma-15 F2.8 EX DG
Sigma-20 F1.8 ex dg df rf
Minilta AF 300 F4 HS APO G
Minolta AF 200 F2,8 HS APO G

price paid:

kit lans

positive:

Price
Light for a tele

negative:

Can produce terrible CA at the end of tele when wide open some test pictures at www.fotolakocinky.estranky.cz/fotoalbum/lens-test
exstends a lot
front part turns when focusing

comment:

This lens can produce some nice pictures best between 75-200
and f/14 to f/22 from f/8 and below CA very visible.
When shooting macro the sharpness is good but bokeh is not nice.I like the MFD 1500mm but I wish it would be 1:1
Some pictures at http://www.fotolakocinky.estranky.cz/fotoalbum/zviratka

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Dr. Harout   review date: April-30-07  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 70-210/3.5-4.5

price paid:

280 USD (new)

positive:

Quite a good lens, with good renderings in color, sharpness and average in bokeh.
Excellent hood.

negative:

5.6 is a bit annoying to shoot handheld in average light and with ISO 100.
Extends a lot towards the bigger tele side.

comment:

Compared to Minolta 70-210/3.5-4.5 (the copy that I own), Sony has a great advantage in terms of picture quality. Color aberration is way less than Minolta's.
The plastic build somehow forces you to take more care.
Overall, a good lens, but the way I tested, IMHO, the owner should adjust picture settings for Vivid, and +1 step in contrast (+1 step for saturation would be also acceptable). Although those steps are possible with postprocessing.
If you need such a zoom and a G lens is not for your pocket, I would definitely recommend this one.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: Turerkan   review date: March-22-07  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

negative:

comment:

I just tried this lens in the shop.. the focusing ring was stiff towards the 300mm end, focusing speed was terrible.. The lens didnt feel and substantial in my hands.

Since i dont have experience in some of the areas like image quality, i just copy the average score, except the build field.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: Thatkatmat   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:

Beercan
Tamron 28-200

price paid:

kit

positive:

Light
Sharp in low light
Nice for indoor sports
Fast AF
Nice color

negative:

(CA)Purple fringing in heavy light

comment:

Got it with the kit. After using the Beercan and the Tamron I would say.... until I get a 2.8.....this is a keeper. Got some good shots at an indoor basketball game. So for me, keep this for indoor zoom needs, keep my Beercan and Big Beercan (Which I just bought!!)for outdoor zooms. After doing some tests in my house the Sony proved to be MUCH sharper indoors in low light than my Beercan

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Dune   review date: January-17-07  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Not had anything in this range previously

price paid:

with camera

positive:

Good sharpness and colour, better built than the 18-70 kit lens and has a metal mount. Good value for money.

negative:

CA shooting into the light wide open (i.e. very bight highlights at full zoom)

comment:

I didn't know what to get, this or the Sigma 75-300 APO but the kit price worked out cheaper so I went with it. I am pleased I did so far. The zoom action is stiff enough not to creep and it focuses quickly. The results are very pleasing.

As with many shots on a digital SLR, I have found a bit of USM works wonders but don't let that make you think this lens is soft as the detail is there.

The results mean I am not looking to upgrade to a more expensive lens which is good news as I could not really justify it given this focal length range is not what I normally shoot (but I can see that changing now I have the lens).

sharpness: 3 

color: 3 

build: 3 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: rasfo   review date: January-12-07  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

kit lens

positive:

Cheap

negative:

Slow AF, bit noisy

comment:

I got this lens with Alpha as kit lens.I do not need this lens because of quality but for telezoom training is OK. Sometimes is problem with AF on tele range

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Vanilla_Kisses   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:

Minolta 70-210 F/4
Minolta 70-210 F/3.5-4.5

price paid:

155

positive:

Great Color.
Doesn't seem to ;hunt; in low light.
Fast Focus.
Very Light, for it's size.
Zoom to 300.
Rubber grip is great, no slipping on this one!

negative:

so far, none

comment:

I got this lens, to have something a bit longer than my 'beercan'.. I'm glad I did.
I took about 40 indoor pics, all turned out great, Great color, clarity, focus.
I have not tried any macro shots with this lens, But I fully intend to.
The lens is really light, comapared to my beercan, and surprizingly, well built, doesn't feel cheap and flimsy to me, like some other 'new, light' lenses feel.
Worked extreemly well, getting a few portrait shots of my nieces from quite a distance away.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 3 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: nabreu   review date: September-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:

With Camera

positive:

Long zoom
fast focusing (but see notes below)
not too heavy for a tele

negative:

Soft
Hunt´s at 300 mm
Sometimes poor image quality at 300 mm
not well built

comment:

I bought this lense as kit lense.
As the 18-70 this lense is not that bad, but dosen´t give the best of the camera.
It´s a bit soft, it focus fast and the image quality is not bad, but i really don´t like it very much after 200 mm
It tend´s to hunt a bit and ocasionally the pictures with poor quality. It should have a macro button because i think that´s why it hunt´s at 300 mm since it sometimes goes through all focusing range.