Minolta  AF 24-105 F3.5-4.5 D  reviews

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: IkengaDawn   review date: December-04-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sony DT 18-200mm

price paid:

Came with Maxxum 7

positive:

Build,size,zoom range, aperture range, sharpness

negative:

none I could see

comment:

I got this nifty very compact lens as part of a Maxxum 7 + VG deal for $250 or so. I love the lens as a general walk about lens on the Maxxum 7 and also on my Sony Alpha A700.

I just picked up a Minolta 28-135mm lens and will compare the two to see which is sharper. In any case, the 24-105mm wins for me because of its very small size and light weight.

I updates some scores from 4 to five given the cost/benefit ratio of this little gem.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Jojakim   review date: November-10-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

- Tamron 17-50/2.8
- Sigma 28-70/2.8 (old)
- 28-135/4-4.5
- Nasty sharp macro's from Minolta

price paid:

150 EUR(2nd hand)

positive:

- Well build
- Quite sharp
- Compact
- Good rings & materials
- Seems to handle distortion well
- Fast and rather silent focus

negative:

- Some fringing
- Vignetting
- It's a compromise lens

comment:

I bought this lens as a allround compromise lens for everyday shooting, maybe a wedding or some architecture.

I like the build quality which is better than Tamron and Sigma. It's not a tank like some classic Minolta's but surely it feels well made, also the hood.

I use macro's for reproductions so I don't care it's not perfect. It surely is better than my old Sigma 28-70/2.8 in terms of sharpness. Stopped down it becomes a pretty sharp lens from edge to edge.

I'd recommend this lens for everybody that looks for a versatile lens for general shooting. It's a modern lens and fits me better than the legendary locomotive 28-135/4-4.5, which I consider outdated in terms of focus and distortion.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: odmanca   review date: August-12-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 XR Di
Minolta 28-135mm
Minolta 35-70mm F4
Minolta 28-85mm F3.5-4.5
Minolta 100mm Macro
Tamron 90mm AF Macro

price paid:

200 USD (used)

positive:

- Decent Range
- Sharp
- Light Weight
- ADI

negative:

- Slightly soft corners at wide open
- Stiff Zoom Ring

comment:

I bought this lens to be used as my walk-around/travel lens for the A700. The Tamron 17-50 has served me nicely for over 2 years but occasionally, in very dusty environment and on strenuous hikes, I wish it had a slightly longer reach, so I didn't have to change to or even carry the Sony 70-300 G SSM (before the purchase of the G it was the Big Beercan). Prior to the purchase of this lens I also considered the K/M 28-135mm for its legendary sharpness but decided the 28mm on an APS-C camera is not wide enough, and that the minimum focus distance of 5 ft. on the 28-135mm is yet another major disadvantage. So I bid on an auction on eBay and won my copy of the 24-105mm.

This lens is not as sharp as some of the good primes such as Minolta 100mm Macro or the Tamron 90mm AF Macro, even the Tamron 17-50mm produces slightly sharper images than this lens, but this lens is still very sharp for a zoom lens. The light weight is great for long hikes. And don't be fooled by the lack of macro mode, its short minimum focus distance of less than 2 ft. (at the focal length of 105mm) makes up for that and renders this lens very usable for close-up shots of flowers and other small subjects.

I am very surprised by the comments about severe CA in other reviews, since my copy exhibits little flare and CA. I have deliberately shot images in high contrast lighting situations in the hope to observe how severe the CA was, but couldn't find any worth mentioning. However, I must admit that my copy came with a Heliopan SH-PMC UV filter (currently selling for $80+ new at B&H), which may have been a factor and stopping down a bit definitely helps.

Overall this lens is an exceptional value for its performance and zoom range.

Edit 8/30/09: I've used this lens for over 6 months now. After reviewing recent (my own) test results on charts and that from real-life images, I changed the rating from a 4.5 to a 5 on sharpness. As stated above, it's not as sharp as the primes such as Tamron 90, but upon closer examination it's just as sharp as the Tamron 17-50, and with better micro-contrast than the Minolta 28-135 (recently acquired a used copy in mint condition); considering its focal range and price of $200 I think it deserves a 5.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: gdkalyanapu   review date: July-07-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 28- 135 f4-4.5, Sony alpha 18-70 DT, Minolta 35-70 f4, Minolta 70-210 f4, minolta 100-300 f4.5-5.6

price paid:

265USD

positive:

Light weight, ADI, durable and nice build, decent range, Sharp.

negative:

soft at wide end, colors not so great, CA, Flare,

comment:

I heard a lot of good reviews about this lens so went ahead to get this one. This lens gave me disappointing results. The chromatic aberration was so high that i did not even care to use it again in bright lighting conditions. Overall, i would say this is a decent lens with decent range with not so bad color reproduction. disappointment comes when you shoot in bright lighting conditions with the flare and CA

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: andrewlamwc   review date: June-16-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sony/Carl Zeiss - Vario-Sonnar T* DT 16-80 F3.5-4.5
Sony - AF DT 16-105 F3.5-5.6
Sony - AF DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6
Minolta - AF 35-105 F3.5-4.5 N

price paid:

230 USD (Used)

positive:

+ Light weight
+ Compact
+ Fast focusing

negative:

- Not wide for APC-S
- Range
- Not so good picture quality

comment:

Intend to keep it for full frame in future. But noted that it shows severe distortion, CA, vignetting and loss outer field sharpness in many reviews. In addition, having acquired a 16-105, it got sold.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: OisinP   review date: June-02-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

35-70 f4

price paid:

130 gbp

positive:

Good one lens solution
Good sharpness for a zoom
Neutral colour

negative:

Occasional flare

comment:

Great general purpose lens - effective 36mm on the 5D is a bit limiting but it is a quality lens that can be picked up for a steal second hand.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 4 

user: minoltaclubuk   review date: May-17-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 RS
Sony SAL 24-105mm f/3.5-4.5
Minolta 35-200mm f/4.5-5.6 xi
Minolta 28-85mm AF f/3.5-4.5
Minolta 24-85mm RS f/3.5-4.5
Minolta 35-105mm AF (original)
Sigma 28-105mm UCII f/3.5-5.6
KM 28-75mm f/2.8 D
Minolta 35-70mm f/4 (original)
Minolta 35-80mm f/3.5-5.6
Minolta 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6
KM 28-100mm f/3.5 -5.6 D

price paid:

49.50 GBP (new)

positive:

It's a solidly made compact lens which performed perfectly on APS-C, very sharp centrally, great colour

negative:

On full frame, it shows severe distortion, CA, vignetting and loss of wide aperture outer field sharpness - it's almost unusable on the A900, which is why it got sold

comment:

My 24-105mm only cost £49.50 new after the KM meltdown clearances. It was my main lens on the D7D then A100, until the 16-80mm CZ appeared - even after that, I found the range of the 24-105 a better match for my 11-18mm and 100-300mm APO D with the A700, and used it for travel. I had real hopes it would become my standard zoom for the A900, but even the briefest first tests proved it was just unsuitable for professional full frame use. I tried a whole bunch of older wide to tele zooms before discovering the 28-105mm RS - which has none of the faults of the 24-105mm. Of the other lenses bought/tried/sold, only the 28-75mm and Sigma 28-105mm remain in my kit. The 28-75mm is a superior lens when range is not needed. The Sigma lives in the studio attached to a D7D and is very happy at f/14 shooting my product pix.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: NIKO   review date: May-16-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sigma 24-135 f2.8-4.5

positive:

Small and durable build, seems to be plenty sharp particularly stopped down one stop, bokeh, no zoom creep, zoom and focus rings nice and tight, but relatively dampened well.

negative:

Not particularly sharp when wide open, focus ring rather stiff thanks to clutch mechanism (see remarks below)

comment:

Some previous reviews claim the build quality is not good. I beg to differ. The build of this lens is excellent. Sure, the external body is made of polycarbonate, but it is durable enough and the inside of the lens obviously has plenty of metal (and glass) due to its weight. Optical quality is also to par. On my A700 & Maxxum 5D I have gotten some great pictures. Vignetting isn't really an issue with an APS-C sensor. I can't say for a full frame camera. The zoom ring has no creep and it feels good. The focus ring is a bit stiff, but it does have a clutch mechanism to prevent it from rotating when in AF mode. This accounts for the added stiffness.

I would definitely recommend this lens or its new Sony variant if you are looking for a decent range on APS-C or Full Frame cameras. However, I feel that my Sigma 24-135 f2.8-4.5 (that I don't own anymore) was a bit better in the sharpness department; particularly wide open. If Sigma was to release that lens again as a "DG" lens maybe even an "EX" designation with HSM I would probably buy it.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Penphoe   review date: May-03-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sony 18-70 kit
Minolta 50mm 1.7

price paid:

$200USD

positive:

Great zoom range
Small and compact when collapsed.
Pretty fast focus. Fairly sharp when stopped down.

negative:

chromatic aberrations on high-contrast subjects can rear its ugly head.
Soft when wide open

comment:

Small, compact, versatile - perfect for my main walk-about lens. The zoom and focus rings are well dampened. My focus ring has a little bit of play in it, perhaps due to the auto-clutch mechanism?

It's main downfall is chromatic aberration on high contrast subjects. I shot some birds of prey at the Vancouver aquarium. With the dark coloured hawk against the bright blue sky, you could see the blue fringing around the bird. Same with the bald eagle's white head against darker backgrounds.

Overall, I find it a good walk-about and vacation lens

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: tnman   review date: February-05-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

price paid:

275 US

positive:

This lense is very sharp, built tough, and covers a nice range

negative:

minor softness in extreme corners at 24mm

comment:

I have been very pleased with this lens on my FF camera. It seems to be very sharp, and covers the range I use a great deal. I think the lense is overlooked by too many folks, who if they tried it.....they would love it.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: tnman   review date: February-05-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

positive:

This lense is very sharp, built tough, and covers a nice range

negative:

minor softness in extreme corners at 24mm

comment:

I have been very pleased with this lens on my FF camera. It seems to be very sharp, and covers the range I use a great deal. I think the lense is overlooked by too many folks, who it they tried it.....they would love it.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: DonSergio   review date: January-16-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

SAL 24-105
beercan
16-80za
24-70za
and price from range (24,35, 50, 85, 100)

price paid:

230 used

positive:

Light weight
Compact
Very fast focusing

negative:

Not sharp wide open

comment:

I used this lens for half of year. Basicaly as travel zoom.
On APS-C cameras this lens does no have wide angle, but as travle zoom it covers 90% my shots in good conditions. With 50/1.4 this lens gets ultimate light kit, that covers practically all my everyday situations.
I use this lens basically stop down for sharpness and get some portrets 4.5@105. 16-80 have better colors, contrast, signifintly more sharper wide open (at 35-80).

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Dynaton-DK   review date: December-04-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta AF24-85RS F3.5-4.5
Minolta AF28-85 Macro F3.5-4.5
Minolta AF28-135 F4-4.5
Sigma AF18-200 DC F3.5-6.3
Sigma AF17-70 DC F2.8-4.5
Cosina AF28-105 F2.8-3.8

positive:

Zoom range acceptable on APS-C
ADI compatible
Build quality
Autofocus speed

negative:

Too expensive

comment:

Comparing this lens with modern super zoom's such as Sigma AF17-70DC and Sigma AF18-200DC, this older design performs on par with these in regard to sharpness and has resonable zoom-range also on APS-C.

Another advantage is ADI compatibility, and I have never had any misfires with this lens as e.g. has happened on a few occasions with the (ADI-compatible) Sigma AF17-70DC.

I think the best thing about this lens is that it is ready for use on a FF camera, but the lens is overrated in general and too expensive (as new Sony branded lens, but reasonable when bought used). Well, it's a good performer, but it's not anywhere near the famous Minolta AF28-135 in image quality. The Minolta AF28-135 on the other hand is not so wide on APS-C as the AF24-105D.

I bought my Minolta AF24-105D to replace a Minolta AF24-85RS, and they are very similar in (good) performance - with this one having the advantage of being ADI compatible.

A thing that is to be said is that color and bohek is nicer on the Minolta AF24-xxx lenses compared to the modern Sigma super-zoom's, but on a daily basis I still prefer to use my Sigma AF18-200 as carry-around lens (due to it's range).
For high-quality pictures the Sigma AF28-135 is unbeatable, so this leaves the Minolta AF24-105D in an odd situation where it is not used very much in real life.

However, the Minolta AF24-105D is a keeper - as I hope to use it as an inexpensive kind of kit-lens for a FF camera some day in the future.

Should you buy one (or another Minolta AF24-xxx lens for that matter)? Yes, if you want an upgrade to the kit-lens and a lens that may have future potential (FF) - but note that modern DC super-zoom's are on par with this in most aspects (apart from FF capability and color). So buy it when you find a used one at a reasonable price, but don't buy a new Sony branded (as it's too expensive).

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: karchon   review date: October-13-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Min 28-85mm
Min 35-105mm Macro
SAL 18-70mm

price paid:

225 USD (MINT)

positive:

- The range is perfect for walkaround
- Excellent sharpness
- Fast focus
- nice weight (not too light, not heavy)

negative:

- CA with high contrast/day light when wide open.

comment:

I bought this lens as a true replacement to my Kit lens and have used it for 7 months now. I feel the lens can be appropriately reviewed. The 24-105 gives me the perfect balance of sharpness, color ,and range as a permanent attachment to one of my Alphas. It is EXTREMELY fast on my a300 and great in all varieties of lighting. Truly a gem. On my a100, its is ever so slightly slower to focus, but still great.

Comparing it to Other Lenses:

I tried to use the 35-105, 28-85, 35-70 as replacements to the kit lens but all of them had drawbacks i couldn't take after a while.

The 35-105 had a horrible min focus despite its very impressive colors/sharpness/build. The 24-105 doesn't beat it in color, but sharpness is on par and is wider with a closer focus range.

The 28-85 gets eaten alive by this lens from my tests at different distances and different times of the day. If you love your 28-85, you'd be amazed even more by this lens. The 24-105 sharper throughout the entire range/aperture and extends both ends of the range. I saw no difference in color reproduction.

Problems:

The 24-105 has CA problems wide open. But it rarely comes up because the only time I'd use this wide is in low lighting. CA only comes up during bright day shots.

It has been said there may be some play in the focus. Mine is absolutely fine as it doesn't go past infinity and has no wiggle. I guess it depends on your luck.

Finally, color is rather neutral, and not as bold and contrasty as the 35-105mm or the old minolta primes. This isnt a bad thing neccesarily. The colors are still excellent (better than 3rd party lens color production) but not quite perfect as the classics or G lenses.

BOTTOM LINE:

This is a GREAT replacement and is a hidden gem IMO for APS-C sensors. It has a GREAT walkaround length, is very sharp at center throughout zoom range, good colors, great weight, and has a good feel all around. BUT its drawback are CA (when wide and bright) & soft edges at wide aperture.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: dczitell   review date: September-17-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

18-70 DT

price paid:

249 (USD) used

positive:

range is great
sharpness is good for zoom range

negative:

CA is terrible on this lens
not very fast

comment:

i like this lens as a general walk around lens - 24mm is very wide on film and acceptable wideness on aps-C. reach is good too. compact size makes this a very easy lens to travel with. even though i wrote not very fast as a con the f4 minimum extends well past where you would expect. a great deal.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: jakubh70   review date: September-07-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sigma 24-135

price paid:

160GBP (used)

positive:

Quite sharp, especially at wide to normal angle. Focus ring not rotating in af mode. Range quite nice (APS-C) or even very nice (film camera).

negative:

Build could be better

comment:

I've bought this lens second hand together with Sigma 24-135, to achieve good quality lens for street pictures, usable both on APS-C and Minolta film camera. After few days shooting with both lenses I decided to keep Sigma rather than Minolta. Lenses are similar in range and picture quality (Sigma is better at longer focal length, while Minolta seems to be a bit sharper at the widest angle). Sigma is much bigger and heavier lens and its good built quality is what I like as well as 2/3 EV better speed in 24-50 mm range. Minolta seems to me too delicate for everyday photography.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: janek   review date: August-20-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

price paid:

250 USD (new)

positive:

good range
quick focus on a700
colors
sharp
very portable
great price

negative:

zoom doesn't work very smooth
hood can be hard to put on

comment:

I was surprised to find this lens brand new at my local camera shop. I am very happy with it. It's a great walkaround/travel lens. It's pretty sharp, especially above f4.5. The focus speed is quick on the a700. I have had problems with the plastic hood, it sometimes is very hard to put on. I believe this is because it's plastic and it warps into an oval shape when you try to screw it on the lens. Also the zoom isn't as smooth as my other lenses. But it's tolerable. All in all, it's an unbelievable lens if you can find it at this price. I was told this lens was originally $500 USD.

sharpness: 3,5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Spirit36   review date: August-01-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tamron 24-135
Sony DT 18-70

price paid:

140£

positive:

A quite fast autofocus
Light and small

negative:

A stif zoom ring
The zoom ring is to close to the flash.

comment:

It is a fine lense, but I will probably sell it and keep the Tamron 24-135.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: Alan_S   review date: June-07-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 50/1.7
Minolta 28-85 AF Macro
Minolta 70-210 /4.0 Beercan

price paid:

235 USD (used - KEH)

positive:

tack-sharp throughout focal range
Nice range - great alternative to the Sony kit lens

negative:

None so far! Would give it "all 5s" but I cannot say the build is quite up to the heavy metal beercan

comment:

Have only had it for a couple of days but am so far totally impressed. Visually, my first impression out of the box, the lens was stunning -- seeing that relatively HUGE 62mm diameter front glass. From there it only got better!

Using it with the Sony a700 body (purchased a couple of months ago), I had initially bought the older Minota 28-85 as a "kit lens alternative" and was really disappointed with THAT lens (CA was unacceptably pronounced w/the 28-85, especially at widest zoom/aperature) -- so, upon arrival, I immediately tested THIS lens for that problem and am happy to say that CA is practically non-existant, even at the extremes of focal length and aperature! ... Am totally impressed with the sharpness throughout the zoom range, even wide open ... And the extra range (over the 28-85 makes) it a great walkabout lens.

On the purchase, I spent some time shopping eBay, then finally ordered from KEH.com (EX+ rated lens w/caps & hood) for $235 USD. Two-day air shipment within the US brought it to $249 total. I highly recommend this retailer. The lens is in absolutely flawless condition, has 60-day return warranty, and arrived as promised in 2 days! Much better than an eBay gamble.

With the extra reach of this lens and the much improved IQ/CA issue (over the 28-85) I will be using the beercan less. Love my beercan, but have CA issues with it unless stopped down.

Bottom line, if you're looking for a relatively inexpensive QUALITY alternative to the plastic kit lens with a new Sony Alpha, this is really a VERY nice option to consider. IMHO, the IQ and sharpness equals that of the 50mm 1.7 prime, with smoother bokeh.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: MartinM   review date: April-07-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sony DT 18-70 (Kit)
Sony DT 18-250mm
Minolta 75-300mm (D)

price paid:

320 CHF

positive:

- AF fast
- Good at low light
- D Lense
- small size

negative:

- Zoom ring
- Focus ring

comment:

I think this lense is underrated. The lense has a fast auto focus and it delivers excellent IQ. I have done approx. 1500 fotos in the past two month since i own an Alpha and this lense. I haven't noticed to much weakness.

I have done tests on all lenses at 24mm / 50mm / 70mm, indoors with a test sheet. Focus and colot test. the IQ was truly excellent.

I am able too make candle light shots, handheld with my Alpha 100 and Alpha 200, at ISO 400. I am unable to do it with the SAL-18250

The focus ring is some movement. I don't know if this is only mine or if it is every 24-105 (D).

I use the fotos to make printout on 9x13, 10x15 and DIN A4 format, as well as watch them on screen.

I am keeping the lense for now although i have the SAL-18250 which has a better range.

sharpness: 4 

color: 3 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: jbtwin   review date: February-13-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

price paid:

275.00 USD

positive:

COMPACT , SHARP ALL AROUND A GREAT WALK AROUND LENSE. FAST FOCUS ON BOTH 7D AND A-700

negative:

ALITTLE SLOW , COLORS SLIGHTLY MUTED

comment:

This lense stay on my camera most of the thime it is a pleasure to use. A little solw but sharp a little distortion.

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: ricardovaste   review date: January-25-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

50/1.7
sig 15-30
min 28-80
35-70/4

positive:

+Very sharp
+Quick AF
+Light
+Compact

negative:

+Bokeh can be plain ugly at ties
+Had issues with focus at 24mm, on the Dynax 7
+Focus ring not firmly set (movement w/o actually changing focus)

comment:

Lovely lens to use, was perfectly matched with my Dynax 7 or 5. Didnt fancy it too much on APS-C, though i feel i rushed the decision in selling it and probably should have held onto it, its a very sharp lens. Stopped down to f/8~f/11 its excellent, will outresolve the sensors we have at the moment (12MP). Simply awesome on film for range and sharpness. It did flare but it was always well controlled... 'pretty flare' if you will ;). Focus quick and locked on well, apart from at 24mm at times. Bokeh could be very odd/harsh, circular aperture isnt going to help you there. Not minolta colours, but still quite good, with a nice contrast too. Sharp wide open.

And of course, as it a modern lens, you get all the nice touches that really make you love it (!). Non rotating front element, non rotating focus ring, D (ADI FLASH) lens, focus distance scale.

Team this up with a Sig 10-20 and i think you have an amazing set. Dont hesitate to get one if you come across it.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Grubeater   review date: November-26-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

KM 17-35/2.8-4, M 24/2.8.

price paid:

200 euro (used)

positive:

Non-rotating front element, range, size.

negative:

Not constant F/4.

comment:

This would be the ideal walkaround lens on full frame, lacks a bit on the wide side on crop bodies.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: NM Guy   review date: October-06-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 28-135
Tamron 35-105
Minolta 35/2
Minolta 50/1.7
Minolta 85/1.4

price paid:

$225 new

positive:

Light, small
Good minimum focus length
Good walk around range

negative:

Not the sharpest

comment:

This is the walk around lens generally on my wife's camera. It is generally a pretty good performer, particularly for the price. There are a lot of comments listed here that identify color, CA, sharpness limitation and more that I'm sure are valid in the type of shooting the users are doing. I've seen posts of most of the problems they have described. On the other hand, I've been consistently surprised by the photos my wife brings home with this lens. I know I've watched her take photos that I thought would have CA or not capture sufficient detail, then just to have to rethink my opinion of the lens.

The sharpness and color are sometimes a notch off of what our other lenses can capture but for the price it performs very well.

The lens is small and light enough that you can almost always bring it with you and not have your back pay a penalty.

I use the Minolta 28-135 lens which has a dismal minimum focus length. That leads to the comment in the Positive Comments section above about its focus length. She is usually good enough to share the lens when things get close.

In summary, the lens does have its short comings, but for the cost and the way we use it, it is a very capable performer.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Dinostrich   review date: July-26-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

28-80 3.5/5.6 D
35-70 ( Macro ) 4
70-210 f4 beercan
75-300 4.5/5.6 D

price paid:

£93.02

positive:

Good range for everyday use
Sharp through most of range
Colour at usual quality
Flare not an issue

negative:

Build quality questionable
Hood very fiddly
Some distortion
Some vignetting

comment:

The build quality is not up to the standard one usually gets from Minolta. The lens hood is a real p.i.t.a to fit/remove/reverse quickly & the location markers are so small as to be indistinct. I take great care using this lens as I feel certain that it will get "barrel wobble" as it ages.
There is some distortion at and around 24mm but that is par for the course when this wide ( better than most ? ) so not to be knocked on this score. There is also the possibilty of vignetting when used wide, especially with a circular polariser on but again par for the course( am looking for a recessed Minolta version ) and never stack filters on it - took a couple of shots to see and did not like what I saw.
Not had a problem with flare as far as I can see.
This may all sound a bit negative but for what it is - a walk around everyday lens with good range - it is a very useful and worthwhile lens which will do a good job for that purpose.
If your camera supports the D ( ADI ) function it makes the use of flash a doddle and is highly beneficial for indoor use when shooting "on the quick".

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: artuk   review date: July-15-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sigma 24-70 f2.8 EX
Minolta 24-85 f3.5-4.5

positive:

Very good sharpness
Good range (full frame)
Compact

negative:

Nothing specific

comment:

Origianlly launched at around the same time as the Dynax 7 film camera, I believe this was the first Minolta lens to support the "D" chip for ADI ("Advanced Distance Integration") flash. Although this lens replaced the previous 24-85 from the early-mid 1990s, it was not a "stretch" of the existing lens but in fact a complete redesign. Minolta appeared to throw the optical book at it, incorporating multiple moulded compound aspheric elements. It is alleged that the design is also protected by one or more patents, though for what I do not know - presumably to stop some aspect of it's design being "copied". It is certainly more compact that the 24-85 it replaced, and few other zooms of the same range have been as small, so it is possible the patents relate this this element of it's design.

On full frame at 24mm, sharpness at centre is very good even from full aperture. Corners are understandably softer than centre at full aperture, a reflection that this is a zoom lens with a wide angle of coverage. Stoping down 1-2 stops improves things, and sharpness more or less reaches parity from centre to edge. The performance is fairly consistent across it's range - 105mm is also very good. Technical tests of the lens at the time of launch showed an overall very good performance. Stopped down, it is certainly capable of very sharp results on full frame.

Colour is good, neutral and well saturated, and whilst there are traces of the fabled 1970s/80s saturated "liquid" colour, this is a much more modern design. Contrast is quite high, fairly typical for a modern zoom lens. This lens is much more contrasty than earlier Minolta AF zooms (such as the 28-135 f4-4.5 or 24-50 f4), and in my opinion this sometimes sacrifices highlight detail, which can blow out. I would say the lens definately uses the design technique of high edge contrast to improve the appearance of "sharpness". This is quite common in mid-range zooms, and a technique used by Nikon is some of their lenses for many years. High edge contrast makes details (which are resolved from contrast of light and shade) appear very well defined - that is "sharp" - even though the underlying resolution of the lens may not be that high. Ultimately, as contrast is reduced (e.g. poor light) the detail will remain until it just disappears as the lens is no longer able to create edge contrast. This is not a criticism, just an observation.

One of the benefits of "slower" variable aperture zooms such as this is that it gives the designers some freedom to improve other aspects of performance such as distortion and vignetting. Lens design must be a trade off between speed (maximum aperture), distortion and vignetting, amoungst other things. Fast constant aperture zooms must be significantly more complex in design (and therefore expensive, bigger, heavier etc) to correct issues such as distortion because the optic required become that much more complex.

The build is very good, typical late 1990s Dynax finish with rubberised controls and satin black barrel made from a mix of polycarbonate and metal. The lens feels quite sturdy when extended to its maximum 105mm length. AF performance is good. The only criticism is that being so compact, the controls are made quite small, and manual focusing is with the typical near useless thin ring with almost no resistance. However, zoom is light but well weighted, and controls and smooth. Overall very good.

Distortion is surprisingly good for a zoom of this range. There is the inevitable barreling at the 24mm end and some pin-cushion at the 105mm end, but it is not the worst I have seen on a wide angle standard zoom. It is about on par with the 24-85 it replaced. For general photography it is unlikely the rectalinear distortion at edges would be noticed, though for architectural an other critical work it may prove problematic. It would rate as very good for this type of zoom.

Flare control seems good. The lens is supplied with a proper "petal" shaped hood, and whilst this gives limited protection at the 105mm long end, flare seems well controlled. Overall, very good.

Overall, on full frame a very good lens. Whilst absolute performance at maximum aperture may be limited when compared to prime lenses of the same focal length, overall the optical balance is good, and performance stopped down leaves little significant criticism. Clearly, at 24mm a prime lens will out-perform it.

There is little to choose between this lens and the 24-85 it replaced. I would suggest, based on personal experience and comparative technical tests I have seen, that the 24-85 is marginally better, but it is so close and potentially subjective that to all intents and purposes there is no difference in their performance.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 3 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: elban   review date: June-30-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

sony 18-70 3.5-5.6
tamron 55-200 4-5.6

price paid:

121 EUR used

positive:

sharp, compact, well built

negative:

strong CA

comment:

I've nothing to add about this lens, it's very good, sharp, well built etc. BUT my copy shows very strong blue CA on almost every picture I take, and when there is strong contrast it can be as strong as 10 pixels wide!!!
The CA is visible at all focal lengths and apertures.
So if you want to buy one of these lenses, test it before giving the cash!

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: esg12   review date: June-25-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

positive:

-compactness
-build quality
-AF fast
-sharpness

negative:

-CA near 105mm
-slightly soft drawing

comment:

Very useful ZOOM range for everyday use. It is my favourite lens.I have it on me everywhere I go taking pictures together with 100-300 F4.5-5.6 D

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: camfan   review date: May-28-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

price paid:

$200(USED)

positive:

Compact and Lightweight
Practical focal range
Build quality
Sharp at F8~

negative:

Soft at 90~105mm
Chromatic aberration

comment:

I used to combine it with 100-300APO for travel. The compact size and light weight are really fit fot this. Also the build quality is decent and the sharpness is very good at F8~. But the optical quality is a little weak at the tele-end and it has some CA problem.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: macroman   review date: May-27-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tamron 28-80. Tamron 70-210 MF
Vivitar 70-210 f/4 AF

price paid:

$380 new

positive:

The zoom range of 24-105 is very good. The overall optical quality is fine. The AF is extremely fast. Max magnification very good at 1:5

negative:

none

comment:

This is probably the perfect lens for overall zooming convenience and compactness. This is going to be the lens
that I will be using on my future digital SLRs. The sharpness rating I gave of 4.5 instead of a perfect 5.0 is only because my 100mm 2.8 D macro is noticeably
sharper. But for a zoom, I think this 24-105 is among the best.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: DavidB   review date: April-07-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

28-135 4/4.5

price paid:

NA

positive:

Very compact, feels pretty solid.
Have found results quite satisfactory.

negative:

Not as sharp as my 28-135. Flare, CA evident in corners under bright lighting a wide apertures.Manual focus is not a good feel.

comment:

An excellent walkaround lens to replace my 28-135 which although a great lens, is heavy and a bit long in range for my 7D. Prefer the 28-135 on the a900.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: MostlyHarmless   review date: March-30-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

MinO 28/2
KM 100/2.8D
Canon 28-135 3.5-5.6 IS USM

price paid:

369.95 USD (new)

positive:

Great size and range, even with a 1.5x FOV crop
Sharp for a zoom

negative:

Not much worth noting - MF with the lens is not pleasant.

comment:

An amazing little performer that gives an unusual but useful range of 36-158 on a 1.5x crop. Balanced perfectly on my 5D. Stopped down to F8 or F11, it'll give you some great results.

Ultimately, I ended up selling it because I found the 28/2 spending more time on the lens mount and the 24-105 spending more time in the bag.

If you're looking at this lens, also check out the 24-85/3.5-4.5 which by all accounts is just as good optically but is available for much cheaper on the used market. Also, chances are that the 18-70 kit lens (which I regrettably passed up on) may be just as good and give you a better range.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: campy   review date: March-24-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Beercan
Kit lens
100-300mm apo

price paid:

89 USD (used)

positive:

Good walk around lens.

negative:

Not as wide or as fast as I would like.

comment:

I read all the reviews and decided if I could find one used at a good price I would get it. I also looked for the 28-75 and 28-135mm. I came across this at a camera store over the internet, it was priced at $99 because it had a 1-2mm scratch on outer lens. In the opinion of the salesman he didn't think the scratch would show up and he was right. He even sold it to me for $89 shipped. Needless to say I am thrilled with the price and the performance. It's real sharp at f5.6 to f8. It feels right on the 5D and is always on my camera. It matches with my 100-300mm apo perfectly.

sharpness: 4 

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:

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 28-75D
Minolta 70-210f4

price paid:

450 CDN (New)

positive:

Range
Build

negative:

Sharpness

comment:

I like this lens for its range and its compactness. But I'm a bit disappointed by the sharpness, I get better result from my beercan.

Re-tested this lens with my a700 and finds it alot sharper.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: tnagy   review date: March-08-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

kit lens

price paid:

240 USD (used)

positive:

Sharp from wide open, a bit stopped down is excellent, compact and nice heavy, good zoom range, no creeping zoom, D lens - ADI metering...

negative:

nothing till, will there ever be?

comment:

It was a lens I still wanted to get from times I read about. I was told about its sharpness, color and other things...and now I'm satisfied. I was looking for it through eBay and found some of them for a good price from $240 till $500. In a shop near my home they ask $850 for a new Sony 24-105. If someone wants to change kit lens, will be satisfied too as I am. Very good range, 24mm is enough for indoors (though 18 is better) and 105 is right prepared for the next zoom 100-300 APO.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: bharnois   review date: February-16-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 17-70DT (Kitlens)
Minolta 35-70 3.5/4.5 (Plastic Fantastic)
Minolta 35-105 3.5/4.5
Minolta 70-210 4 (Beercan)

price paid:

$220(US) little use

positive:

Absolutely Great Range (Look at Comparison Group!)
Nice Build (Feels good too!)
Looks awesome (And people tell you!)
Handles Well on 5D (Doesn't flip cam down!)
Fast Focuser
Non-Rotating front element.
Not THAT heavy.
Works Fine on Older Maxxums (7000i)

negative:

Hood not that good on cropped sensor.
Seems to require more effort to get sharp shots.
Hood rests on surface when put down and pushes up on internal barrel.
A LITTLE heavy for it's size (maybe positive!).

comment:

I really like it. Gives me back the wide range I lost on my 35-105 when going digital. This is at least as good and usually better at the same ranges as the comparison lenses. Stays a little faster than the 35-70 and 35-105 at the same f/l. Has great color. From 70-105 the Beercan is certainly sharper but I didn't have to change lens to shoot that range!

This is an awesome walkaround lens due to the range. Great for indoor situations for the same reason. Of course it isn't as fast as the 2.8 stuff.

A perfect match for my SIGMA EF-500 DG Super as the zoom ranges conincide very well. I plan on using this combo as my indoor event shooter.

(3/9/2007 I've updated my sharpmess and build ratings for this lens. Now having used this at both banquest style and intimate indoor events I like it even more.)

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Eclipse   review date: February-15-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

positive:

Useful range,pretty sharp,mostly good colour, AF fine, light weight

negative:

Colour at wide end not so good.

comment:

Bought when I bought my first Minolta body as a general purpose lens for odd jobs. (I use telephotos for work). Its range made it especially useful at the start when my only other lens was the 100-300. Far superior in all respects to the similar range Pentax lens I used before, especially in sharpness and colour. I don't use the wide end much, but when I have I haven't thought that the lens performed as well down there, especially in terms of colour.(Sorry chaps, but I'm still on film, hence the colour references.)Not really a fast lens.

sharpness: 3,5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: pacorro   review date: January-19-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 200/2.8 APO G,
Minolta 100/2.8 Soft Focus
Minolta 24-85/3.5-4.5
Minolta 28-105/3.5-4.5

positive:

zoom range

negative:

not so good picture quality

comment:

Very useful lens, the zoom range is enough for weddings, portraits, travel, for almost everything, but the picture quality is not so good. It could be a little bit sharper, and more massive also.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: aostling   review date: December-08-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

positive:

Sharp all the way to the corners. Superb build quality. High contrast.

negative:

comment:

A search of available tests (particularly in fotoMagazine, which gives it the coveted Super rating) convinced me this is the best zoom with 24mm at the wide end. I decided on it, THEN bought a Maxxum 7, for a trip to Italy in November 2005. The camera and lens were stolen in Naples. But I never forgot the test images I'd taken back home. When I bought an A100 (my first digital SLR) I bought the 24-105mm lens as the first step. Of course on digital it is not as wide, so I also now use the 16mm fisheye.

I don't understand why this forum includes a rating for lens color. Mostly, we look at our images on a monitor; we cannot objectively rate the color characteristics of the lens. So I have rated color as 5.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: mipr   review date: December-08-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Kit lens

price paid:

126 GBP (used,EXC++)

positive:

Reasonably fast, good range

negative:

CA in contrasting situations

comment:

Good walk-around lens (my workhorse at the moment), could be a little bit longer though (24-135 would be perfect for me). CA can appear in contrasting scenes.

Addendum: My 5D back-focuses with this lens (focus is spot on with 50/1.7) and, interestingly, on my colleague's 5D it behaves exactly the same.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: 800si   review date: December-02-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

28-105 xi

price paid:

$350 CDN (new)

positive:

- Light
- Compact
- Nice zoom range
- Fairly wide aperture @ 105mm

negative:

- Not as sharp as some of my other lenses

comment:

This lens is sharper than my 28-105 xi power zoom, but of course not as sharp as my 'beercan' or 200mm f2.8 G. I think it is an excellent walk-around lens.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: RobertW   review date: December-01-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 20 2.8, 50 1.4, 100 2.0, 100 2.8 macro, 17-35G, 35-105 3.5-4.5 macro, Sigma 28-70 2.8EX, 70-200 2.8 EX APO

price paid:

250 Euro's used

positive:

Light, sharp, cheap

negative:

zoomring rubber came off 2 times now

comment:

Lens is ok, nice and light to carry around for long times. The rubber zoomring came off 2 times now. I've been able to glue it with 3M tape. It is not in the top 3 of my favorite lenses unfortunately. The 17-35G, 100 2.8 macro and 100 2.0 are !

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: FoxyRabbit   review date: November-28-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Konica Minolta 18-70mm (kit)
Minolta 50 mm f1.7

price paid:

133 £ (used)

positive:

Very sharp
Minolta color
compact
AF speed

negative:

nothing yet

comment:

Very nice walkaround lens. It will be even better when Sony produce a fullframe camera. The Minolta color is right on and i love it.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: jakobdam   review date: November-28-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Konica Minolta 18-70mm (kit)
Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 APO
Minolta 50mm f1.7

price paid:

250 USD (used)

positive:

- Excellent color rendition
- Excellent center sharpness at ALL apertures and focal lengths
- Excellent corner sharpness when stopped down, and used below 90mm
- Reliable autofocus (though see issues below)
- Internal focusing (wuhu, no rotating front element)

negative:

- When flowerhood is mounted for carrying, it makes it difficult to handle manual focus ring
- Auto focus can hunt in low contrast, more than e.g. the kit 18-70mm lens
- Zoom is not as smooth as on the 18-70mm kit lens, but still better than on the Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 APO

comment:

I was vastly impressed when I began testing this lens, after I received it.

Center looks razorsharp at (almost) all focal lenghts and all apertures, and even the prime (Minolta 50mm f1.7) couldn't beat it here.

When looking at edge sharpness, you will notice a drop in sharpness - especially at f3.5 at 35mm. Stepping the aperture a bit down performs miracles, though.

Above 90mm, it generally becomes a tad softer overall. Not much, and I definitely am not afraid to use this lens at 105mm.

Colors and contrasts looks extremely nice.

I'd gladly rate this lens as "Highly recommended", to use DPReview terms. :)

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: lucas vda   review date: November-01-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

18-70 kit, 28-200 Tamron, Minolta 50 F1.4, Minolta 70-210 F4, Minolta 35-105, Minolta 35-70

price paid:

299 USD new

positive:

Much better image quality (wide open) than expected. Overall image quality really superb.

negative:

hard to get at the moment (no Sony's yet, and not a lot of eBay offers)

comment:

I bought this lens for the convenient range and to take an optical step up from the kit lens. However, IMHO this lens is one of the most underrated Minolta lenses around and seriously underpriced. First of all, the image quality is really superb. It is much sharper wide open than most other zooms I have encountered. And the images have that special Minolta feel that I really like. It is difficult to describe, but it has a pleasant bokeh (with a nice connection between in&out of focus), nice contrast (clear, but not too aggressive) and warm accurate colours.

Finally, for the ones interested in convenience. It is small, the front element does not turn. Autofocus speed is fair (but not the fastest I know). It seems to be quite solid. It is a D-lens.

Anyone considering this lens or a superzoom, I would say : take this one. It is from an image quality point of view in a different league - a 36-157mm range is really quite good. (But than again, I personally am a bit disappointed with superzooms on digital cameras. I feel they are more a compromise than they were with film.)

Anyone who wants to go for absolutely the best available image quality independent of price etc. I would say, buy primes or wait for the Zeiss 24-70mm F2.8 and see how good that lens is (although there is no guarantee that the image quality will be as pleasing , as sharpness is not everything).

Let's hope for us that Sony does not raise the prise for this lens (although the lens is IMO worth much more than the 300 - 450 USD that is being asked for it.

p.s. A last point. If Sony ever comes out with a Full-Frame than this lens will still be superb.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: pkovalp   review date: September-01-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sigma 24-135 f2.8-4.5 Asph. IF
Sigma 70-200 F2.8 EX APO IF

positive:

colour
front lens and focus ring don't rotate during AF
small and light

negative:

Sharpnes wide open

comment:

Compared to Sigma 24-135:
For minolta:
better build, faster AF, size, more ergonomic
For sigma:
Zoom range, sharpnes, less distiorsion.
It's great as walkaround lens and for indoor shots for film cameras (for digital, it's not wide enough). Well build (for it's price - little plastic but I've used it for 2 years and looks like new). AF is fast and acurate.

sharpness: 3,5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: DavidBo   review date: August-30-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta AF 100-300 f/4,5-5,6 APO .
SONY 70-200 f/2,8 G SSM.

price paid:

600 €

positive:

Very usefull zoom range.
Fast and reliable focusing on KM 7D. SONY A700, and SONY A900.
OK colors.

Stopped down to f/5,6(f/8)-f/11 it's really great on APS-C.

negative:

Some cromatic abberation. Especially at the long end. A lot worse than my minolta 100-300 APO and SONY 70-200G.
Some distortion at wide end(barrel).
Not sharp wide open especially at the long end.
Not recommendable on the A900(FF) because of severe vignetting and very soft corners.

comment:

I had mine sent in for repair. The focusring locked and the zoomring was thight when reaching ca 50mm.
It has worked fine eversince.

It's possible to print close to the A3 format with the A900 and this lens, but only in certain situations. If you are making a close up and need the whole frame to be sharp then forget this lens on A900. It's of limited use on A900 because of the lack of sharpness especially at the longer focal lengths.

I really enjoy using this lens on APS-C.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: maskedman   review date: June-16-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 28-80(D)
Tamron 24-135

positive:

sharp
light
great colour

negative:

none

comment:

This is a great walkaround lens. It's compact and light. It's a great match to the 7D and balances nicely in my hands. The zoom ring is nice and tight - no zoom creep. The focus ring is wide enough to manually focus without difficulty.

This lens is really sharp for a zoom lens (especially when compared with the 28-80D kit lens that came with my Maxxum 5) and the colours and contrast are also great. I have never had any problems with flare with this lens.

The reach is not as long as the Tamron 24-135 but I find the qualities between the two lenses are quite similar. The Tamron is a great lens too, but it doesn't have D capability which I find useful in the 24-105 range.

There is some distortion at the wide end but that's to be expected with wider lenses.

All in all, a superb day-to-day lens.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: chuckdk   review date: March-31-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

positive:

Great bouqet, color, and sharpness. Quick focus on the 7d

negative:

Fairly light build - guess I'm spoiled for all metal bodies and barrels.

comment:

Excellent walk around lens - ditch the petal hood that comes with it if used on 5d or 7d. With the crop factor you can use a full hood and avoid the flair much better than the hood it comes with and wind up with sharper images. There is some distortion at the wide end but no more than one would expect with a zoom. Well within limits and much, much better than the super zooms (18-200) It's just a much better lens than the all in one zooms. Nice combination with the 100-300 APO.

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: zpafonso   review date: February-20-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tamron SP 24-135mm

positive:

Image quality
Compact

negative:

Build quality

comment:

This lens doesn't feel so solid as the Tamron 24-135mm, and that's what made me sell it and keep the Tamron. Even optically the Tamron seems to be better, specially in color and contrast. However this is a very good walkaround lens, compact and with a good image quality.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: ronin   review date: February-16-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

alot of standard zooms

positive:

size, image quality

negative:

comment:

Been used on a lot of cameras over a long time it starting to show its age. It should be a more robust lens for what it cost. my Sigma 28-70 2.8 is older seen more action and is in better condition.

EDIT 02.06.2009 slight vignette on Full frame digital but nothing that can be fixed in lightroom

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 2 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Micholand   review date: February-10-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

positive:

- colour, contrast, sharpness
- front lens and focus ring don't rotate during AF
- little distortion at WA
- small and light

negative:

- occasional flare in direct sun shots
- a little CA in bright lit situation

comment:

The 24-105 does a very good job as a perfect travel lens, having a useful zoom range which is even covering a bit the wide end on digital. On 7D the AF speed is good and the pictures are colourful and sharp - not as tack sharp as with good primes but overall better than with most zooms.
It's one of the few lenses that I mostly have in my camera bag when going out for a walk.

edit: I have to lower the build points due to the fact that for the second time the AF gearing got stuck during the use in cold temperatures. First time when the focus jammed the lens was about one years old and it still was repaired under warranty, now roughly three years later the same thing happend.
Seems like there is a timer somewhere and my lens copy is a summer version only :-(

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: munchmeister   review date: January-28-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

positive:

negative:

comment:

Only recently purchased a 7D, Dec. 30, 2005, with this lens, as my 'walk around' lens (and only lens, so far) and I am very impressed with color rendition and value.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: jstartin   review date: January-22-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

18-70, 100-300 APO

positive:

Sharp
Compact
Light weight
Non-rotating front element
Focus ring does not rotate during AF

negative:

comment:

A sharp x4 zoom with no less than f/4.5! A super general purpose complement to the 5D camera.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: jeditim   review date: January-19-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

positive:

Very useful lens...food for most situations

negative:

Sadly the field of view is no longer as wide

comment:

I probably keep this lens on my Maxxum 7D 70% of the time. Using it previously on my Maxxum 7 was great because of the wide field of view. I will probably need to supplement this lens with either the KM 11-18 or the Tamron 12-24 for the low end.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: mcgravy   review date: January-11-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

positive:

Very good zoom lense

negative:

Not as wide as on my film 7

comment:

I got this lense before I obtained my 7D. It takes reasonably sharp photos and is a versitile focal lenth. It was made for the 7 film camera but works well with the 7D. I shoot mainly primes but this lense is always in my camera bag. Good for those times when you don't want to carry a lot of gear. If I didn't have this lense I would get the 28-75 f2.8. Since I do... I can't justify the cost. I bought this lense after seeing the awesome photos Pat Di Fruscia shot with his film 7.

You can check out his work at http://www.difrusciaphotography.com/

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: G4hout   review date: January-10-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

minolta 28-75 2.8

positive:

good range, sharp photo's

negative:

the zoom doesnt work good anymore on mine...

comment:

I bought this one second hand for my old dynax 500 si, and used it first as my allround lens on the 7d. But shooting a wedding the zoom didn't work good anymore, I still can use it, but have to turn it back to 24 and then can zoom again.
It was repaired before for other failure, but I didn't like to spend money on repair again. I bought the 28-75 2.8 instead. The 28-75 is a bit sharper, although I miss the 24 mm.range, but when I really need it I can still use the 24-105, or my old cosina 19-35 lens. Also have the 18-200 tamron, but don't use that one for wedding.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: richard_b   review date: January-03-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

CZ 16-80, Minolta 70-210 f4

price paid:

349 USD (new)

positive:

Good mid-range zoom
Very sharp in all the shots I have taken

negative:

Focus ocasionally hunts when shooting in very low light, otherwise the focus is pretty good.
Seen ocasional flare on direct into the sun shots and some CA wide open.
Not super fast, but I typically stop down to f8 or lower to increase DOF

comment:

This lens works really well for me. The range covers most of the shooting situations that I am interested in - mostly landscapes and cityscapes.
Have some samples posted at 24-105 sample gallery.
Also ran a series of test shots (center and edge) at f4, f8, f16 and at 24mm, 50mm and 105mm at 24-105 test gallery.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: PhotoTraveler   review date: November-28-05  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

28-100 D, 100-300 APO D (sister lens to this one)

positive:

Great range, Solid Build, Compact, great quality

negative:

It is a bit heavy for it's size, wish it was a bit faster

comment:

I bought this lens to replace my 28-100. I must say it's been a great lens. Its range works well with the 7D, and for 100-300 owners it is a perfect fit for ones lineup.

Its range isn't so far that quality falls off, though its not that great on the long end. But on the plus it covers a great enough range you don't find yourself going from full wide, to full long and never stopping in the middle. The 24mm end is nice to get you some wide back after what the 1.5x crops steals from you on a 5D or 7D.

The build of the lens is very good. Its right there with KMs other mid-grade lenses. Its not a G lens, but for what it cost it's not bad at all. Things like non rotating filter are nice. The focus ring feels a bit weird, like you are turning some gear drive, not a bad thing, just different.

If there was one issue with the lens, it's that it's not very fast, only a 3.5 and it drops down to a 4.0 very quickly. If you really need a fast lens, look for the 28-75 D.

I've gone a weekend and almost only used this lens. Its range covers most needs so if you want to go for that quick walk around some trail or similar and not carry a bunch of lenses, only carry a tripod with you for extra gear its great.

Compared to the 28-100, this lens makes the 28-100 look like a turd (of course for 5 times the cost you expect that). Its much sharper and much better build.

If your on the fence about this lens verse the 28-75 D, it's not a bad trade off. You might not use the long end much, but those extra 4mm on the wide are very nice to have.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: mikethelaserman   review date: November-24-05  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

positive:

Gives pin-sharp images with good colour rendition.
Compact size. Non-rotating filter mount.

negative:

Distortion apparent at wide end

comment:

I've really liked this lens on my Dynax 7 (film) : it has given consistently good results and my only gripe is with the distortion.

Not sure how much use it will get now that I have a 5D with the KM 18-70 lens.

Now tested with the 5D - momentary gross focussing errors (soon sorts itself out) and a bit slower to focus than the 18-70 kit lens, but otherwise excellent.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 4 

user: gsaronni   review date: November-13-05  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

KM 24-85

price paid:

249$ S/H

positive:

Light, sharp, good value for money. Little distorsion at WA

negative:

At 85-105 is less sharp, needs more USM

comment:

My first lens for my 7D. 85% of my pics are between 35mm and 50mm (in 35mm), so this is my lens.. Cheap filter because of 62mm screw. Very fast focusing. With low light (inside pics) some OOF pics, better to use MF at 105mm.

Focusing ring not very smooth. Can be used for portraits and landscape. A great travel lens

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: agetan   review date: July-09-05  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

28-135 f4-4.5

positive:

Light, sharp, useful range

negative:

build quality

comment:

I used to use this lens quite extensively when I bought my 7D. Mainly because it become a ~35-160mm (35mm equiv) and I shoot quite a lot in that range. It is very light and yet sharp lens and great for travelling purposes.

One thing about the lens is the feel, feel somewhat plasticky (just me).

sharpness: 3 

color: 3 

build: 3 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: Erol   review date: June-28-05  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tamron 24-135mm zoom

positive:

Very useful focal length range.

negative:

Front barrel wobbles when zoomed out. Similar to the Tokina 24-200 zoom.

comment:

I have compared the Minolta 24-85, 24-105, Tokina 24-200 and the Tamron 24-135. The Tamron beats them all at all focal lengths. The Tamron is also built more solid than all of the mentioned lenses. Just purchased a Konica-Minolta 28-75 f2.8 D and have not had a chance to compare them all on the same subject. The Minolta 28-75 f 2.8 D has the same front end wobble as the Minolta 24-105. I wonder if this is something inherent in the Minolta zooms.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Montago   review date: May-26-05  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 28-80
KM 28-75 2.8
M 50 1.4 / 1.7

positive:

+ front does not rotate
+ petal hood
+ fast
+ compact
+ looks good on 7D
+ colour, contrast, sharpness

negative:

- a bit slow

comment:

a really nice lense !

this lense has a very nice range, which works better on a full-frame camera, then on a 1.5x cropped one, like the 7D. becomes a 36-156mm and therefore lacks the wide angle.

however, on the 7D i get the most of my pictures with this lense, and mostly they are razor sharp... like said on other sites, this lense gives the sharpest pictures around f/8+, which is true.

i've heard rumours about varying production quality, but in my case, nothing to complain about.

it's one of the best lenses for the 7D, given the range, quality, design and sharpnes. -IMHO

My lense broke, the focus system stopped working :(

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: ronin   review date: February-14-05  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tamron 28-105mm, sigma 28-70 2.8 (the old type)

positive:

D features, zoom range (24-105mm)

negative:

image quality at 24mm

comment:

I never go out without it. It is one of the few lenses that you will always find in my camera bag. It’s a nice size for a standard zoom. I thought it would be much bigger when I ordered it.

EDIT I havet used this lens in a long long time as the KM 28-75mm2.8 just kills it. but i keep it as a back up STD zoom

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: agetan   review date: November-21-04  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 35-105 f3.5-4.5 Macro

positive:

Compact
Excellent image quality
Good range of focal
Good for both Film and Digital

negative:

Slight distortion on widest end, but not very noticible

comment:

I had a chance to play around with this lens, I love the weight as well as the focal length combination.

I can see this is my perfect travel lens.

After shooting about 6-7 rolls of Sensia slide, I am quite impress with the image quality. Focusing is abit stiff with this particular sample that I have, but not too much of an issue there.

Wish Minolta release a constant f2.8 of this lens... well.. keep on dreaming.