Minolta AF 28-100 F3.5-5.6 D  reviews

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: Cloneranger   review date: October-31-10  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Min 28-135mm
min Big beercan
Sig 24-135mm
Min 50mm 2.8

price paid:

0

positive:

Cheap
light weight
fast AF
OK bokeh

negative:

Flat at times

comment:

I found this lens much better that the Sony 18-70mm kit lens, with good results indoors with or without a flash. The color is good but gets washed out in bright light. I've had better results in the shade or indoors.
I've had worse lenses that have been rated a lot higher in this forum. One really good thing is that if it gets broken it's no big deal! I got this lens at a flea market with a couple other lenses for next to nothing. I'm keeping it and using it. Would I recommend it? Yes, I would!

2/5/11: I recently tried to use this lens while shooting outside in the snow on a cloudy day. About 1/8th of the pictures were washed out and unusable, 1/4 were barely acceptable, and 1/2 were acceptable, and the other 1/8 were good. Not very good odds! But, in defense, I did say earlier that the lens was horrible in bright light and there is not much brighter conditions than new snow.
2/20/11 I fixed all but 3 photos in PS and they came out very well, clear, sharp, and good color.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: Lukas07   review date: March-11-10  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 24-85
DT Sony 18-55

price paid:

300 RMB

positive:

cheap,light,so...even when it gets trouble,you heart may not get trouble...
easy to control,slight distortion

negative:

Not a good len in my mind...I only own this len for 1 month,and I sold it

comment:

Not a good choice...I don't recommend...
ONLY advance...cheap,meybe good for a new guy~

sharpness: 3 

color: 3 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: koprivakopriva   review date: November-24-09  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 18-200, Sony 18-70

positive:

-Decent range

negative:

-Not a good lens
-Poor build, sharpness, contrast, and not particularly fast either

comment:

I bought my a200 off craigslist and the guy I bought it from threw this in with it. I sold it for whatever I could get for it (it wasn't much)

Sharpness was noticeably lacking, and colors were underwhelming at best.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: MichelvA   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:

Konica Minolta A200 / 28-200
Konica Minolta 18-70 f/3.5-5.6
Minolta 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 RS
Minolta 17-35 f/3.5 G
Minolta 28-70 f/2.8 G

price paid:

€ 30 (used)

positive:

Usable range
Cheap
Lightweight
Full frame
Fast enough focus

negative:

Stop down from f/5.6
Medium to low build quality
Slight flattening of image
28mm too long on APS-C

comment:

Bought this lens before i had an SLR (March 2008) in case i'd found a body without lens - so for testing. The lens is similar to the 18-70 kitlens, little longer range. It is very slightly softer than the kitlens up to f/5.6.
The sharpness rating i gave (according to Guidelines) is from f/5.6. Bigger apertures gives a softer image. For starters not a bad lens but there is no magic. In some situations not bad at all, sometimes you have to look twice in comparisons with the mentioned lenses - especially if you shoot outdoors with enough light.
Once i had the body i bought the 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 which gives better sharpness, colors and build.
Compared to better lenses, flattens the image, very slightly dull colors, but you have to see photo's next to eachother to notice.
Still way better than photo's made with a bridge camera like the Konica Minolta A200.
Mind you this is a full frame lens, but i don't think many 850/900 owners will need it! For APS-C there are many better alternatives like Sony 16-80, 16-105, 18-55 SAM.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 2 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: borjomi   review date: November-12-08  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 24-85 new
Sony 18-70 kit

positive:

Good colors
Cheap
Light weight

negative:

Plastic
Bad bokeh
Soft at wide open

comment:

Very good picture quality for "free" kit lens for film at f/8.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: tomiZG   review date: October-12-08  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 70-210 f4
Minolta 35-80
Cosina 19-35
Sigma 24 2,8
Sigma 28-80
Sigma 70-210
Sigma 400 5,6

price paid:

49 €

positive:

range
price
weight
colors and bokeh - still minolta!
ADI for flash

negative:

bit soft wide open
bit soft at long end
plastic all in all

comment:

Got it for 49 Euro, read the reviews afterwards, then got sad to have paid too much and that I got only a cheap old kit lens.

On the contrary - I must admit, I am absolutely happy with it. Got a copy in mint condition, as new. The sharpness is OK, the colors and bokeh are absolutely Minolta!

As someone else said, this lens does not deserve the bashing.

It is completely fine for a walkaround - travel lens, light, good range, decent pictures produced.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: uranio15   review date: April-19-08  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta - AF 28-105 xi F3.5-4.5
Minolta - AF 28-105 F3.5-4.5 RS
Minolta - AF 35-80 F4-5.6 II
Sony - AF DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6

price paid:

Kit of Camera

positive:

Cheap
Light weight
"D"

negative:

Cheap feel
Plastic mount

comment:

This lens came with my Dynax 60 Date. I think it is great lens for the price. Now you can pay for it around from 25 to 35 EUR on Ebay.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: whitecat   review date: April-06-08  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

90 USD (new)

positive:

Inexpensive.
Quite sharp when stopped down.

negative:

Soft at f/5.6, especially at 100mm, but that is to be expected.

comment:

It would be silly to compare this lens with the CZ or equivalent. It is an inexpensive lens, ideal for someone on a budget, or for someone trying his/her hand at photography, and doesn't want to blow $500 on a lens. I have made 12x18's using this lens at the wide end stopped down to at least f8, so I am not going to bash it. It is very usable at the tele end too when stopped down a little.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Happy Hour   review date: March-17-08  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

$30.00

positive:

Light
good carry around lens
Sharp enough for a everyday lens

negative:

Not much for a kit lens or how cheap you can buy them
Color

comment:

I can't believe how much this lens has been bashed here! I think it's a great lens for the price.I bought this lens to resell and ended up loving it. If I'm at home, this lens is on my camera!It couldn't be a better walk around lens. It's light weight,it takes sharp clean and clear pictures. Yes I would not take this lens to anything important(like a wedding) But I have some great shots from around the house with it and at the zoo also. I walked around with this lens on all day and didn't feel it on my neck. most of my lenses are very heavy and you know there there after a few minutes around your neck. Again if you don't have enough $ to buy a great lens this is a good starter lens and if it werent for it being silver (it looks a little goofy on a black body) I would never sell this lens. Not a bad lens to take to a kids outing (if it was smashed it wouldn't make a difference) It's cheap!

sharpness: 3 

color: 4 

build: 1 

distortion: 2 

flare control: 2 

user: Morven   review date: February-12-07  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

50mm f/1.7
Lenses on other systems I've tried.

price paid:

Came with camera.

positive:

Came effectively free with the camera. Better than a body cap. Has, at least, some tele reach for a kit lens. Light.

negative:

Poor match to an APS-C sensor. Severe barrel distortion at wide end. Prone to flare. (Lack of) build quality.

comment:

It's not the worst lens in the world, but it's not good either. At least with the 7D's crop factor, we're just getting the center quality, not edges - but even then, barrel distortion at the 28mm end is more than it should be, flare is a problem, the supplied hood is more use as an extension of the focus ring than for any light-shielding properties, and the inner barrel wobbles.

On the plus side, it weighs nothing, came effectively for free, and gives some nice telephoto reach for a kit lens.

sharpness: 2 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: polossatik   review date: September-06-06  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

minolta "Beercan" 70-210 f4
minolta 35-70 f4
Tamron 28-200 f3.8-5.6 XR Di

positive:

cheap cheap cheap or free

negative:

crappy lens in every way.
Might be good to put on a old (analog) body and give it to your kids to play around with

comment:

problem is that anyone who knows at least one bit about minolta will ask you money to accept this lens....

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 1 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 5 

user: Tsukiyomi   review date: May-15-06  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 70-210/4
Minolta 18-70/3.5-5.6(D)
Minolta 35-70/4
Minolta 50/1.7
Sigma 90/2.8

positive:

Inexpensive, light

negative:

Cheaply built, missing details, distortions

comment:

Sharpness okay compared to other inexpensive lenses (at least stopped down), but details are always missing. Barrel distortion. Since a kit costs as much as a camera body alone, it´s extremely good value for money - you get it for free. But you´ll soon find yourself looking for better lenses.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 2 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 2 

user: vedran   review date: March-20-06  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

cheap,light weight

negative:

not enough wide, plastic feel

comment:

Got it as a kit lens,ok for the start but quickly i wanted to sell the lens. it's not enugh wide, great for punk concerts as Arny wrote. manual focus ring too small but in combination with hood it's great because you can manual focus by turning the hood .

sharpness: 3 

color: 4 

build: 2 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: PhotoTraveler   review date: October-24-05  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

100-300 APO D,

positive:

Cheap, makes for a good first lens if all your looking for is something cheap to show up at your door with the camera.

negative:

Its a cheap lens, plastic mount, only goes 28 on the wide which kills you on a crop camera

comment:

Well, I got this with my camera since I had no AF lenses. So it was cheap and would get me going. Also there is a real problem for lenses in this range. Also anything else gets more expensive which isn't very appealing for ones first lens especially if your spending 1100 bucks on the camera at the same time.

Its range is a problem. The 100 end is fine, but 28 is just not wide enough on a 1.5 crop camera. So you will be wanting a wider lens.

Its also a very cheaply built lens as one would expect for the price. It has a plastic mount, and weights nothing.

But in the end its not bad if your just looking for a starter lens, or need a beater lens.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 1 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 2 

user: arny   review date: December-23-04  

tested on film camera:

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

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

my nephews Lego toys, the Lego won in the fun department.

positive:

got it free when I bought a dynax 60 for my wife

negative:

cheap plastic feel. Manualfocus ring is really to small. I only use this lens to shoot punkconcerts, it doesn't matter if the lens is broken by stagedivers.

comment:

crap!