Minolta  AF 28-135 F4-4.5  reviews

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: PeteMag   review date: February-09-10  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tokina 20-35 AFII
Beercan
Big beercan
Kit lens 18-70
Minolta 100mm f2
Minolta 50mm f1.7
Minolta 50mm f1.4
Minolta 80mm-200mm HS G

price paid:

200Euro

positive:

Sharp when open
Great range on FF
Build Quality
Colours
Macro added value
Internal focus in rear

negative:

Flare
f4 sometimes not enough
No hood
Minimum focus distance
Rear focus can get in the way

comment:

There is plenty to love about this lens, but before you buy you should consider the negatives. The Minimum focus of 1.5m is too long and often causes a hinderance. If you want a zoom to cover low light then any 2.8 might be a better option. There's flare thats difficult to control - especially as it came without a hood. The rubber hood I have shows in the corners of the image on FF up to around 35/40mm. Rear focus although sharp can get in the way of how I hold the lens.

Thats the faults out of the way, but the positives are well documented. Sharpness of a G lens is a fair comment, build quality and engineering is amazing - just look at the way the zoom moves for a start! Focusing is quick due to the rear focus. From 28 to 135 its sharp wide open, the macro is useful (including to focus shorter than 1.5m!). The range is brilliant on the a900, a true perfect lens in good light for what people call walkabout (or I call don't want to bother switching lenses all the time). Colour is good, although not quite up to the 100mm f2 or 80-200 HS G. Its a bargain at £200, if Sony released this now they'd call it a G and my guess would be £600-800. I love this lens.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: lumajr   review date: January-29-10  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

MINOLTA AF 24-85
MINOLTA AF 24-105D
MINOLTA AF 28-105
MINOLTA AF 28-85
TOKINA 28-70/2.6-2.8
.......

price paid:

about USD 200

positive:

REALLY SHARP!
VERY quickly focusing on a900
BEAUTIFULL saturated colors

negative:

FLARE - but you can use your hand like sun hood :)

MFD 1.5m - but the macro switch is really nice - 25cm
nothing else - weight is acceptable for the zoom 28-135 and the aperture 4-4.5

comment:

This is perfect standart zoom for full frame cameras, practical focal lenght range 28-135, very good aperature f4-4.5, beautifull "old minolta" saturated color, SHARP across the frame at all focal lengths, even at f4 or f4.5. and even in corner! IMHO for the price USD 200-400 you can´t get better standart zoom lens for a900/a850. Recommended!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 2 

user: zoidberg   review date: January-22-10  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tamron 28-75/2.8
Sigma 24-70/2.8

price paid:

350 USD

positive:

Sharpness
Bokeh
Awesomeness

negative:

Some CA
Long MFD, obnoxious macro mode
No hood, flare sensitive

comment:

This lens is every bit as awesome as everyone says. If the opportunity to get one ever comes up, take it.

To start with the bad things: it can flare badly, but not in all situations. I've taken some remarkably useful shots even with the sun in the frame, whereas some other shots have been completely ruined. My guess is that it is dependent on the angle of light, or something like that. The lack of a hood isn't exactly helping either. It also exhibits slight CA, but it is sharp enough to be easily removed if needed.

The 1.5 m MFD can be a real problem sometimes, especially for indoor shots at the wide end. Since the MFD stays (almost) the same throughout the zoom range, the only way to get real closeups (e.g. close headshots) is to use a longer focal length. The macro mode helps, but it is of limited use as it only covers distances between approximately 15 and 30 cm. Unless the macro mode hack is applied, MF is the only way to go, but the big and comfortable zoom ring can (sort of) be used for focussing in macro mode since the lens isn't parfocal.

Now to the good things: This lens is freakishly sharp. Wide open it is only sharp, but stopped down it is nothing short of stunning. Most notably, the corner sharpness is quite unlike anything I've seen in a standard zoom. The colours are of classic Minolta character, giving very pleasant results. And the bokeh is lovely, not as good as on my Sigma 50/1.4 but definitely on a par with many other really good primes I've used - and it outshines most of the zooms. Focussing is very fast, haven't been timing it, but it feels about as fast as my 28/2.8. The focus ring is weirdly placed, but I got accustomed to it quickly.

To sum things up, this would probably be the best lens in the whole wide world if it had better MFD, a hood and better flare control. Instead, it is a fun and quirky lens capable of awesome results under the right circumstances. Which is more than enough reason to get one, but any expectations should be kept on a realistic level.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: rohit   review date: January-21-10  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

price paid:

250 USD (used)

positive:

negative:

comment:

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: rpmpics   review date: January-15-10  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

minolta 50mm f1.7
minolta 35-70mm
minolta 35-80mm

price paid:

£10 gbp

positive:

price luck shone on me found for ten pounds in a charity shop
build. built like a tank
colour.lovely minolta colours

negative:

none. stunning lens for price

comment:

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: Shootist   review date: January-15-10  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

I think I've owned ALL (then perhaps sold some) of the Minolta Consumer lenses by now!

price paid:

$270

positive:

Well, I guess it's solid...and also it sold for more than I bought it for! yea!

negative:

Price
Not as sharp as 35-105 older version
Over-hyped

comment:

I’ll probably be accused of trying to bring the *incredible* prices these lenses are getting these days DOWN by saying this but: what IS the big deal about this lens guys?!

I found it heavy, not so sharp, and the zoom creep nearly broke my lens mount!

Truth is, this lens was about 25th out of perhaps 40 Minolta lenses that I went through as I built my collection last spring and summer (2009)

And what a fun build is WAS! As many of you now know; Minolta consumer lenses are WAY undervalued and if you’re like me – you never really loose any money buying them. I sold 90% of the ones I bought for more money….

I WANTED to like this lens but it failed all my tests shooting on a tripod at f5.6 and 250 shutter on a new Alpha 350,with IS off

Now, maybe it was unfair to test it versus the 35-105 1985 old version but – THAT was the lens I was thinking this one could REPLACE in my bag…. Heck based on your combined reviews HERE I thought I was going to be replacing my 3 (20,24,28) Wide angle primes and my 2.8 135 prime too! Shoo wee!

It wasn’t to be, and now someone else has the copy of this lens that I tested…and yes I got the BIG money you all are paying…made a few bucks on it. I guess that’s my main positive – it made me $45…

Could have been a bad copy but I don’t think so…it was ok, not ugly, just not in a league with the lenses above.

!!!2/2/2010 Update!!!

WOW….wow. Wow.

I just got my next copy of this lens.

It’s totally unmolested unlike the last one; nice tight zoom -and- NO FUGGING ZOOM CREAP - it’s sitting on my desk right now, upright, fully extended, and just waiting for me to put it back to 35mm or whatever! Plus, this one is nice to look at.

This one still had it’s *virgin* filter on the front (a Tiffen 812, no less!) and I almost hated to ‘break it’s cherry’ when I took that light stealing artifact off it for the first time since 1986....but, it was REAL good ; ) I almost thought there was water floating on the front element...literally perfect ; )

What about SHARPNESS?! All that you need to know is that it had identical center sharpness and some SHARPER corners than my Minolta f1.4 50mm prime at f4.5 in very scientific testing!!!! But….oh please…don‘t drive up the prices…sigh.

My only very weak gripe is the rear focus...we've been conditioned all our lives to brace our cameras by holding the rear of the lens for stability (and lower shake/shutter speeds) and....someone at Minolta back in the day decided to CHANGE that?! It's all good ; 0

I’ve changed my scores….

-Shootist

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: derekw   review date: January-12-10  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 28-85, 28-105s, 35-105s

price paid:

£112 GBP

positive:

Sharp across the frame at all focal lengths
Colour
Versatility

negative:

No lens hood

comment:

Super lens. Doesn't even feel excessively heavy. Recommended

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: ghmcs   review date: January-05-10  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sony 16-105 f/3.5

price paid:

330 USD (used)

positive:

extremely good image quality, quick autofocus for this zoom range, high performance-to-cost ratio

negative:

size and weight, oddball filter size, zoom creep

comment:

I wasn't quite prepared for the large size and weight of this lens. I'd much rather carry the smaller, lighter Sony 16-105 around all day. That said, for a 25 year old lens, the performance is extremely good even by today's standards. The camera's view TTL is very bright and clear. And, for full frame, what other choices are there in this very useful zoon range, especially at this price? Minor annoyances - the odd 72mm filter diameter, and zoom creep. In fact 'creep' doesn't quite describe it; let the lens dip much below horizontal and the zoom just takes off.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: Nygaard   review date: January-01-10  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

28-85 F3,5-4,5
18-70 3,5-4,5
35-70 F4

positive:

Build quality
Weight
Range
Color
Sharp wide open
Very sharp closed down a bit
Fast AF

negative:

Flare
Front element is way out there
No original hood
Could be faster

comment:

I bought this lens a few days ago, after reading all the raving reviews on this wonderful page. The price wasn´t a bargain, and the front element had a few dings and scratches but this doesn´t affect my view on tis lens.
This lens is a gem! I must say that I agree with all the positive reviews, this lens is awesome. It is very reasonable sharp wide open, and closed down a stop it is on par with my 50mm. The range is perfect for me since I got the wide end covered with my Sigma 10-20. This lens is the perfect walk around lens, and though many might find it a bit on the heavy side, it balances great on my A700 with grip. The large front element is sitting right there in the very front of the lens, which makes it very prone to scratches and such, so a UV filter or an after market hood might help protecting it.

Its negatives put aside, this is a lens you shouldn´t hesitate to buy if you can find a decent copy. You are not going to buy mine, cause this one is definately a keeper!

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: berlin steve   review date: January-01-10  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sony DT 3.5-5.6/18-70, Minolta:Beercans 35-70, 70-210mm & 75-300mm; 50mm f1.7; 135mm f2.8; Minolta 28-135; Tokina 28-70 2.8 AT-X; Tokina SD 70-210

price paid:

eur 130

positive:

sharp
minolta colours
good build quality

negative:

heavy
rear focus ring spin catches me out every time...
not 2.8, but you can't have everything...

comment:

Like all good Minolta lenses, this one comes with an orthopedic warning. Heavy! It doesn't look as heavy as it is, considering its size. But it is.

It has a nice range, and for a (heavy) walk around can prove quite useful as a result.

The focus ring at rear catches me the first couple of shots I take whenever I shoot with this lens on. The torque generated feels like it is about to draw you into the innards of the lens when your supporting hand is holding the lens. This has to be my bigger gripe with this glass. I'm sure if I used it for longer periods of time, I would become accustomed to it.

What can I say that hasn't already been said. This is a lens that deserves its reputation. It covers a useful range with good IQ all the way. Nice for portraits, and with my Soligor 1.7 teleconverter means I can get Beercan like zoom results without needing to take the Beercan with me when traveling. Without teleconverter IQ is of course slightly better than the good ol' Beercan.

I have to admit though, within a day or so of getting this lens I also got a first generation Tokina 28-70 2.8 A-TX lens (for which I'll be writing the review once this model is posted) which IMO is in some ways better than the Minolta. Both are sharp, both have great Minolta colours (even though only one is a Minolta) and only one is 2.8. And that is not this lens, and makes me wish it was... because otherwise this lens would be perfect.

If you don't need a 2.8 zoom and want all the other great features like built like a tank, and the ability to sever fingers with the focus ring coupled with great colours and super IQ, then this is one to get. I would like this lens far more if I hadn't got that 'pesky' 28-70 Tokina which is in some ways just as good, but with 2.8 to boot. And not quite as heavy.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: linearamp   review date: December-31-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

minolta 35 - 105 mm
minolta 70 - 210mm f4
minolta 50mm f 1.7
sigma 90mm macro
carl zeiss flektogon 35mm
carl zeiss sonnar 135mm
pentacon 135mm f2.8
vivitar 28mm manual f2.8
minolta rokkor 58mm pg f1.2

price paid:

£77.00

positive:

well built
very sharp
contrasty

negative:

heavy
some flare

comment:

i got this lens cheap off ebay ,and its definaltly staying in my bag.
ive been looking for this lens for a while after reading the comments and reviews posted here.
It hasnt dissapointed one iota . Very Very sharp typical minolta colours .and contrasty. Focus seems very quick on my sony A700 .others have said its slow ,but i havent noticed it been slow.
i have the minolta 35-105mm also ,i thought this lens was my favourite lens in my bag ,but now i have changed my mind
its got to be the minolta 28-135mm ..

negaitve points its rather heavy and is prone to flare ,but this isnt a problem for me

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: Glass   review date: December-15-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

positive:

Fantastic walk around lens for FF
Great Color
Excellent range

negative:

Poor in low light and short focus distance

comment:

This is the very first lens I ever used. My father purchased it for me with a Maxxum 7000 from one of his tennis buddies in the early 90s. If one can deal with the weight and limitations of the lens, I think they'll find that this monster produces GREAT images. The build quality is 1st class and above anything I've seen in current production. Metal and glass, just like a lens is supposed to be. My copy is still in great shape after over 20 years of use. This is the one lens I would never part with.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: derekw   review date: December-07-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 35-105 f3.5-4.5 (original)
sigma 24-135
Tamron 24-135

price paid:

£122

positive:

Very sharp across the range
Colour
Build

negative:

No lens hood

comment:

Best zoom you can buy if you can live with the flare and slow maxinum aperture.

Different quality but 35-105 runs it very close and my 100-300 APO lens hood works a treat on the 35-105

sharpness: 3,5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: nitrosyl   review date: November-24-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

- Sony Carl Zeiss 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 Vario-Sonnar T*
- Sony Carl Zeiss 24-70mm f/2.8 Vario-Sonnar T*
- Minolta 28-70mm f/2.8 G

positive:

- Very nice range.
- Fairly sharp across the frame.
- Built like a tank.
- "Macro" mode is useful in some situation.

negative:

- Rare, hard to find a nice copy.
- No OEM lens hood
- Flare
- MFD
- Rotating front element when zooming
- "Macro" mode is manual focus only.

comment:

This lens is built like a tank and performs well across the whole frame. Holding it I felt it's gonna outlive me by a large margin ;-)

It would be the ideal lens for outdoor/landscape A-mount photographers. Indoor/congested area could be a bit of problematic due to its long MFD, but that's when you will appreciate the "Macro" mode (MF only though) at 28mm!! IMHO that's a very thoughtful design.

The lens works very well on APSC (lacks wide angle though), and definitely shines with a 24MP FF sensor!

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: shinka   review date: November-23-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sigma 24-70/2.8 EX DG
MinO 70-210/4
MinO 28/2
MinO 50/1.4
MinO 85/1.4
MinO 135/2.8

price paid:

400 USD (used)

positive:

Wonderful colors
Nice and sharp
Love the build quality

negative:

Crappy minimum focus distance
terrible flare control

comment:

Not much unique to add to what has already been said about this lens. It definitely has its quirks/disadvantages (minimum focus distance, flare control) but I really like this lens.

The first thing I noticed was the fantastic build-quality of this lens. Each end of the (very smooth) zoom range has wonderfully dampened stops that prevent lens creep and just feel very solid.

The flare control is kind of a problem. Not only is the front element right up to the front of the lens barrel, there is no provision for attaching a lens hood. I bought a shallow lens hood (about 1-inch deep) to help with flare, but it vignettes very badly at 28mm (on Full Frame), so that's not a very good option either. Until I find a better option, I'll just have to use my hand.

My favorite part of this lens, however it the colors. I think it's the best example of 'classic' Minolta colors I've seen (and I have lots of Minolta glass).

Overall image quality is superb, but if you're going to purchase this lens, make sure you're aware of its drawbacks as well as its positive attributes before buying.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: REVENGE   review date: November-16-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

35-70mm f4
50mm Macro

price paid:

266 USD

positive:

Acceptably sharp wide open
Good colors
Built like a tank
Useful Macro MFD

negative:

CA until f8
Average flare control
No standard hood
Annoying creep from 50mm onward
Long MFD

comment:

Another old lens that seems somewhat over-hyped nowadays (similar to the Beercan IMHO). For full frame users this lens does indeed offer great walk-around coverage and performs admirably despite its aged design. However, on APS-C that range is less ideal, and on digital in general the design faults start to show up.

This lens is NOT super sharp wide open, and I expect any comparisons being made to some of the higher end primes are superlative. What IS remarkable is the level of corner sharpness. Stopping this lens down to f8 gives an incredibly sharp picture throughout the frame, and CA disappears by then too. Shoot in fair weather to truly appreciate the IQ of this lens.

Kurt Munger remarked that Sony could toss digital glass, SSM and a G badge on this lens and it would sell sell sell. I beg to differ, seeing as this lens is both heavy and not very fast. At this price, full frame users aren't going to find anything better, and APS-C users won't complain too much either. Personally, I would like a see a new Sony lens based on this design and zoom range, with the same center and edge sharpness at a constant f2.8 apeture, with SSM and a reduced MFD. Then Sony could justifying putting on the G badge, and jacking the price way up to the $1000 level.

sharpness: 3,5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: raisiner   review date: November-11-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Beercan
Min 35-105
G's & CZ's

price paid:

Approx $350

positive:

Build (if you like weight)
Range of focal length

negative:

Overall less than expected

comment:

I'm on my third copy of this lens and I'm giving up. The first two were not bad but not great in color and sharpness. Of course they had flare problems under the right conditions and I did find some distortion but not bad. The current copy is in the best shape cosmetically and the glass is clean. However, its not as sharp as one of my previous copies and the colors lean toward simply dull.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: Jojakim   review date: November-10-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

- Sigma 28-70/2.8
- Tamron 17-50/2.8
- Minolta 24-105/3.5-4.5

positive:

- Sharp!
- Build like a tank

negative:

- Weight like a tank
- Slow
- Pronounced distortion

comment:

It's heavy!! It's massive!

I might not have the best copy, the zoom is not very smooth anymore and macro mode is sticky. Also I discovered the distortion is quite big, but maybe unfairly compared to my macro's.

I was amazed by some sdamples I saw on the web and bought it quickly. Now I hardly use it because I grab my macro when I need sharpness and use my Minolta for better speed and ADI flash.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: nvc789   review date: October-22-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

minolta 28-85mm
tamron 17-50mm

price paid:

250 USD

positive:

great build
great colours
Sharp

negative:

horrible flare
minimum focus distance
28mm is not wide on APS-C

comment:

I bought this lens over a year ago and love what it does. Sure it has it's warts like the size, weight and minimum focus distance of about 6-7 feet. Pictures, especially portraits come out beautiful, there is something magical about the pictures it produces, especially between the 90-135mm. It is one of the few lenses I will never sell. I find the focus is a bit off when I stop it down past f5.6 (ie back focus). buy it if you can.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 2 

user: ckone   review date: October-19-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

28 - 85

price paid:

gift with M.9000

positive:

Colour
Bokeh
Distorsion

negative:

Flare Issue
Weight

comment:

One of the Minolta classics and my first lens that came with the Minolta 9000 :)
Okay, getting over sentimentals, back to business: It's a heavy lens and you may get the imperession, that it's a rigid lens, but the interior mechanics is sensitive, especially the diaphragm. You may get used to the focusing ring, which always scratched my finger, but in the 20 using years I got used to it and knew, where to place my hand...
Distorsion is great from 35 to 50 and 70 to 135 mm, in the other parts I observed pincushion distorsion, but not bad ones.
Which was difficult to handle (with the usage of several rolls of film...) was the flare, which tended to ruin some pictures; golden rule: Turn away from the sun...
I liked the range better than the 28-85, which was short some times, it's an ideal walkaround lens, especially if you work on fullframe, diital and/or film.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: jakoblochowich   review date: October-08-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tokina AT-X pro 28-70 f2.6-2.8
Minolta 70-210 f4 (beercan)
minolta 20 f2.8
minolta 50 f1.7
minolta 100 f2

price paid:

200 Euro (used)

positive:

Sharpness
Colors
Build
All-round-qualities
quite good macro function

negative:

minimum distance
indoor abilities
no hood: flare
weight (if that's an issue)

comment:

If a perfect out-door all-round lens exists - this one gets close...

I just came back from one month of traveling in japan and this lens did such a great job, that I have to celebrate it here.

I used it practically every day for such different things as portrait, buildings, landscapes, street life, and close up macro-shots. No matter what I capture with this lens, it comes out razor sharp and with great colors - both wide open and stopped down. Even the macro function is surprisingly good - far better than just usable.

It's a heavy and well-build lens. Iron and glass - nothing else! But it is born without a hood, which can create flare in some direct-sun situations.

Apart from that, the only weak point of this lens is its indoor abilities. With its minimum distance of 1.5 meter, combined with f4-4.5, indoor shooting is clearly not what it is meant for.

But the minute you step out the door it creates miracles!

Get it if you can!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: tuanle   review date: October-08-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

price paid:

400 (used)

positive:

negative:

Flare

comment:

If you use the full frame camera or film camera, the flare is your biggest challenge!!! At 28mm, the big ruber hoods on ebay can not help you at all (IMO). On my A350, the hood is very useful for this lens.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: TxllxT   review date: October-03-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

none

price paid:

525 NGL

positive:

Very reliable overall wide-zoom-macro, quickly sharp, fine color, renders stunningly back the live atmosphere in which a photo was taken.

negative:

Some flare

comment:

Twenty years ago I bought this lens secondhand for half the new price (525 guilders = about 240 EURO) from my student allowance. Ever since it remained my steady life-companion, being joined with two Minolta filmcamerabodies, the Sony a100 and since a few days the Sony a900. I may confess here, it is this lens that has made a photography-enthusiast out of me. In my studentdays I acquired the AF 28-135 with hardly any backgroundknowledge, just following the judgment of my own eyes (& the available money in my pocket). I wanted to have once and for all an allround zoomlens of high quality. (- I'm delighted to read the confirmations of this in this forum -). Well, this wish for sure has come true. With my a900 I'm entering complete new fields of photography (having switched from JPG to cRAW), but with each picture taken the real credits go to the Minolta AF 28-135. Reading all the complaints about heavy weight etc., I can only comment that I've never known otherwise. When I get a DSLR from friends in my hands, it's the lack of weight that begins to bother me... Probably I am the second owner of this lens, carrying it through Europe on countless travels. With the a900 the wonderful days of wideviewing Full Frame will be coming back. Just cannot wait to go out on holiday again!

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: madecov   review date: September-27-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 28-85
Minolta 24-85
Minolta 35-105
Tamron 17-50

price paid:

Stole it (used)

positive:

Sharp, good colors, low distortion. Fast AF, Non rotating front in AF, moderate apertures

negative:

Front rotates when zooming, large heavy, Long minimum focus distance, no factory hood, large filter diameter. reversed focus and zoom rings

comment:

Picked this lens up at a local camera shop. My copy has a bit stiff zoom from 70mm through 100mm and then is smooth again, but I've read on line that this lens may have some internal build issues. I've not really wrung this lens out in high contrast shooting but indications are it's sharp. Colors are typical of Minolta lenses. Not a lens that I want to carry around all day due to weight. It does make my A-700 with grip look huge. I couldn't see someone using it with the A-230 series bodies. The zoom range is nice but I'm not all that sure it's so far ahead of the 24-85RS / 28-85 / and 35-105 originals to justify the huge price difference (other than extended tele end) and the other lenses focus closer. If you can find one at a reasonable price it's another tool in the arsenal but I don't see were it's head and shoulders above other quality Minolta lenses of the same era, maybe I just need to work with it more as I just got it and did some quick Jpg shots around the yard. I have not tried macro with this lens and typically don't use macro in zooms since I have dedicated macro lenses.

Might be a good two lens set with the 100-300 series


Edit: I'm going to leave flare control rating were it is. This lens exhibits a bit more flare than I like. I will be looking to pick up a rubber collapsing hood

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: Tetraodon   review date: September-20-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 100-300 APO D
KoMi 28-75 2.8 D

positive:

- Sharp
- Colours
- Build

negative:

- MFD (1,5 m)
- Prone to flare (no Hood included)
- Chunky

comment:

I bought this lens 20 years ago and it costed me an arm and a leg. Since then it travelled with me around the world and there was never any glitch. It's build like a tank - IQ always has been top.

I now use it on my A700 - IQ is still tremendous. It' prone to flare, because Minolta never provided a hood for this gem. Focussing is up to date

Annoying is the MFD of 1.5 m.

Nevertheless: Sony should reanimate this legendary lens to digital standards (coating and MFD) - ok: it wont happen ...

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: Blair7   review date: September-19-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Min 28-85, Min 50, Min 35-105, Tam 17-50, Beercan

price paid:

$225 CDN

positive:

Sharp (I mean really sharp)

negative:

Heavy
flare

comment:

I bought this lens a few months ago as a result of reviews I read here. The first copy had a little spot that did not effect performance. I was able to acquire this lens, a Min 50 1.7 and a 7000 for $225 CDN. I sold the other copy. I used it a little on my 7D but it was too heavy for what I was doing at the time.
I used it on my A700 this week while doing some hiking and photography of some different rivers and waterfalls. I really see what this lens can do. I am really happy with the results.
The weight meant that at times I was choosing other options. I will now choose this lens whenever I can.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: zeroone   review date: September-17-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

35-70 Minolta f4, 28-85 Minolta f3.5,
17-210 Minolta f4, 50-f3.5 macro Minolta, 24-50 f4 Minolta, 50 mm 1.4 Minolta, and a few others as well.

price paid:

$300 USD

positive:

Very sharp
Great range
Fast Focus
Balances well on A900
Could be used wide open on APSC

negative:

A touch bulky
Flare prone
Low contrast
Minimum focus distance is very limiting

comment:

Up front I must make a point, all my lens testing is done in RAW, tripod mounted with precise exposures set using uni WB, and converted in Raw Developer, this method extracts every last bit of detail from an image file and shows up any problems quite obviously.

Make no mistake here unless you are using RAW and a decent convertor you will never know just how good this or pretty much any of the above lenses really are.

So how does this classic perform.

It is an utterly amazing lens, it is sometimes bettered at certain settings by some of the above but the key to this lens is consistency across the entire range.

If the lens were used on APSC one could truly shoot wide open at pretty much any focal length, full frame needs a bit of stopping down to get edges really sharp.

At 28 mm the full frame is critically sharp at f13, the edges get softer with each stop wider, diffraction is a minor issue at this aperture but things can easily be re-sharpened if needed. Of the above lenses the 24-50 may look just a little bit sharper at 28 mm but it is very very close.

35 mm performance is quite stellar, at at f8-11 is pretty much as sharp as one could hope for, it is better than all of the above lenses at this setting.

At 50 mm is performance is sharp across the entire frame even at fairly wide apertures, but its central resolution is not as tack sharp as the 35-70 or the 50 mm f3.5 macro. It should be noted though that at 50 mm the 35-70 is quite incredible and beats all other lenses bar the 50 mm f3.5 (but it comes very very close) I have said it before, if you need a 50 mm lens for your Sony bypass the fixed 50s and buy the 35-70 it is a better performer unless you really need wide apertures.

At 70 mm the 28-135 rocks, it creams the alternatives easily.

Above 85 mm it is a close call between the 70-210 and the 28-135, either will do the business and it should be noted that the 70-135 mm range is the optimum for the 70-210.

I could not use this a general purpose lens, it is a bit too heavy and the MFD is just too limiting, but that is what I have the 35-70 or 28-85 is for. But for landcsape work, and a whole array of jobs where close focusing is a non- issue the 28-135 is a very fine tool indeed.

Strangely I think it would make a better option for those who would other wise buy a 28 f2.8 or either of the 35 mm Minoltas as it seems to out-resolve them by a margin and as said the 50 mm setting is better than the f1.4 and way better than the f1.7. And the 70 mm setting rocks, so if you wanted to just cover the 28-70 mm range this is likely the optimum tool.

Contrast is low, but I feel this is a benefit as the files are very easy to tweak as a result, but out of the camera they can look a little flat. You definitely can not point it into the sun and expect anything reasonable.

The price for the lens seems high to many folk, but my feeling is that it is a bargain for what it can do. If a new lens were available that resolved across the range like this one the price would be sky high (like over $2500.00) and of course it would have higher contrast and better flare control.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: northernfarmer   review date: September-15-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

SAl 50 F/1.4
minolta Beercan 70-210 F/4
Sigma 18-125 3.5-5.6

price paid:

300 Euro

positive:

Build and performance
Sharp
True like reproduction
Natural color

negative:

A little bit flare

comment:

Fantastic build and IQ! It is a legend lens. Also an example of human innovation and quality control.

Many thanks to everybody here for your strong recommendations.

It is proved to be much flexible compared with the major primes with decent IQ. The macro is usable esp in 28mm range.It produced natural color than that of warm classic minolta such as beercan.The optical design philosophy of 1st generation of minolta lens is something different from modern one. I like the taste but can't tell in words.

My copy is surprisingly new. Maybe what I paid is more expensive than guys here. I am still happy with the my decision after use of half year.

I would like to keep it as my 7D daily lens. Were it possible for you to find one in decent price, don't miss it.

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: chad   review date: September-10-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

minolta 50 f;1/7 28:28 34-70 f:4 28-85,24-105,beercan,
big beercan,sigma 24-135, tamron 1 7-50, tamron 28-300

price paid:

300 usd

positive:

very sharp even at 135 mm

negative:

contrast is not as good as
my tamron 17-50, but what a
sharp and colorful lens it is.

comment:

This lens is incredible. For the first time i was sastified
almost totally with a lens. But minolta has produce others "secret handshake": marvelous 28-85,35-70 f:4,50 f;1/7,beercan and big beercan.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: karchon   review date: August-30-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tamron 17-50mm
Sony 70-300G

positive:

Sharp all around

negative:

MFD
Not for low light

comment:

When i bought this, I was completely skeptical of the hype. It felt cumbersome when i took it out of the box. What i did love when i took it out of the box was its huge front element. Absolutely sexy IMO.

I took it to a graduation shoot a few months back, and I was not impressed with the image quality. The graduation was obviously in poor light but I expected more due to the hype. I defaulted back on the Tamron for the f2.8.

Not having touched it for a few months (other than keeping it clean), I decided to put it through the tests yesterday to see if i should just sell this heavy glass for a hefty profit or keep for FF a8/9xx. I tested this against the Tamron and my Sony G 70-300mm, as i feel these lens give a good standard of my minimum sharpness requirements.

With an a700, I tested f4, f5.6, f8 from ranges of 28, 50, 70, 135mm during sunset and after sunset (to test low light) handheld & tripod, against a high contrast object at infinity. Results blew me away. The Minolta 28-135mm had sharper images all around with better color saturation. However, it was not sensitive to light contrast as the Tamron was through out the range. With the Tamron, areas of low light had better illumination in the final product. The Minolta yielded more "dark" areas. This explained why the graduation pictures from the 28-135 did not look good. However, the colors from this lens reminded me of my 35-105 Orig - was so saturated wonderful colors!

I will keep this lens for the rest of my life simply because it really is prime sharp stopped down. It was sharper than the 70300G and the Tamron 17-50mm. My only grip is the MFD. I love the weight even though it throws my a700 off balance. This will definitely be used on my FF when i get it.

I still need to test flare control as i have not had a good chance to do so. (Remains at 3 rating)

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: rvonner   review date: August-25-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sony 18-70mm (kit lens)
Minolta 50mm
Minolta 70-210mm (beer can)

price paid:

40 USD

positive:

Sharp pictures
Good detail
Excellent colors
Well built

negative:

Heavy
Light flair om lens.
Some hunting in low light.

comment:

I had an opportunity to use this lens at a Weeding this past weekend. I used this lens for almost all the pictures I took. The range 28 - 135mm was the perfect range that I needed that day. I tried to start out with the kit lens. I was not pleased with the results. The lens did some hunting in low light, but other than that I was pretty pleased with the results. When I purchased this lens it came with 50mm and 70-210mm (beercan). All lens were in good condition. I thank God for the opportunity to get these three lens at that price.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: JeremyT   review date: August-19-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

* Sony 18-70 F3.5-5.6 (kit)
* Minolta AF 28-75 F2.8 D
* Minolta 50mm F1.7
* Sigma 18-50 F2.8 EX DC

price paid:

185 USD (used)

positive:

* Impressive build quality
* Long range
* Very sharp wide open < 100mm
* Odd but fun 1:4 "macro" mode at 28mm

negative:

* CA
* Flare (and no hood)
* Poor minimum focal distance (1.5m)
* Hype has driven the price too high (over 300 USD)
* Not as sharp wide open > 100mm
* Heavier and bulkier than modern lenses

comment:

I bought this lens (in well-used condition) by accident on ebay. Despite an ugly exterior, the optics seem to be nearly flawless. I hear that this lens can have build quality issues, but my copy doesn't.

A better body might need stopping down throughout the range for optimal sharpness, but under 100mm it out-resolves the A200 sensor. Beyond that some softness is visible, but stopped down 1 stop it beats the A200 sensor again.

Colors are "classic Minolta." Images have the same "feel" as those taken with the 50mm prime (similar bokeh, similar colors).

The lens can flare, and it didn't have a hood. CA is problematic - I commonly see purple fringing in high contrast areas. Stopping down just a little helps.

Dedicated macro at 28mm is odd, but I've found it surprisingly useful. It allows for some creative shots, and in some cases it can be used to work around the nasty 1.5m MFD.

The filter ring rotates on zoom, but not on focus (the focus ring is near the body). AF is as fast and accurate as any on my A200, though I hear a "knocking" sound when it operates (could be my copy).

If you get a good copy for $200 or less, it's a great value and worth every penny. But if you're looking at $300 or more, the choice is less clear to me. "Like a G" claims aside, this lens has some drawbacks compared to modern lenses.

It's got a great range for full-frame, but it's heavy and slow relative to modern glass. I think the market for this lens is somewhat limited - the range is problematic on APS/C, and I have to think that anybody who can afford a 2000 USD+ full frame body will be willing to spend more on a modern replacement that will perform better.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: vitaly   review date: July-17-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

price paid:

370 USD

positive:

Razor sharp
Excellent color
Build quality
Weight

negative:

comment:

with Hoya digital filter and hood no flare and CA

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: beppe61   review date: July-16-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

C.Z. 24-70 f2.8 SSN

price paid:

250 EURO (used)

positive:

Very very sharp, fantastic "Minolta colors", great buid.

negative:

minimum focus distance

comment:

This is a great lens, perfect for my A900!
It's very sharp, even wide open, and has the best "Minolta colors" I've ever seen! Flare is not a problem. The only little problem is the minimum focus distance: 1,5m

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: Paul07   review date: July-12-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

KM 28-75/2.8 D
KM 24-105/3.5-4.5 D
Minolta 85/1.4
CZ 85/1.4

price paid:

EUR 250

positive:

Build qualitiy
Sharpness center to edge
Minolta colours
Nice long range

negative:

Less flare resistant and no dedicated hood
Rather long minimal focus distance

comment:

I got really interested in the lens after reading a review at www.artaphot.ch (see links page for this lens), comparing this 28-135 with a few G- and CZ-lenses.

I must say I can only confirm the very positive results as reflected in above review.

I does not have an f/1.4 or 2.8 available, but it does perform extremely well when used wide open througout the range. Never needs to be stopped down to provide nicely sharp images, and always giving the known Minolta colours.
Also, build quality is superior to the newer 28-75, 24-105, 16-105 and 18-250. Hardly anything but metal and glass has been used.

On the downside, and as obvious consequence of the above, the lens is heavier and less compact than the more recent "standard allrounds"... But that is a consequence I gladly accept, considering the plusses this lens offers.

Its range suits me very well. I was used to having the 28-75 as standard zoom, and the additional 75-135 range is very usefull. I personally prefer that over a 16-80 alternative.

Without any hood, the lens is prone to flare, but the generic rubber hood I got with it does eliminate most of that.

This type of lens obviously was known very well by Minolta users and it seems a lot of copies have been used extensively. It also took me two tries to get a good copy.

In short, I can understand why this lens is called "secret handshake". It does not carry a G-label, but still offers most (if not all) of the G-lens quality, at a very decent price !

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: cassious   review date: June-29-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

The entire minolta line...

price paid:

150.00

positive:

Nice all around lens

negative:

CA!!!!
FLARE!!
Minimum Focus Distance

comment:

For some reason I seem to find this lens on my camera quite a bit..It works fairly well in most applications and offers a nice zoom range on the "C" sensor.

The colors are true to Minolta and thats probably the best feature of the lens. The purple fringing is almost unbearable. Also prone to flare like everyone says...if your aware of it while shooting its usually not an issue..

Descent all around lens...

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: dsoulsticec   review date: May-21-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 100mm Macro F2.8
Minolta 28-135mm F4.0-4.5 XX's Crossed
Minolta 135mm F2.8
Minolta 70-210mm F4.0
Minolta 50mm F1.7
Minolta 100-200mm F4.5
Minolta 35-105mm F3.5-4.5
Minolta 28-85mm F3.5-4.5
Minolta 35-70mm F4.0
Sigma 35-135mm 3.5-4.5
Minolta 100-300mm APO F4.5-5.6
Sony 18-70mm F3.5-5.6

price paid:

390 USD (used)

positive:

negative:

comment:

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: DonSergio   review date: May-14-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

16-80/3.5-4.5za
24-105/3.5-4.5 (Minolta and Sony)
24-70/2.8za
35-70/4

price paid:

400$ (used)

positive:

Great resolution from 28 to 100mm.
Very good colors an bokeh.
Great range for outdoor.

negative:

Softness from 100 to 135mm.
Flare.
Bad edge sharpness on A900.
Rotating front element on zooming (so hard to use CPL and gradient filters).
No hood.
Hard to find in good conditions.

comment:

i think that minolta 28-135/4-4.5 is the best full frame travel zoom suitable for A-mount at this moment. Because it have great image quality from wide open at the range 28-~100mm (colors, contrast, bokeh) all in one except edges of full frame images (no notocable on APS-C cameras). In most of aspects of image quality it's better than 24-85/3.5-4.5, 24-105/3.5-4.5, 35-70/4.

But for me on APS-C 16-80za is much more versitile lens.

28-135/4-4.5 is not ideal lens.
Lens is big such 24-70za (except filter diameters 72mm vs 77mm). Lens does not have original hood and flare are noticeble often. Front element rotates on zooming (not focusing) but use CPL and gradient filters is not ideal. Focusing ring rotates than AF works. At 100-135mm visible softness and contrast lossing, but this range usable for portrait from wide open.

If you can live thith this issues 28-135/4-4.5 is great choice and pick pick up it if You find it in MINT conditions.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: Mr_Canuck   review date: May-13-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sony 16-105
Sigma 17-70
Min 135/2.8
Min 100/2
Min 50/1.7
Min 35/2

positive:

Range at long end.
Sharpness, colour.
Smooth Minolta look of images.
Quick focussing.
Price.

negative:

Min focus distance (compensated for by a useful macro mode).
Flare.

comment:

The "Secret Handshake" Minolta:
It's a lens I feel I can trust to deliver great images all the time at whatever aperture and focal length. I don't have to walk out the door wondering if I should have brought a prime in case I want a 'really good quality' image (my own photography skills aside) – this wasn't the case with the digital-only zooms I tried. It has that beautiful, smooth, natural, colourful look of the best Minolta lenses. It stands up very well against my Minolta primes at similar apertures. It seems to be sharp all the way through the range. Nice bokeh at long end. The autofocus is really quick on my a700. I like the range on APSC and prefer the extra reach at the long end.

On the downside, it is prone to flare. I have a plastic lens hood that helps in this regard. However, the front element rotates on zooming, which makes using a petal hood not the best option. The minimum focus distance is long, but I consider it an outdoors lens so that's not an issue for me; and it has a useful macro mode if you need it. It is a bit loud as it snaps into focus, which might be an issue at an event where noise was a concern; but no more obtrusive than an SLR shutter snap. It is also a heavy lens and I do feel the weight of it over time, but same with the 200/2.8 – if you want metal and good glass, weight comes with. None of these are significant weaknesses nor reasons to avoid this lens.

This truly is the "secret handshake" lens. Because there's no G label on the barrel, it gets less stage presence. Interestingly, it bucks the trend of the higher quality Minolta legacy lenses, and is less expensive than it was new.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: RuneDK   review date: April-20-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 70-210mm f/4
Minolta 100mm f/2.8 Macro
Minolta 50mm f/1.4

price paid:

250 CHF

positive:

Sharpness
Color
Bokeh
Focal Range
Zoom ring
Fast AF

negative:

Heavy
MFD
Filter size
Back focus

comment:

This is a great all-round lens in my opinion. It focuses fast, although i think that the back-focus is inconvenient even though it allows use of special filters since the front element doesn't rotate.
Sharpness and color are classical Minolta, and I like how the zoom ring locks at both ends of the range.
The macro function I rarely use. I find it better to use a dedicated macro lens.

In all, a recommended all-round lens if you can live with the weight and MFD. In my opinion the IQ easily overcomes those "problems".

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: Strider25   review date: April-14-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Big Beercan
Sony 55-200

price paid:

$330

positive:

-Great Minolta Color
-Very well built
-Fast rear focusing

negative:

-None really. I guess its perfomance in low-light. Not too good, but, then again, not what it was made for

comment:

Best lens i own, bar none. I just love the color and sharpness of the images this lens produces. This lens is easily worth more than what i paid for. Long live Minolta's legacy

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: jordo7   review date: April-14-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Beercan
Big Beercan
18-70 Sony
100mm Macro Sony

price paid:

$350 (worth $700)

positive:

Hard to take a bad picture with it. Of my favorite 100 pictures, 90% taken with this lens. 3-D quality to the pics. Nice weight, great build quality.

negative:

About 6 ft. minimum focusing distance is the only drawback that I've found.

comment:

Best lens I own, hands down. Only the 100mm macro is sharper in my collection. This lens has a different look to its pictures than any of the others. Bokeh is amazing. Hand the camera to anyone with it set in auto mode and this lens will give professional results.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: villykl   review date: April-07-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

minolta 35-105 f 3.3-4.5 LBC
sony 70300 G SSM
minolta 70-210 f 4 BC
minolta 75-300 f4.5-5.6 BBC

price paid:

357 USD

positive:

sharp
color
3-D look
fast

negative:

need hood

comment:

I glad to have legendary lens now.
Buy it!!!!!!!!!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: solomonXX   review date: April-04-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Beercan

price paid:

400 USD (used)

positive:

Sharp sharp sharp!
3-D effect;
fast AF focusing;
build quality

negative:

flare;
MFD - 5';

comment:

This is a truly amazing lens. I got a used but very rare cross XX copy. It is in mint condition. I have to say it is a non-G-label G lens. Actually the weight is well balanced on my A700, and the MF focus ring is very easily controlled.

I compared the lens to Beercan and it outperformed Beercan in every aspect. I only keep two zoom lenses and this is one of them.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: captmolo   review date: April-01-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sigma 18-50 f 3,5-5,6
Tamron 55-200
Tokina 20-35
KM 70-210
KM 50 f 1,4

price paid:

1200 NOK

positive:

Very good build
Very good image quality

negative:

Some say it is heavy :)

comment:

Got this lens used a couple of months ago, and could not be happier.

The zoom action is nice and tight. The focus ring is kind of loose on my copy and it makes a kind of "snap" noise when it starts or stops focusing but that was normal. Focusing is fast and spot on.

I dont mind the minimum focusing distance of this lens. Dont mind the weight either by the way, just adds to the quality feel i guess. I really do like the range 28-135 on my a200.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: wahgongzai   review date: March-29-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 70-210 F4
Minolta 35-105 F3.5-4.5

price paid:

US$280-US$320

positive:

Sharpness
Color
macro (1:4)
Build

negative:

rare

comment:

This is one of my "must get" lens in my collection now the list is finally complete for the 1:4 minolta seriers. Minolta 35-70, 28-85, 35-105, 28-135.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: fmajor   review date: March-20-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 24mm f2.8
Minolta 50mm f1.7
Minolta 28-85mm f3.5-4.5
Minolta 35-70mm f4
Minolta 70-210mm f4 "Beercan"
Multiple Minolta Rokkor Manual Focus lenses

price paid:

$310 (mint cond.)

positive:

Superb colors!!!
Sharp Sharp Sharp!!!
Fast focusing
Very good contrast

negative:

Slight CA present
A bit flare-prone

comment:

INITIAL REVIEW:

The 28-135mm is very sharp in the center while losing very little in the corners - exceptional in this regard. While maximum 'sharpness' is from f5.6 through f11. This is not an empirically-derived understanding; rather that i tend to notice the 'sharpest' photos in most all lighting conditions tend toward these 'middle' apertures.

Unlike some lenses which render "cartoon-like", overly-saturated colors these 1st Generation Minolta Maxxum lenses, such as this 28-135mm, render colors which are neither overly saturated/rich or flat.

The lens also exhibits excellent bokeh. The Minolta Legend lives up to the name!!!

The 28-135mm feels like what ALL lenses should feel like - in a word - SOLID. I would appreciate an OEM lens hood, but none exist. I found a nice all-metal hood that works quite well.

This lens is very fast focusing and I also like where the MF ring is placed (close to the body), but when auto-focusing i am careful not to have my finger on it as it spins quite rapidly. This is not because it's painful; rather that i don't want to impede the lens' functioning.

I have also noticed this lens does not "hunt" as frequently for a focus lock in lower light/contrast situations as my other "classic Minolta" lenses.

The MFD is on the long end at ~5ft. This is more of a design limitation and not necessarily a build flaw. The "Build Quality" is superb, it is only the design that is compromised in this one area - small matter given the other strengths.

The lens is susceptible to flare. This can be managed, but it's occasionally present all the same.

While the 28-135mm lens also does not have the official Minolta G-Series designation (with attributes such as constant f2.8 (or wider) aperture, etc., it delivers superb results with a very attractive focal range. It also delivers these results for a very reasonable price.

IMHO, this lens (with the 1st 300mm f2.8 and possibly the 70-210mm f4 "Beercan") is among the 1st G series Minolta AF lens - before the G designation was officially implemented. See the image of the 1st Generation Minolta camera/lenses/flashes brochure in my flickr page (found in my signature) for clarity on this.

Sharp, contrasty images with rich colors are the norm with this incredible lens and it is my go-everywhere lens for travel/work/home use.

This lens is HIGHLY recommended!!!! Don't wait - get one while there are still good samples available.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Raimios   review date: March-20-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Whatever....

price paid:

can't remember

positive:

Built, bokeh, sharp!!!!

negative:

comment:

Stop down a little bit and you get synonym for word SHARP!!! Why the heck they don't build lenses like this anymore.
This lens belongs to every Minolta lens collection, it's a living legend!

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: vangio   review date: March-12-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

AF 17-35mm 2,8-4 (D)
AF 24mm 2,8
AF 28-75mm 2,8 (D)
AF 28-85mm 3,5-4,5
AF 28-135mm 4-4,5
AF 35-105mm 3,5-4,5
AF 50mm 1,7
AF 70-210mm 4
AF 75-300mm 4,5-5,6 1st
Tamron AF 11-18 4,5-5,6
Beroflex 400mm 6,3 1st

price paid:

100 € (used)

positive:

very sharp
range
very fast AF
solid build

negative:

solid build
weight
size
only f4-4,5
min. focus distance

comment:

A very sharp lens with a really versatile zoom-range and a good addition to the 17-35mm 2,8-4 (D).
The very fast AF, only very little CA and the warm colors make fun. But only outside... Because of the min. focus distance of 1,5m and the slow f4-4,5 I use this lens only outdoor. There it is a very good performer when you stop down to f5,6.
In my opinion this isn't a „must have“ lens, but a really nice, very good performing, luxury solid one. And this is one of his biggest disadvantages too. The weight is high and it is not really compact. I've bought this lens for low money in good condition with a little axial play at the zoom-ring and I decide to repair this (Thanks to Pete Ganzel). Wow... what an impressing lens construction! The build quality is exceptional. A fine example of a high-quality-full-heavy-metal-lens.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: perese   review date: February-22-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Cosina 19-35/3.5-4.5
Minolta 50/1.7
Minolta 70-300/4.5-5.6
Sony 18-70/3.5-5.6
Sigma 70-300/4-5.6 APO II Macro

price paid:

150 EUR Used

positive:

The build, solid. sharp, color, bokeh. Fast AF - very fast.

negative:

It is a little heavy, but I like the balance with my a700. AF ring could burn your hand.

comment:

I've had this not for so long. But I do really like it. The colors, bokeh, build - you name it. It is worth every cent I bought it for. My copy is not so sharp at wide open, that's why only 4.5. The flare control is due to the lack of hood, but with a hood mounted it will be a 4. I tend to use it often and I have mounted on my a700, as my everyday lens. It is a keeper, unless I get a hold on a better copy.

Updated: I've two copies now, and I can say that the sharpness is quite impressing. And with the metal hood bought from ebay, the flare control is good.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: Sulde   review date: February-13-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

SAL 18-70, Tamron 18-250, 50/1.4, 100-300 APO

price paid:

250 USD (used)

positive:

Fantastic Colors and contrast!
Decent AF speed
Rather fast
Good zoom range
Build quality is good

negative:

Big and heavy
No hood, prone to flare
No wide angle on a crop camera
Hard to use in dark conditions
Focus distance

comment:

This is a legendary lens and if used wisely, it produces magic! I used it a lot during my travels, despite it doesn't have a wide end on A200. I think this lens gives the best color and "athmosphere", it is just fantastic! Good for both landscapes and portraits.
There are some negative points, of course - no hood, very heavy, etc. But why should I care? This is a legend, and I am proud to have it!

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: tommyrider   review date: February-12-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

DT 18-70
CZ 16-80
DT 18-250
Sony 70-300 G ssm
70-210 F4

price paid:

235 (used)

positive:

-Dramatic sharpness and color
-Good focal range,specially on FF
-Reasonably fast @135mm (f4.5)for its price,range and IQ
-Decent AF speed both in a200&a700
-Macro feature
-Stunning bokeh (best seen in all the lens i owned)
-Superb built quality

negative:

-Weight -but its all metal!!-
-Flare issues
-Contrast could be better
-Minimal focus distance is painfull for small rooms indoors.
-No lens hood (strongly reccomended to atach one)
-Flare issues

comment:

I owned this lens for several months.I was really excited with my first impression, having tried till that momment only dt 18-70 and 50 1.7.
Sharpness is very good, but most impressive, is the real -life looking images than this piece of glass can deliver.
Bokeh is simply outstanding.
NOt as sharp as CZ 16-80. But there are two different kind o "sharpness" here.
CZ`s is more "clinical" and resolves -according with the samples I tried both zeiss and Minolta - micro contrast detail.AF 28-135 has a special touch of magic plus neutral yet pretty accurate colors and drama to the pictures,
Relly m theres no much stuff to compare to Af 28-135.Its unique. As CZ 16-80 is ,even people compare it with sony 16-105, another nice lens but different in some points than cz 16-80.
I sold 28-135 to buy 16-80,wich find it useful because the wider end an focus distance.But if i didnt need to sell it i would keep it. Nothing compares to this lens,i overall features.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: hemigossipol   review date: February-12-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

18-70 Minolta
28-70 Tokina 2.8 AT-X

price paid:

$275

positive:

sharp
built like tank
contrast

negative:

no hood
heavy

comment:

Lens is very sharp. Has a near 3 dimensional quality with sun behind you. Color is excellent, built like a mortar shell. Wonderful lens. Rubber hood works well on it.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: tgx78   review date: February-11-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

CZ 16-80mm
minolta 28mm f/2.0
Sony 50mm f/1.4
Minolta 200mm HS G
Minolta 80-200 HS G

price paid:

340 USD Mint-

positive:

Sharp!
built like a tank
good focal length on a900
fast focus speed.

negative:

flare
min. focus distance
little heavy

comment:

Wow Wow and wow.

This lens is indeed very sharp between 28 - 100mm range.

Color is very good but I find contrast is little too much.

amazing on full frame body.

around f/8 everything is sharp corner to corner.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: perslucht   review date: February-08-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5
Minolta 35-70mm f/4
Minolta 70-210mm f/4
Sony DT 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6

price paid:

110 €

positive:

Sharpness
Build
Range

negative:

Weight/Build
Flare
No dedicated lens hood
Chromatic aberration

comment:

This lens seems to be, just like the beercan, a minolta-legend.
I think it's a bit overhyped, but that doesn't mean this is a bad lens.
Not at all, it has a good range (except there's no wide angle on aps-c). The colours are beautiful, nice contrast. The macro-mode on 28mm can be very useful. Bokeh is very nice, especially at 135mm.

The sharpness is oke, at least a aps-c. On full frame it seems the corners are a bit soft. In good light conditions the lens performs stopped down t 5.6/8 very good! But in less light I don't find this lens useful.

Don't forget this lens is very heavy! The focus is pretty fast on my A200. Never tested it on other cams.
Because there is no dedicated lens hood there is a lot of flare visible at 28mm! So get yourself also a lens hood when you buy this lens!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Ome_Joop   review date: January-10-09  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 70-210 F4
Minolta 35-105 F3.5-4.5
Minolta 35-70 F4

price paid:

125

positive:

Sharp
Fast AF
Build

negative:

No Lenshood
Noisy AF
Strange MF
Macro at 28mm!

comment:

WHat is to ssay about to say about this lense?!
It performs great that is for sure.
Drawbacks for me is the backfocus design wich makes it strange/hard to manual focus.
Mine is very noisy when AF but it's AF speed is very fatst (Warning: don't touch the focus ring as it moves at great speed!)
I bought a cheap flowerpad hood for it wich helps a bit against flare (don't know if there is a normal minolta style hood for it...is there a Hood database? Wich hood fits wich lens?)
Macro switch is useless as it's at 28mm and the strange focus ring position doesn't help either!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Kayzer   review date: December-16-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

minolta 50 f1,7

positive:

28-135mm range is outstanding on a quality glass like this.

negative:

Need service. I can of course complain because there is no hood, on the other hand it's up to me to utilize the potential this tools gives me.

comment:

I used this lens on A-100 and A-700 and she never gave me any whoo experience. On the A-900 it is a total different ballgame. She outperform the Minolta 50 1,7 by far, and the picture she gives me is so sharp that it hurts. Actually all Minolta glass shines on the A-900 which is logically because a full frame is what they where built for.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: Dynaton-DK   review date: December-01-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta AF24-85 F3.5-4.5
Minolta AF24-105D F3.5-4.5
Minolta AF28-85 F3.5-4.5
Minolta AF35-105N F3.5-4.5
Sigma AF18-200 F3.5-6.3
Sigma AF17-70 F2.8-4.5

price paid:

Bought used

positive:

Razor sharp
Fast autofocus

negative:

Heavy
Long minimum focús distance

comment:

This lens made me reconsider previously made reviews of fairly good lenses for a simple man like myself. Lenses that I used to think were very sharp are now degraded a notch in my book. I had to edit all other reviews setting the Minolta AF28-135 F4-4.5 as the reference in regard to sharpness, color and build quality.

This lens is extremely sharp - and has surprisingly fast autofocus that easily outperform the focus speed of my new lenses.

Pictures come out visuably much better with this lens than all the lenses that I've have or used to have.
This lens is simply superb - it's a keeper for all times to come.

It has some drawbacks, but when looking at these razor-sharp images and the colors I completely ignore the fact that it's very heavy and that you must take a step backwards to focus.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: kojben   review date: October-28-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 70-210/4
Minolta 24/2.8

positive:

Build quality
Good colours
Fast AF

negative:

Heavy!
Minimum focus distance!

comment:

I manage to get hold on a good lens on Ebay. The only thing with the lens is that when it is at 28mm position it kind of "wiggles". This disappears as soon as I move the zoom just a milimeter or two.

This is the lens I use most.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: tobyjay   review date: October-11-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

18-70
100-200 f/4.5
Beercan
Minolta primes - 24, 35, 50, 100, 135.
Various tamron/sigma zooms

price paid:

£200 near mint

positive:

Great walkabout range
Mega quality build
Amazing colours
Quick (rear) Autofocus
Sharp!

negative:

Too slow for indoors - without flash
Minimum focus distance is poor.

comment:

I didn't expect this to be so good. I just sold my 100-200 Minolta because the range was less than ideal and bought this instead. As an outdoor zoom it is ideal. Not that big and heavy - just properly made!

Sharp enough throught the zoom range wide open. CA not a problem. Distortion not a problem. Colours are outstanding - as good as the 85 1.4 and better than the 100-200 or beercan I think.

What a unit this lens is! Worth a lot more than I paid.

p.s. It is a little slow for lowlight but the onboard flash (A700) seems to work very well with this lens. It does not cast big shadows and the colours come up well using flash.

Highly recommended!!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: 5thElefant   review date: October-09-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tamron 28-105 F4-5.6 IF,
Minolta 70-210 F4

price paid:

£190 (mint)

positive:

Great performance right through range, built like a tank

negative:

Flare, built like a tank

comment:

Great quality, great results but very heavy.

I didn't use this lens much on aps-c, I had shorter and longer options and 28-135 didn't really cut it in utility terms. On full-frame it becomes genuinely useful.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: superx2won   review date: September-18-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

M50/1.7 & 2.8
Beercan
T17-50/2.8
M20/2.8

price paid:

200 USD (used)

positive:

Heavy ...i like it
Build is great, all metal
optic is great, all glass
great range - 28-135
Fast rear AF
IF..i like it
Sharp image
Standard 72mm ring

negative:

minimum focus distance is 1.5m?????
Loud AF sound

comment:

Build like a tank and heavy... some may dislike it but i like it. It give you more steady holding the len.

Image produced is sharp and the AF is fast. Wish that Sony build more len with rear focusing.

Good for outdoor walk around len but not good for indoor as minimum focus distance is 1.5m. If the MFD is 0.5m Then this is a great len.

if you found 1 is decent price , go and grab it. Good len.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 2 

user: GOG   review date: September-05-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Beercan 70-210/4
Minolta 50/1.7
Minolta 24/2.8

price paid:

300 USD (mint)

positive:

+ Sharp
+ Minolta Colors
+ Build Quality
+ Fast AF
+ Bokeh

negative:

- Flare
- CA even if stopped down to f11

comment:

I found a practically unused lens. The flare control and CA is a joke for a lens with this reputation. Flares can be tamed with an aftermarket hood but this stops you from using a filter to protect that delicate glass.

However, in the right conditions, this is probably one of the best lenses ever made.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: LECHER   review date: July-17-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

MinO 28 f/2.8
MinO 35-70 f/4
MinO 50 f/1.7
MinO 70-210 f/4

price paid:

275 USD (used

positive:

Sharpness
Bokeh
Color
Heft
Glass

negative:

I didn't get one sooner

comment:

I just got this lens and I must say, I am excited with the results. Definately sharper than any of the Primes and pretty close to the Beercan @ f/4.5. Though the 135 f/2.8 was alot sharper at f/8 and beyond, I was surprised that the bokeh was a little bit harsher than the 28-135.

Since this is the DAY 1 TEST MODE, I will update as I get more familiar with this glass.

I am very happy with this lens and am surprised that I was able to pick up a Crossed x version for so little money.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: soter   review date: July-15-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

35-105
28-85
80-200

price paid:

300€

positive:

built quality
control (focus, zoom, macro)

negative:

autofocus speed
no hood usable

comment:

***I'm still working on the review***

I'm not sotisfied as others from this lens and I will do much more tests in the future. This review will reflect the development of my ideas

1) For me, focus with this lens is problematic. Manual or auto, it is much harder than with the 35-105 or with the 80-200 2.8

2) I love the macro, the BLUE macro function of the classic Minolta lens

3) I love color

4) I dont love the contrast or the definition. Still to understand if there is a problem with mine

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: lattiboy   review date: July-15-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tamron 18-250mm, Minolta 28-85mm, Minolta 100-200mm, Beercan, 35-70mm, 50mm

price paid:

185 USD (used)

positive:

1) SHARP

2) Build quality (tank-like)

3) Shows good taste

negative:

1) HEAVY!

2) Looooonnng

3) A bit slow on the focusing

4) Hunts in low light

comment:

A real beauty! Sharp as many primes throughout the range and almost no distortion. Images more than usable wide-open. Stopped down to f/7-8 it is almost as sharp as my 50mm....


however, holding this lens back is the sheer SIZE of the thing. It is such a limited range (for the size), it feels almost silly carrying it around. It hurts your neck and cramps your wrist if used for any real amount of time. Even my super-thick neck strap feels strained when walking with this on. For the $$$, there is nothing even approaching this lens. Buy it, save it. It'll probably skyrocket in value when the FF gets going.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: charlemeign   review date: July-02-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
Minolta 50mm 1.7
Minolta 35mm f/2
Minolta 70-210 f/4
Minolta 135 f/2.8
Sigma 20-40 f2.8

price paid:

200

positive:

Sharp
BEAUTIFULY colors
GREAT range

negative:

Everything needs to be about 5 feet away... Min Focusing Distance is awful.

comment:

This lens would be perfect if it focused closer. The colors are incredible... And these lenses are built very well.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: petesidewalk   review date: June-18-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

K/M 75-300 Big Beercan
K/M 35-70 4
Sony 18-70 Kit Lens
K/M 50 1.7
K/M 70-210 4.5-5.6
K/M 70-210 4 Beercan
K/M 28 2.8
K/M 28-80xi
K/M 28-135 4-4.5
K/M 35-70 3.5-4.5
Tamron 200-400 5.6 LD NEW
Sigma 75-200 2.8-3.5
K/M 80-200 2.8 HS G
Sigma 75-200 2.8-3.5

price paid:

275.00USD

positive:

Sharpness
Amazing Colors
Sharpness
Build
Bokeh
Macro
G-like performance
Good Price

negative:

NONE that negate IQ

comment:

This lens is capable of unbelievable photos. For the price, it is the best performing lens one can buy. IQ is G-like. Does have a weight issue and is prone to flare, but these issues don't overshadow the lens performance. I have read others reviews of this lens being soft and slow to focus and I cannot stress HOW STRONGLY THAT HAS NOT BEEN MY EXPERIENCE. This lens focuses faster that any of my other lenses, and is tack sharp stopped down. I think I got lucky and got a great copy.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: steunix   review date: May-06-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

positive:

Build quality
Colors
Sharpness

negative:

Heavy
Minimum focus distance
Hunts on a700

comment:

Heavy, built like a tank, I used this lens a lot on 7D, and it gave very good results. On my a700, it hunts a bit too much and the focus is often not precise, so I sold it.

The colors are great to me, but the most disappointing feature is the minimum focus distance, that is approximately 1,5 meters... definitely limiting the 135mm side too much.

The focus ring was a bit too loose, but maybe it was my copy. Still, I have to understand the meaning of a macro switch at 28mm... not very useful indeed.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: Calistoga Guy   review date: March-16-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

50mm f1.7
Zeiss 16-80mm

price paid:

170

positive:

Can be very sharp and pleasing. Beautiful front element. Lens 'locks' at short and tele end so no creep

negative:

Heavy. Min foucus distance can be a pain. Can be too soft below f7.1 slow to focus and hunts a bit more than normal on my A700. NOT a low light/indoor lens. Lens barely fits in my bag.

comment:

After reading many reviews for this old classic (and many others) I worried about zoom creep. Why nobody ever mentions that this lens 'locks' on the short end and tele end is beyond me. If it has been mentioned, I don't recall. Anyway how did I get here? I had a zeiss 16-80mm and it was bad, I don't care what anyone tells me, there are bad copies of that lens out there.

That lens had a bad habit of making sure nothing in the pic was in focus. Of course when it nailed it (not often enough) boy was it a sweet sharp lens. So I dumped it. I ended up using only my 50mm 1.7 for much longer than I thought I would. I just didn't like anything out there for the price. Took a chance on this lens with a very tiny scratch in the glass, hence the low price.

So far I see the lens (at least this copy) is far too soft in too many instances. What are they? First, go beyond about 90mm and it can get too soft. Virtually everything that would be at 'infinity' is too soft, especially at 28mm. This lens can be sharp for me in two cases as well. If I open the lens up to say f4 to f5-ish it can be sharp for nearby objects and people. Far away, and it can just be way too soft or hit and miss (heavy on the miss). Now for people and things 15 feet way and beyond, this baby seems like it needs to be at f8 to f11 to be sharpish.

In that range, as a walk around lens shooting street style photography and candids about a quarter of shots taken in that way will be just short of what I would call razor sharp for a lens like this or in this price range. It has never, nor will it ever be razor sharp like say a big G lens.

Color and Contrast are strong, and I so far haven't really noticed much CA even when pixel peeping. On my A700 it can hunt more often than my prime when I'm using focus points that are not in the center, and sometimes just the simplest scence can cause it to hunt, but it hasn't been a big issue. Right now I'm loving this lens as a BRIGHT daytime walk around lens.

Indoors, opening it up to get a decent shutter speed it can be a bit soft. I hate using a flash, however stepping this lens to about f7 thru 9 and hitting someone with a flash indoors it can be prime sharp, dare I say a tad sharper than my 50mm every now and then. It could be that my copy isn't 100% and that it's just old... reasons I might not give praise as others do so take my opinion with that in mind.


Beyond the 100mm mark, well I try not to use it too much. To get sharpness f10 is the min and it's not very common to get any real sharpness at 135 even with a fast shutter and f11. I don't see sharpness get better beyond f11.

Ok now for the macro, it's not that bad, not so great but here's why it's a blessing. The min focus distance is yes near five feet. Worse yet, it can be more than that. I've notice that if I'm about 5-6 feet from something and I zoom to 100mm up to 135, the lens can't lock focus until I move back about another foot or two. Even manually the lens isn't physically capable of focusing in such instances.

So yes the macro mode won't let you take truly gigantic pics of flowers and bees, but the range will let you take pics of anything from a few inches to nearly a foot away, it's good enough to get close for ebay pics and such. I still keep my prime for indoor stuff as this lens can get too soft at f4-f5 and such. For the money I paid it's a top notch lens compared to what's out there in this price range.

If you can get a copy at a good price, it's at least worth taking a chance on. I'm glad I did in spite of its quirks. Almost forgot about flare. For night pics with some bright lights, it's better than my prime. While my prime is fast, it's a flare monster in such cases, here it's more controlled and rarely a problem. In bright light, I haven't seem much flare, but because there is no hood, I've had the sun hit my lens often.

This causes my images to wash out and lose contrast, but to actually see flare, I usually have the sun in frame or nearly in the frame. Also be careful. Unlike other 72mm zooms, there's virtually no distance between the front element and the edge of the barrel. Hitting that glass can be super easy. I'm looking at a filter, maybe the new Zeiss 72mm T* coated ones.

And one final bonus of this lens. Its big barrel and 72mm front is something I like. Bonus, when taking pics, especially last weekend at a local Jazz and Blues fest, people get the heck out of your way, they stop rather than walk in front of you, and just notice and or respect you a little more. It sounds funny, but going from a dinky prime or zoom with a 55mm front element, you'll notice a difference in those around you.



I've got pics taken with this lens here

http://s231.photobucket.com/albums/ee146/sslabs/

Pics are labeled so you know what lens I've used, all are taken with an Alpha A700 only, and all are big-ish in size, no dinky 600 x 800 pics, just click on the full size option. I'm posting pics there all the time.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: Kaishi   review date: February-19-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

28-85 F3.5-4.5
28-80 F4.5-5.6
SAL1870

price paid:

230 USD (excellent)

positive:

Focus speed.

negative:

VERY heavy. 0.75 kg.
A little slow.

comment:

This lens is absolutely stunning. Using one will be the best argument you'll find for wanting to own one. They're rare, expensive, heavy, and slow, but the photos are completely worth it.

Macro is roughly 1:4 magnification.

Lens has a unique rear-focus system that allows for extremely light and quick focusing. A clutched focus ring would be an improvement but is really unnecessary.

If you can find one of these, at least consider it. In my opinion, it is the best lens purchase I've ever made.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: Sildra   review date: January-17-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 50/1,7
Minolta 35-105/3,5-4,5
Minolta 50/2,8 macro
Minolta 100/2,8 macro
Tokina 19-35/3,5-4,5

price paid:

180 $

positive:

excellent build
good sharpness
quite fast AF

negative:

heavy for a walk zoom
1,5m minimal focal distance

comment:

One hell piece of lens! Definitely one of the most succesful product made by Minolta in optics. It's can be reference to other lens in sharpness and colour issues. Someone can find it as too heavy for a usual walkaround lens but in my opinion it's so much versatile that its weight shouldn't be measured as cons.
It's really worth of money spent and I highly recommend it to everyone that cannot decide which lens buy instead of kit 18-70 lens.
Regarding build issues one must be told that it's diffucult to find something more solid in the lens market (even today)then this model. Perfect glass.

sharpness: 3,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: awaken77   review date: January-16-08  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sony 18-70/3.5-5.6
Tamron 17-50/2.8
Vario-Sonnar ZA 16-80/3.5-4.5
Minolta 85/1.4 G
Sony 50/1.4
Sigma 20/1.8

positive:

Bokeh
Color rendition
Built like a tank
Impressive focal range
Neglible distorstion

negative:

AF hunting on Sony DSLR-A100
Softiness
Prone to flare
No standard shade

comment:

Old Minolta legend, rare to find in good condition nowadays.
It renders pleasant (but not very sharp comparing to modern "digital" zooms) picture with nice colors and smooth bokeh. I consider it mainly as a portrait lens "all-in-one". Wide end (28-35mm) is very soft, and it isn't a choice for landscaping. However, form film and 6MP digital it it probably OK. Biggest drawback for me is AF hunting with A100 - it's almost impossible to use this lens on incandescent light on wide end.
On Dynax 7 film camera, AF is OK - fast and reliable.
It would be interesting to try it on A700.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: accady   review date: December-20-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tamron 28-105/2.8
Minolta 35-105/3.5-4.5 RS
Minolta 18-70/3.5-5.6 (kit)
Minolta 100-200/4.5
Minolta 50/1.4

price paid:

140 USD

positive:

-image quality
-range
-price

negative:

-heavy / weird balance
-min focus distance (sometimes)

comment:

Given its range, the image quality is outstanding as it easily matches some primes (especially from 28 to 100mm). That's the reason I consider it a deal even at current 300+ prices for a good sample.

It is prone to flare in certain conditions but this doesn't bother me at all. It is the kind of flare I like (spreads evenly throughout the frame) and this could be used creatively.

Another 'treat' from this lens is the macro mode. Many consider it useless but I quite like it. Getting close to you subject at wide angle makes for some creative opportunities.(TIP: While using the macro feature of the lens, switch the camera to manual focus to enable the focus assist feature - at least that's how it works on my 7D).

Min focus distance can be annoying in tight spaces (indoors) but this is rarely a problem for me as I use it mostly outdoors.

While it seems built like a tank, the vast number of bad samples proves it is in fact extremely delicate. Mine has no problem so far but I feel I need to have extra care every time I use it.

One thing I really don't like about it is the way it balances on the camera. Due to a heavier front, the overall camera-lens balance is different from any other lens I own and this feels weird. Recently, I've noticed the AS/SSS performance is better with other lenses at same FL/aperture combination and I suspect this has to do with the balance. My Tamron 28-105/2.8 is of similar weight but it balances better on camera and has better AS results. Anyway, take this with a grain of salt as it well may be just personal preference.

Final conclusion: the image quality easily makes up for all the negatives. I think this is the queen of non-G Minolta zooms.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: Dumont   review date: December-16-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

135/2.8
85/1.4 G D

price paid:

160 USD (used)

positive:

Very sharp, images IMHO are G like (very 85/1.4'ish)

negative:

Macro at 28mm seems pointless. My copy's zoom is not very smooth especially bewteen 100 and 135mm. I haven't read all the reviews but mine seems to have a familiar problem of AF not working at certain focal lentghs.

comment:

I think this lens is as much a classic as the beercan which it compliments very nicely on film or a full frame digital (A900?), on cropped digital the range is not so usefull but better than the usual 28-75mm/2.8 long zooms if not faster... I only bought this lens because of the low price (ahh mine also came with a small scratch in the front element which sofar does not show in the photos), I suppose it's worth the usual USD250-350 a good copy gets...

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Webguyyy   review date: December-04-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sony 16-105
Sony 18-70

price paid:

550cdn new

positive:

Sharp pictures, very well made classic lens.

negative:

Heavy, large filter size.
Macro feature at 28mm.
Range mostly suited to film cameras.
No lens hood.

comment:

This was a great lens in it's day. Takes excellent pictures on 35mm cameras and digital. I used this lens for a long time before recently selling it because it's range on a digital equates to 35mm equivalent of 42-202.5mm. Great range on a film camera, but far less useful on a digital with a c size sensor. Biggest drawback was that it is a heavy lens, and the large filter size makes attachments expensive. The lens never had a lens hood, because of it's 28mm wide beginning range. It was designed before the current petal lens hoods. The macro feature is at 28mm, which is like having no macro feature at all. It's a good, collectors item, but with digital, it's range limits it's usefulness.

sharpness: 3 

color: 3 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: bender21   review date: November-30-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sigma 24/1.8
MinO 35/2
MinO 50/1.4
MinO 100/2
MinO 135/2.8
KM 28-75(D)
etc....

price paid:

180 USD (used)

positive:

Beautiful lens to behold...
Fantastic zoom if working properly

negative:

Build issues..
Flare
Heavy
Long Min. Focus distance
Zoom creep

comment:

I have no doubt that these lenses were/are fantastic, however I have heard of and seen a number of problems with them. The first is how delicate the internal alignment seems to be. I have seen some image samples that attest to the great IQ this lens can have, but that hasn't been my experience and felt this would be the perfect place to share it. I have had the same issues as everyone else, with the minimum focus distance and flare.
At first, I loved this lens.. it is absolutely beautiful and I had taken some very nice photos with it, then *boom*, disaster strikes! After about 3 years of owning and using this lens, the zoom mechanism begins to lock up and become stuck, or won't zoom past a certain point, and then the focus won't focus past a certain point. I had it opened up and what do you know, something broke off inside for absolutely no reason that I can think of, the metal tab to the macro switch I believe and it had been loose, wreaking havoc inside the lens. Well, everything seems to be fine again, but then I shoot a whole day of pictures and they are suddenly dreadful. A haze or halos over/around everything, terrible sharpness, colors and contrast are very underwhelming.. I believe the alignment of the elements might have been knocked out of whack, and after some checking around, it seemed to be a common problem with this lenses, thus my thought of them being pretty delicate.. Supposedly the alignment can be shot by even a good shock.. I try to baby my equipment, and it happened to me. Oh well. I really do want to like this lens, I believe they put alot of money, and really over-engineered it, and believe it is capable of alot, but I just couldn't trust it again.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Jeroen   review date: November-16-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

24-85 F3.5-4.5
35-70 F4
24 F2.8
Sigma 70-300 Apo Macro

price paid:

130 euro

positive:

sharp
great colors
if it was not so heavy it would be a great alround lens

negative:

heavy
no dedicated lens hood

comment:

Used this lens a lot on film camera. Loved it. Good range. I sold it because I used to travel a lot and wanted to travel light.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 2 

user: Maffe   review date: November-15-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

28-70G, Sigma 24-70/2.8, 80-200/2.8

positive:

Color, image quality, build

negative:

MFD 1,5 meter, flare control

comment:

This lens is just lovely, build is excellent this is how a lens should be built.
Color is like other minolta lenses from this time, great!
AF is fast, my 7D hunts a little, on the Dynax 7 it´s faster and less hunting.
Would be nice to test this on a700...
MFD is 1.5 meter and that is one of two bad things with this lens.
Flare is the other week spot.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: MCNGUYEN   review date: November-01-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tamron SP AF 90mm F2.8 Di
Minolta 28-85mm F3.5-4.5 RS
Minolta 70-210mm F3.5-4.5
Minolta 35-105mm F3.5-4.5
Minolta 75-300mm F4.5-5.6

price paid:

150 Euros used

positive:

Wonderfull color and sharpness
Fast focus

negative:

Heavy, close focus a bit long

comment:

Great lens. Love the colors it produces. It's my walk around lens now. Would change it for the Tamron only for macro or portrait.
Heavy, but that means a quality lens too.
Samples here: http://www.pbase.com/mcnguyen/como_2007

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: TangoJetta   review date: October-17-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 28-75 F2.8

price paid:

$160. USD shipped

positive:

Sharp, great colors and bokeh,
build, great range

negative:

Heavy, no hood

comment:

This is an great lens!!! Very sharp, contrast is outsanding, AF speed is good, and great colors on my 7D and 7xi. I mostly used it as my all around outdoor lens since I have the Minolta 28-75 F2.8 for indoors shots. The build is second to none.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: hotwire   review date: October-07-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tamron 24-135

positive:

Flexible range
Near constant maximum aperture

negative:

No Hood

comment:

Great lens, but I prefer my faster f/2.8's, but that is just a matter of my shooting style.

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Minolta Head   review date: October-06-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

28-70 (D)
24-105mm (D)

price paid:

180 USD (used)

positive:

Sharpness
Bokeh
Solid Build

negative:

72mm Filter
Autofocus Hunting
Weight

comment:

The sharpness/bokeh/contrast/colour are typical of older Minolta lenses. I examined my first test shot for sharpness and realised that the whole shot from edge to edge was crisp. the build is solid, the lens is a little heavy compared to modern carbon based offerings.

A biggest negatives for me are the AF speed which is slow and unpredictable, and the weight.

Macro is really funky, operating at the wide end, you have to take care not slam the lens right into the subject it is so close.

Overall I would not hesitate to buy another, but be aware of the condition..I was lucky with mine, many others have bought paper-weights, this after all is a fairly old model.


July 2008:
I sold this lens simply because the weight added to my kit bag is too much to cope with.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

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

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 24-105
Tamron 35-105
Minolta 100-200
Minolta 17-35
Minolta 50

price paid:

$130 USD

positive:

Very usable range
Image quality is exceptional

negative:

Kinda heavy
Long minimum focus range

comment:

This is the default lens on the camera. I agree with about all of the comments on the lens, both positive and negative, that have been posted previously. I won't rehash that ground again.

As far as images the lens can capture, generally they are extremely good. In my opinion they are as good as any more recent lens and must have been phenomenal when it was manufactured. I've found limitations in the flare and minimum focus length though (OK, guess I will go into past comments).

My copy of the lens came to me used. It had seen some pretty good use before it got to me. With that in mind though, it shows very good workmanship and rugged components. Even showing some previous use it is a solid, smooth performer that above all gives great images.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: artuk   review date: October-06-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 24-85 f3.5-4.5
Minolta 24-105 f3.5-4.5
Sigma 24-70 f2.8 EX

positive:

Very good image quality
Classic Minolta colour
Very well built

negative:

No dedicated lens hood
4ft close focus

comment:

Originally launched with the first batch of AF lenses with the Minolta 7000 AF body, this was an expensive lens (£350). As with all the first generation AF lenses, it has a metal body, and uses (I believe) glass elements rather than plastic, which would account for its weight of around 700g. It is rumoured this lens was designed by, or co-designed with, Leica, but I do not believe there is any evidence for this. My own understanding was that it was designed and built by hand at Minolta's lens plant in Osaka. It differs in detail from other Minolta lenses as the focus ring is in front of the lens mount, near the body, no doubt making it easier to find than at the end of the zoom. Fingers need to be kept clear as it rotates when the camera drives the AF gear, as it is not clutched. A very wide knurled metal zoom ring fills most of the lens body. Build quality is exceptional.

Minolta stated at launch that the large front element (72mm) had been designed to give good image quality at 28mm at full aperture. At 28mm and full aperture (f4) image quality is very good to excellent, from centre to corner (full frame). Stopping down one or two stops improves image quality a little, but not by a great deal. It can be used at full aperture with confidence. At the long end, where maximum aperture drops to f4.5 the situation is similar, with good to very good performance fully open rising to very good to excellent about 2 stops down. Intermediate focal lengths are equally strong.

At 28mm, a "macro" mode can be engaged by pulling the macro button and twisting the zoom ring beyond its 28mm limit. The zoom ring then becomes a focus control with a well weighted damped action. In this mode, the lens can focus at a ratio of about 1:4 (not true "macro), but this represents a subject distance mere centimetres from the front element, so care may be needed! The image quality in this mode is extremely good, sharp across the frame even from full aperture.

The lens displays typical early Minolta colour and contrast. Overall contrast is moderate, giving good overall image and edge contrast but without the aggressively high contrast of some modern lens designs. Colour is well saturated, and seems to exhibit that classic Minolta "liquid" colour. This type of image quality is often attributed to good micro-contrast, the ability to handle very fine changes in contrast and colour/tone giving the image a very "real" almost 3 dimentional quality. Leica have always designed their lenses with this in mind, and this may explain the rumours of a Leica design in this lens.

Distortions are surprisingly well controlled for a lens of this vintage and extreme range. There is some barreling at 28mm, though it is not the worst I have seen in a full frame zoom lens. At the long end, there is some subtle pincushioning, but it should generally not cause a problem. This isn't the ideal lens for architectural work at its widest end, as straight lines toward the edge of the frame will display a little outward bowing, but it is usable.

AF speed is surpirsingly good for a lens of this vintage, the AF gearing is reasonably high, and on a mid-range body such as a Dynax 7, AF speed is good and accurate. Unfortunately, the minumim focus distance is around 4 feet. This was not doubt a limitation of the design at the time, the lens undoubtedly having been designed by Minoltas engineers with only a little assistance with computer aided design. Given it's focal length range was quite extreme, the image quality was exceptionally good, and the aperture reasonable, something had to give - and it was focus distance!

Flare control in undoubyedly is biggest weakness. Bizarrely, it was never sold with a dedicate lens hood, though in fairness a hood designed for 28mm would offer no protection at 135mm - just check the hood on the 35-200mm Xi to see! Although I would not say the lens glass itself is especially prone to flare, with a 72mm front element right at the front of the lens, it is easy to get flare when a light source is out of shot but in front of the lens. It tends to be the contrast reducing type of flare than can ruin an image, rather than the more localised type of "sunspot" flaring. There are some internet reports that some examples are more prone to flare than others. The best solution is either to use a hand to shade it when it becomes a problem, or use a rubber collpapsible lens hood that screws into the filter ring (Hama et al make them).

Overall, this is a terrific lens. It may not compare to some of todays high resolution and high contrast lens designs on digital, but the overall image quality is fantastic.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: leitnor   review date: August-17-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

28-80/3.5-5.6
50/1.7
70-210/4
24-85/3.5-4.5
17-35/2.8-4

price paid:

140€ (used)

positive:

Very sharp
Contrast
Good zoom range
Well built
Quite quick AF
Looks nice on 7D

negative:

Heavy
Bad minimum focus
No dedicated hood
Flare

comment:

I think its sharper than the 24-85 or the 17-35. Very useful walkaround lens. Focal length is good but it will be even better if it starts at 24. I think one of the best Minolta AF lens. I recommend for everyone!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: DLNY   review date: July-25-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Sigma 28-75 EX 2.8
Minolta 28-85

price paid:

175 euro

positive:

Everything, I like this lens better than my 80-200 HS APO

negative:

No hood
Minimum focus distance a bit to long

comment:

Everyone wants a Beercan, but I think this lens should be in every true Minoltian's bag. Because of this lens I'm thinning out my line-up, these are the 3 main lenses I'll be using from now on: Tokina 20-35, Minolta 28-135, Minolta 200 HS APO

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: lauge   review date: July-25-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

18-70kit, 50/1.7, 70-210/4

price paid:

133€ (mint in box)

positive:

Color and contrast, Build to last, Amazingly sharp, Price/Quality, AF performance

negative:

Min. focus distance, Good samples seems rare

comment:

This lens really lives up to its reputation! It compares to the 50/1.7 in sharpness and it's miles ahead of the kit lens in every aspect. Its build quality is amazing, if it wasn’t so heavy it would have been the perfect walk-around zoom but then again good glass is heavy. Color and contrast is really amazing and I haven’t really experienced that much problem with flare as others have. The macro at 28mm gives a fun perspective to macro shots. Gets a bit softer at 100mm and up but still sharp.

The price and quality of this great vintage Minolta lens makes it a must have for the cheap lineup.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: andapp   review date: July-09-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

28-85 RS
135 2.8

price paid:

£150 (used) see note

positive:

Build quality
Colour
Blokeh
Sharp
Fast AF

negative:

Rare
Poor minimum focus length

comment:

I have been searching for one of these lenses for some time, they are becoming rare as hens teeth. I wanted one to supplement my 28-85 RS that use in my studio as I often have to change to my 135 2.8 for tight headshots.

Eventually found one on Ebay that was described as perfect but with a sticking zoom. I paid way too much for it and when it arrived not only did it have a sticking zoom but the filter thread was damaged where it had been dropped and the optics were filthy.

I called Dave at the Camera Repair Workshop and he agreed to take a look, after a bit of persuasion he agreed to repair and clean it for a very reasonable cost.

I now have an excellant example and boy is it great, fantastic colours, sharp and feels fantastic in use. If you can find one of these lenses grab it.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: Pyl62   review date: July-09-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

18-70 kit lens

price paid:

€200

positive:

Build Quality
Image Quality
Good range

negative:

Heavy
Prone to flare
Not wide enough at the short end
Very poor near focus range

comment:

Fantastic walk around lens except for a few things: I haven't got around to getting a hood yet and it is very prone to flare, it is quite heavy and 24 or even 20mm at the wide end would have been excellent! Also, the near focus range is pretty bad.

The build quality is nothing short of stunning! Great IQ and bokeh, stunning colors!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: madcat207   review date: April-24-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tamron 28-300 XR LD IF

price paid:

$50 (got lucky)

positive:

Excellent zoom range.
Built like a tank.
Good aperture.
Rear focus provides very fast focus.

negative:

A bit nose heavy.
Very delicate front element.

comment:

For those that don't know, this is the father of all original Minolta wide zooms. While the 28-85 and 28-105's are "dime a dozen", the 28-135 truly is something special.

The lens is one of the last designed with Leica, and it shows. The lens has a giant front element (72mm), and a good aperture throughout its zoom. One of the really unique aspects though, is the rear focus. Unlike every other Minolta lens made, this lens features the focus ring and elements at the back of the lens, rather than the front. While this is due to the design of the lens, it has the side effect of creating a very fast AF system (less gearing, higher turn ratio).

The optics of this lens are what truly makes it great. It is easy to see the quality put into the lens, in both physical feeling, and the pictures produced. The colors are crisp, and the lines are sharp. However, there are two flaws:
1) No hood is included, and the lens can be prone to flare. This is fixable though, with a good after-market metal or rubber hood (metal obviously fits the look of the lens better).
2) The front element is extremely delicate. It is very easy to scratch a coating; and while only cosmetic, it obviously can't be fixed. If you do get a copy with a pristine element, put a protective filter on it, and never remove it.

All-in-all, this is a great lens if you can find it. They are currently demanding a high price on fleabay, but if you are looking for the ultimate in original Minolta glass, it is worth it.

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: Station53   review date: April-23-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

price paid:

100.00 CAN (used)

positive:

Well built.
Focus ring is in a perfect spot.

negative:

Bit too heavy.

comment:

The toughest lens I have ever seen.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: DavidB   review date: March-26-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

24-105 zoom,
100 macro
24 2.8
200 2.8 APO

price paid:

Forget

positive:

Very sharp, good colour, excellent range for film & FF, a good all-around lens that I use if only taking one. Very solid build.

negative:

Heavy, lack of hood, flare can be an issue if shooting into light. Front element rotates with zoom. Don't use macro much at all... have 100 macro.

comment:

I have owned this lens since it first came on the market, and it is the one I always take if travelling "light" (for film or FF a900).
I use the 24-105 on my 7D as I like the compactness, light weight and wider angle on APC.
This is an excellent lens in almost every respect, and has never given me any trouble.
Examples can be found on my blog at: http://web.mac.com/davidbannister

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: maxfarphoto   review date: March-15-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

KM 17-35 f 2.8/4
Minolta 70-210 f4 (beercan)
Minolta 75-300 f4.5/5.6 (big beercan)

price paid:

€ 150

positive:

- Sharp
- Solid as a rock
- Smooth zooming
- Great colors
- Fast

negative:

- Hood missing
- Delicate front lens

comment:

Great walkaround lens, I am using it in a trip across Asia and found it extremely versatile. Focal length is good but it will be even better if it starts at 24.
Flare is not so much a problem but, of course, you must take care of sun position to avoid it.
This lens is incredibily sharp, even sharper that my 75-300 (big beercan), as from f 5.6 to f 11. I have tried at min aperture f22 and it is still sharp (but it was cloudy so I don't know how it manages with diffraction).
This is the kind of lens which makes me an A-mount system "addicted"......

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: yariv   review date: February-10-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 28-100 (D)
Minolta 28-105 xi
Minolta 50 f/1.7
Minolta 70-210 f/4 (Beercan)
Sigma 28-70 f/2.8 EX

price paid:

200 USD (USED)

positive:

Very Sharp
Very Fast AF
Excellent Zoom Range

negative:

Limited near focus (1.5m)

comment:

I bought this Lens 6 month ago after reading lots of reviews at dyxum web site. I think others just Said it all.

This is my favorite lens which I never take off.
I like the speed and accurate of the AF. I like it's sharpness.

A bit of a problem to use indoor because of the Limited near focus.

This is MUST HAVE lens for all KM users.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 2 

user: mikiha   review date: February-01-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

canon 28-135 IS USM

price paid:

160$ used

positive:

sharp !! at f 5.6
very nice bokeh
very nice colors
build like a Tank

negative:

heavy
minimum focus too big
no hood

comment:

wow
this is a good walk around lens
not so good handling flares but if you can set up a hood
it will be fine.
very sharp at f5.6 - F8
beautiful colors and bokeh
the big problem is the minimum focus range if you want to take
pictures indoor its a problematic lens - better of taking the minolta 17-35 .

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: TheBeej   review date: January-24-07  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta AF 18-70mm f3.5-5.6
Minolta AF 70-210mm f4
Minolta AF 50mm f1.7

price paid:

$200 USD

positive:

- Build quality is top notch
- Awesome range of focal lengths
- Very usable macro function
- Extremely impressive sharpness, color, and contrast across all apertures
- Fast AF!

negative:

- Slightly less than ideal range on APS-C sized sensor (wide)
- Very prone to flare (no dedicated hood)
- Bizarre minimum focus distance characteristics

comment:

After spending four days in NYC over New Years, I found myself using the 5D kit lens a lot more than I had anticipated. I was pretty spoiled with the sharpness of the 50mm and beercan, but some of the shots I took with the kit lens were pretty soft (no surprise). Not a big deal, but I knew I could get a better performance out of a higher quality lens.

I cruised around Dyxum and various other photo forums dedicated to Minolta glass, and I ended up deciding on the 28-135mm to use as my main walkaround lens to replace the kit lens for that purpose. The minimum aperture of F4 leaves it a little less than ideal for indoor use, but it comes from the same generation of lenses as the Beercan, and was manufactured by hand at the legendary Sakai plant (where the G glass lenses were built as well in the mid 1980s).

Since it arrived in the mail on Saturday, I haven't taken it off my camera. It's an amazing performer and I got it for a really fair price from a fellow Dyxum member.

Highly recommended lens! The bokeh is very pleasant, images are super-sharp and clear, and the color/contrast creates images that have that "pop" I've been looking for. Should Sony ever go full frame, this would be the ultimate killer lens!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: RobY   review date: November-05-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

24-105 D
28-85 3.5/4.5
18-70 "Kit lens"

price paid:

€200

positive:

Very very Sharp
Excellent Zoom Range
Minolta colour
Build Quality
AF speed

negative:

Limited near focus (5ft)
Heavy
No dedicated hood
Large compared to lens with similar range
Did I say heavy?

comment:

It's built like a tank and does look the business on the 7D.

Never used the "macro" setting (28mm only). Got over the lack of a dedicated hood by using an extending 77mm rubber hood with a 72 - 77mm step-up, this also protects the big 72mm filter thread.

Thanks gsaronni, it's a great lens!

I've now seen its true potential on a 9xi film body. The detail it resolves is fantastic, on the A900 it is a great lens.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: jubilee0504   review date: November-05-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

28-80, 28/2.8, 50/1.7, 135/2.8

price paid:

£160 (s/h 1995)

positive:

Very Sharp
Excellent Zoom Range
Build Quality
AF speed

negative:

Limited near focus (5ft)
No hood
Zoom range not so useful on digital

comment:

I bought this s/h in 1995 when I had a 9000 and 500Si. It's a superb travel lens and has been all over the globe with me. It's built like no other modern lens and will probably last forever. It is incredibly sharp for a zoom at all focal lengths and apertures, holding its own even against prime lenses.

The limitations are the close focus at 5ft, although it is possible to manually focus closer at 28mm only - I have found this useful for getting wedding couples in the back of the car shots. Also because of the front element size and focal length range there isn't a practical way of fitting a hood to it - it can be prone to flare in contre-jour situations.

A great lens!

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: PMac   review date: October-30-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

70-210 f4 (beercan)

price paid:

210USD (used)

positive:

Really, really sharp.
Very useful range.

negative:

Self extending front is a pain.
Flare.

comment:

This is my first ever review of my first ever lens on my first ever DSLR so treat this however you like (and I'll try an update it when I know more).

This lens is my basic walk around kit and I love the images it creates, the detail is so rich and sharp that there is plenty to play with when I get home. It is heavy but then I'm a big guy used to carrying around heavy stuff so thats not really posing a problem at the moment.

The downside is that I'm having real problems using it effectively due to flare. Inside, with a flash, in flat light etc the lens is a gem but once the sun is out I'm really struggling. At the moment my solution is to simply underexpose the image to preserve all that wonderful detail and then play with the lighting in post processing. Much of the flare manifests as almost a faint blue mist so I wonder if a UV filter might help a little but until then I'll continue to rely on software.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: DaveK   review date: October-16-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

- Minolta 75 - 300mm f 4,5 - 5,6 (big eercan same year)
- Minolta 70 - 210mm f4 (beercan; same year)
- Sony kit

price paid:

150 Euro

positive:

- Sharp
- nice range
- solid
- Minolta colours

negative:

- flare
- weight (not realy a problem)
- no lensehood
- focus distance

comment:

I like this lense a lot. It's one of my favourite lenses. Like with all the 20 year old stuff of Minolta I'm glad I could find one.

I use it as a replacement for the Sony kit lense (18-70mm) on the Alpha 100. The kit lense isn't realy bad, but this lens is awesome!
It's the lense that I walk around with.

The one I got is very warn out (I bought it like that). It even has a little scratch on the front glass, but there's no problem on the photographs. Even cropped there's no problem. I can't get a filter on (the lense isn't round anymore..) so it's unprotected. Maybe someday I replace it with a 'newer' one, if I can find a cheap one. That's wishfull thinking I guess...Update: I have two spare ones...

Get one if you can!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: seagr112   review date: September-23-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Vintage 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5
135mm f/2.8

positive:

Sharp Image Reproduction
Solid Vintage Build
Very Minimal Distortion
Fast Rear IF
Natural Color Rendition

negative:

Minimum Focusing Distance
Max Aperture f4/4.5
28mm = 42mm digital

comment:

I am totally hooked on this lens. As most other reviewers have pointed out, this is one of those classic Minolta lenses that proved the company knew how to make great (and innovative) glass back in the day. Released in 1985 with the first line of vintage Maxxum lenses, it has been out of production for some time now.

For covering such a wide focal range, the lens is close to flawless in its image reproduction. The only "complaints" that I have about it are the limitations in maximum aperture, minimum focusing distance and the (only) 28mm wide end. The lens was very expensive in 1980's dollars ($600-800 retail), so I'm sure its price would have been exponentially higher had those issues been addressed.

I use this lens as my everyday casual walkaround with my 7D/VC-7D. Quite a handful, but it works. And it minimizes lens changes with its wide range. Many of these lenses have crossed my desk in the past few years, and it surprises me how poorly cared for some of the copies were. Perhaps because of its size and weight it has the potential to receive more of a beating, but what a shame! On the flipside, mine is a beauty and the zoom is still tight with no creep whatsoever. Well used copies tend to get a little sloppy. The rear AF is fast, and the front element (obviously) doesn't rotate which is great for CPL use. The macro is pretty much useless, but there if you need it.

I consider the vintage 28-85mm zoom to be the "poor man's" 28-135mm. A little less range, just a little less of a performer, but great value as it seems to have fallen out of favor of late. The 135mm prime is comparable at this focal length but with the larger maximum aperture and a steep price.

In the digital domain, the 28-135mm loses a lot on the wide end, (28mm becomes 42mm) but I have several wide primes to compensate for this and usually carry one of those if I think I'll need it. (My walkaround just got heavier!)

Rebuild this lens with a 20mm wide end, make it f/2.8 and close focus....sorry, just dreaming for a minute! As it stands, it's still one of my favorites. Highly recommended, but like all other good Minolta glass, getting more expensive to procure with the popularity of digital.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: jarenas   review date: August-19-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Tamron 24-135, KM 28-75D

price paid:

175USD

positive:

built, color saturation, macro, super fast AF, 72mm filter

negative:

weight, no lens hood, focusing distance, rotating front element

comment:

If someone asked me which would be my last lens that I would sell it would be this one. Sure it has its short coming but the pros certainly outweigh the cons.
First, the flare was nowhere near as bad as I was expecting. When compared to my sigma 50 2.8 it was slighty more prone to it but only by a few degrees. Also, the colors are so much more rich and vibrant than the KM and blows the Tamron out of the water. I'm still getting use to no lens hood and the fact that the focus ring is in the rear forces me to change my holding style. My version had a bargain rating and it looks like its had a long career but I have no doubt that it will continue to produce quality shots for me.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: terrylloydsmith   review date: August-12-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

28-75/2.8 KM
17-35/2.8-4 KM

price paid:

265.00

positive:

Nice, robust and sharp
Great build quality

negative:

Close focus is just 1.5 meter

comment:

I purchased this lens from a dealer after reading the excellent reviews. The lens I bought has several wear places but the glass was clean. A well used "user" model. I'm surprised how good this zoom really is. It's just as sharp as the 28-75 KM and sharper than the 17-35 KM. I think I'll purchase another nicer example later...this lens is that good.
Update:
I finally purchased a very nice example of this lens and it's one fine optic...right there with the G glass as far as I'm concerned. Aside from the not-so-close focus, I love this lens.

I have a couple examples on my Flickr site.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/terrylloydsmith/

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: Jose de Luna   review date: July-31-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

positive:

Excellent build and optics quality.

negative:

No dedicated hood, closest focussing distance only 1.5m

comment:

I can't deny that this has been my workhorse lens since my film-days. Match this lens with a Fuji-Velvia and you will be amazed with the colors and sharpness of any photo that you'll capture. With the 7D, image quality is superb. In normal prints (6x4" or 5x7") you can't even distinguish the difference between a photo taken with this lens and with a prime or G lens. It also performs well in flash photography, very ideal for indoor parties or weddings. Rear focussing serves its purpose, and it seems very fast considering that it's an old lens (circa 1980s). The aperture is almost constant at f4. That means I can practically simulate a 340mm/f4 lens (135mm x 1.5 crop factor x 1.7 TC).

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: gipper51   review date: April-25-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

18-70 kit lens
28-70 2.8 Tok pro SV

price paid:

$120

positive:

-good zoom range, would be perfect if started at 24mm
-sharp wide open at 28-100, very sharp stopped to f5.6
-quick AF even in low light (for its age)
-good contrast
-built like a tank
-low distortion

negative:

-a tad soft wide open at 135mm, but still outstanding.
-weighs as much as a tank
-purple fringing even stopped down
-flair prone
-72mm filters = big $$

comment:

I picked this lens up on a whim when I found a near mint copy in a local camera store. I'd was new to SLRs and never heard of it. Didn't know how good a lens I found until doing some research and taking some pics. Compared to the 5D kit lens I had its a night and day difference. The lens is very sharp throughout but as with most big zoom lenses it loses just a bit at the wide open long end, but not much. It's still phenominal though, especially for the price.

The zoom range is good but would be better on a APS-C camera if it started at 24mm. This is my primary lens and will be for a while I think. My only complaint I have with the IQ would be the purple fringing. It's often there even stopped down, and can be quite noticable wide open in high contrast pics. Given that this lens is hard to find these days, prices are high and it's big and heavy you may be better off with something newer but will have spend a lot of $$ for comparible image quality. If you can find a clean copy for a reasonable price I don't think you can go wrong.

sharpness: 4,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: lifephoto.it   review date: March-04-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

price paid:

200 € used

positive:

Professional build level, colour's answer and sharpnes' definition

negative:

Minimum focus distance only 1,5 meters and flare.

comment:

Heavy and solid lens with macro possibility (only in macro position). Together the new 17-35 f/2,8-4,0 it make my couple for travel around the world.

sharpness: 4 

color: 3 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 2 

user: william_01   review date: February-24-06  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 28-105, Tamron 28-200 etc etc

positive:

Soild, fast/quiet AF, good focal length, good to excellent sharpness.

negative:

Flare prone, medium to low contrast. Longish minimum focal length.

comment:

Relatively sharp lens for its focal length. A solid performer. I trust this lens a lot. Indoor photogrpahy is no problem. With 5d's excellent high iso performance and this lens, covering 45mm to 180mm-ish focal length, it does the job alone.

Close focus distance is a bit of problem, 1.5m. It's bit too long for intimit shots but can be rectified by carrying another lens, i.e. 50mm.

I would definitely buy another one.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: RacingManiac   review date: December-09-05  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

AF DT 18-70 f3.5-5.6
AF 70-210 f4

positive:

Very Sharp
Good Build Quality
MF ring near the body
Surprisingly useful Macro mode
Relatively constant aparture throughout.

negative:

Heavy
Extending front element
Hard to find shades for with 72mm ring
Small-ish aparture for such a big glass.
Long minimum focus distance

comment:

My replacement for 5D kit lens. Its got a useful 28-135mm(1.5x for 5D) range and relatively constant aparture throughout. Images are very sharp and in good color. It is heavy but adds a good feel to the small-ish 5D. The macro range is usable for doing model kit and stuff. I wish it is available for lower f stop though. And the 72mm filter thread is hard to find accessory for. Recommand it if you can find one in good shape and for reasonable cost.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: 2manycamera   review date: December-06-05  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

Minolta 24-105, 28/2, 35/2, 100/2, Sigma 28-200, 24-70/2.8

positive:

AF speed, sharpness, build quality, contrast

negative:

front heavy, flare, spinning focus ring under your finger

comment:

I like it so much I bought it twice. I bought a somewhat abused sample a few years back, stuck it on my 9000 and shot away! For all of its dents, scratches and dings, it focused FAST and took terrific pictures. When I got the 7D, I bought a mint copy and couldn't be happier. For walking around with just one lens, and I don't need the speed of a prime, I go to the 28-135.

I don't do lens to lens tests, so my reviews are always subjective. I like the look of pictures with this lens. It is rumored it was one of the last lenses built in co-operation with Leitz. I believe this is true, as the lens displays many "leica" qualities. The contrast is marvelous, the colors rich and saturated.

As far as drawbacks, the front heavy nature of this lens is why it is so hard to find a realy nice one. Carried over the shoulder, it takes on a life of its own. I've gone to wrapping the strap around my wrist and carrying the camera by the VC-7D. I needed to change my grip slightly, because the rear focus ring spins next to the mount, well worth it for the fast focus. No surprise, flare is an issue, but with 1.5 crop, a regular rubber hood causes no vignettes and flare control is markedly improved.

My favorite accessory is the Minolta 72mm C. Polarizer. Since it is actually a 77-80mm filter in a permanent 72mm step-down ring, it is much easier to hold in place as the lens focuses, since the front element does turn.

Finding one at a reasonable price is problematic, unless you can inspect prior to purchase. However, even abused lenses can still perform well due to its incredible build quality.

sharpness: 3,5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: brettania   review date: October-07-05  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

KM 28-75, Minolta 85 f1.4

price paid:

120 NZD (2/h)

positive:

There's still a lot to like about this "oldie" which I have judged against the highest quality lenses as well as the more digitally optimised KM 28-75 D. Good colours.

negative:

A bit too heavy for a walk-around in this day and age. Some CA.

comment:

If you are on a limited budget this one definitely still has a place if you are young and fit. I have had some good results when using flash with this lens.

sharpness: 3,5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: Kiklop   review date: October-03-05  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

KM 28-75/2.8D

price paid:

120 € (used)

positive:

Excellent build
Sharp
Beautiful image qualities
Fast AF

negative:

Without dedicated hood
Minimal focus distance a bit too long
Occasional CA and flare
Unfortunately not produced anymore

comment:

This is one of those lenses that witnesses how much care Minolta used to have in building lenses. My sample is almost 20 years old and is still smooth in operation. For lenses like this one, I've been a long time Minolta user.
I'm glad to say, that many of the qualities are still here, in digital age. It's sharp (with a bit closed aperture it's real fantastic, at least until 100mm), with a special Minolta-like color renditions. You may be surprised how good the AF performance is despite the old design and a bit slowest aperture.
With FF bodies it can be hard to find a good hood for it (this lens is designed without the hood in mind) but with 1.5 crop camera, a standard screw in hood will do the job nicely.
Flare control was always a bit problematic, but I must confess that my sample does not exhibit this often (most of the time I use hood with it). What could be an "issue" with digital is CA on high-contrast scenes.
The lens has a macro option, but only at the wide end, which I haven't find useful on many occasion.
It's an old lens, but in many ways, it a G-class.
**Full frame**
Solid performance with very good results across the frame once stopped down a bit.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: natamambo   review date: September-06-05  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

positive:

Sharpness, clarity, colour rendition, bokeh.

negative:

flare, weight (but worth lugging around)

comment:

This has to be the one of the sharpest, purest zooms ever made. I have gone from a host of primes on my X-700 to (most of the time) just one lens on the 7D. I have photographed birds 20 feet away and you can see every filament of the tail feathers in a photo blown to 12"x18" with no pixelation or distortion whatsover. The colours are just superb, the rendition of skin tones the best I have ever seen, sky, water, foliage, all reproduced perfectly without any shift in hue or colour depth.

See http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=00DP4F&photo_id=3684190&photo_sel_index=0

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: agetan   review date: July-09-05  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

24-105, 28-85 f3.5-4.5

positive:

Useful range,
Sharp,
Cheap,
Nice Bokeh,
Heavy, but well balance

negative:

flare could be a problem in some situation.
A bit slow (old lens)

comment:

Nice and heavy lens, construction wise is very good. I love the way that the focusing ring is at the end of the lens because I use a lot of manual focussing when doing portrait.

I like the bokeh (out of focus).

The range is very nice on 7D and not too bad in terms of focusing with 7D or film 7.

It is very sharp and colour is very natural.

sample pictures can be found on http://www.pbase.com/hartanto_tan/lachlan_yvonne

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: lysander   review date: June-18-05  

    tested on film camera:

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

    tested on full frame:25MP

compared to:

28-70G

positive:

Very great lens

negative:

Very heavy. Rare to find.

comment:

Very great lens.