Minolta AF 28-80mm F3.5-5.6 II A-mount lens reviews

reviews found: 23   
reviewer#44137 date: Sep-26-2018
sharpness: 4.5
color: 5
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4.3
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:A variety of prime and zoom lenses, Mostly Minolta, Sony, Sigma etc
price paid:$25
positive:Lightweight, Focal Range, Color, Sharpness, Low Cost.
Generally, very good image quality
negative:Usual issues with lenses designed for use with 35mm SLR film cameras when combined with digital sensors.

Lack of modern coatings resulting in flare. Lens hood suggested
comment:Something I have come to understand when evaluating an older lens is to take into consideration that since I am far from being the original owner, I have no idea of the history of how the lens was cared for over the decades. Unlike assessing a relatively new lens where all are of the same factory issued state, I find it's best to look at these lenses with an understanding that this review was subject to the condition of the lens as it was when evaluated. I also take into large consideration that these lenses with their analog shortcomings were not designed for use with APS-C or FF systems and to expect a serious dropoff in certain aspects of IQ when using them in other than optimal conditions. Therefore the review is pertinent to this individual specimen and not a critical evaluation of a particular model. The cameras that I used in forming this opinion were an a100, a55 and an a57.


I picked up this lens on a lark. It was listed as in "very good" condition by a large North American used camera outlet. For what little it cost I felt it was worth a look. Aside from the silver barrel, unusual filter diameter and a definite "cheap" feel it does perform mechanically smoothly.
This lens proved to be better than I expected. The color and sharpness are above average for Minolta lenses from this era. Unsurprisingly it does best in bright natural light conditions, but I have come to realize its potential for a variety of controlled indoor lighting situations. Performs well when shooting close-ups. Some slight purple fringing at the edges in high contrast images. Most issues can be addressed in post processing.
Overall my opinion is that this lens is worth having and using. What sets it apart from the other lenses in my gear bag is its image quality and versatility.
One won't achieve "Gold" performance from this lens and it suffers from the same drawbacks as other legacy lenses, but it does deliver very good color and acceptable IQ within a limited range.




reviewer#39935 date: Sep-17-2017
sharpness: 4.5
color: 5
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4.3
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Minolta 28-80mm & 28-100mm f3.5-5.6 (55mm filter thread, usually silver)
Minolta 28-80 f4-5.6 (one with macro switch)
Sigma 28-80 f3.5-5.6 (62mm filter thread)
Minolta 24-105mm
Minolta 35-105mm (later plastic one)
& Lots of other zooms and primes
price paid:£7 with film camera
positive:small, light, cheap
pretty sharp at full aperture
no CA to speak of
low distortion
negative:not a lot for the money, except annoying 62mm thread and not taking the same lens hood as the 55mm thread versions.
comment:Judged as a cheap normal zoom for FF digital or film, I have to say my copy of this lens was a pleasant surprise. 100% crops were pretty good into the far corners, with just the expected amount of softness at full aperture and very little discernible CA, and the centre sharp at all focal lengths and apertures.
Clearly copies vary, but after trying maybe a dozen or so of the cheaper Minolta zooms, it is rare to find one that isn't pretty useable. Can't say that for the Sigma lenses all of which were terrible! So how do they compare?

The later silver models with 55mm thread are very sharp in the centre, except at full aperture at the longest end where it is a bit weaker, and pretty sharp in the corners at f8, though soft wide open (but not with objectionable CA or PF).
This one (the black 62mm filter thread model) seems pretty good to me in the corners fully open, and I am certainly happy to use it fully open without worrying about the corners, though if I was taking an architectural shot in good light I would probably use f8. Tree backgrounds are also pretty good even wide open, without the horrid CA or PF that turns many high-contrast distant tree branches purple. Sure, there's a little barrel distortion, that's to be expected but overall I'm happy to use it.
I have yet to test the macro-switch version fully.
The 24-105mm is a better lens, at least wide open (some other lenses end up sharper at f8 than my copy) but it's bigger and heavier and more expensive.
The plastic Minolta 35-105mm is a different lens entirely (see my review) but not a first choice for most uses.
If you want an FF lens in the 28-70mm or 28-80mm region and can live without f2.8 at the long end, frankly any of the Minolta 28-80 lenses are worth trying despite or because of their incredibly low price on ebay. And all the types capable of making excellent pictures (okay, maybe except the shutter cap and xi versions) - if you get a bad one just toss it and buy another; the trick is to test them thoroughly against a tree background to see how bad the corners are and to know what aperture you need to get them sharp (on those occasions when you do need the corners sharp). They *should* be pretty good.
To me, the important thing is not getting a 'perfect' lens (there's no such thing) but testing your lenses enough so you know what their foibles are and how to use them at their best. Eg, most of them need a hand to shade them from sun out of shot, and the older ones are generally less tolerant to sun in shot. This one seems not too bad. It looks fine through the film camera OVF too, and we'll see when the prints come back!
reviewer#16315 date: Jul-16-2015
sharpness: 3
color: 4
build: 3
distortion: 4
flare control: 3
overall: 3.4
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I used to own this lens
compared to:Sony 18-55
Minolta 24-105
Sigma 30/1.4
price paid:25 EUR (used)
positive:weight
62mm filter
negative:soft image
comment:I just tested this lens and than sold it. It produces very soft image with low detail quality. I just took it for a vacation twice as a backup lens, because of its weight and size.
reviewer#11029 date: Apr-10-2013
sharpness: 4.5
color: 5
build: 2
distortion: 4
flare control: 5
overall: 4.1
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Tamron 4-5.6/28-105
Sony SAL 2.8/28
Minolta 1.7/50
price paid:15 Euro (incl. cam.)
positive:light-weight, cheap, small, compact, performs well
negative:does not seem very sturdy
comment:I got this lens attached to a somewhat broken Dyanx 5 for 9 Euro plus delivery fee from Ebay from a gentleman who sold this as broken, as the camera was broken. I could not find any of the problems people usually criticize it for as it just works fine. I am about to replace it with a high(er) speed lens though. Yes, it feels damn cheap, but... it was definitely cheap for me.
Might have some distortions at 28mm but I did not really compare it with another lens, but it seems my Sony 2.8/28 has less.

I like it not adding extra weight to my A850.
reviewer#10681 date: Nov-10-2012
sharpness: 2.5
color: 3
build: 2
distortion: 3
flare control: 3
overall: 2.7
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Sony SAL-1855
Sigma 28-80 3.5-5.6 Aspherical
Minolta 50mm 1.7
price paid:18.50 USD (eBay)
positive:Cheap
light weight
macro?
simple dial in focal lengths
negative:no macro button
not very sharp
a little slow
comment:Minolta 28-80 II 3.5-5.6

1st of all I'm a newbie, I've only had my camera for less than a week and I'm trying out different lenses.

My biggest issue is the lens lacks a macro switch, so I find it hard to know when/where the lens will go into macro mode. This maybe just a newbie issue but I also got a Sigma 28-80 with a macro switch (The sigma is clearly labeled to set at 80mm for macro).

The sigma seems to AF faster and better. (I used AF for my comparison to take my inexperience out of the evaluation.) I also like the depth as well as color better with the sigma.

All my objections could be just my lens, but I'll keep the sigma and resell the Minolta.

One other note about AF in macro mode.
The Minolta 28-80 II seems to auto focus in macro mode. The Sigma also auto focuses in macro mode. I saw the hack for Minolta's with the switch, apparently the sigma don't need the hack.

reviewer#10445 date: Aug-11-2012
sharpness: 4
color: 4
build: 3
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 3.8
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Sony 18-55 kit lens
price paid:50(SGD)
positive:Sharp although not tack sharp
Nice contrast and colors
Light and cheap
Produces nice flare
negative:Flare a little too much and lens hood is redundant.
comment:Overall a nice lens to use for events due to it's versatile focal length and light weight. It's cheap as well.
reviewer#10102 date: Apr-10-2012
sharpness: 2.5
color: 4
build: 3
distortion: 3
flare control: 3
overall: 3.1
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I used to own this lens
compared to:Sony 18-55 SAM
Minolta AF 35-80 F4-5.6
price paid:40 USD
positive:late Minolta colors
full frame design
feather light, great for lazy days
negative:slow
sharpness can't be expected
CA is horrible
comment:I was curious and bought both Minolta 28-80 version II and 28-80 D version and found out they performed almost exactly the same. The 8 blade aperture doesn't do anything better.

This is the cheapest among a-mount lens you can find. And that also means cheap quality physically and optically. The only thing I like is how light it is on the camera. The colors're ok. But the image softness from spherical aberration and CA are so bad that you'd better use the Sony 18-55 kit lens for APSC and for the full frame, spend a bit more and get for example 24-105, 28-105, 24-50, 35-105, 35-80 to improve your images' keeper rate.

It's not that this lens is totally unusable. But it requires more works in post processing to make the images passable.

For the same amount of money, I highly recommend sacrificing the wider end and get the plastic fantastic Minolta AF 35-80 F4-5.6 II. Super light for lazy days and that one can be eye-bleeding sharp, although it vignettes quite heavily on full frame.

I sold my 28-80 as there is really no reason to like about and keep my 35-80 f4-5.6 instead.

See my photos with Minolta 28-80 f3.5-5.6 and Minolta 35-80 f4-5.6 on my Flickr collection at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lifeispixels/collections/72157628204412995/
reviewer#9711 date: Dec-22-2011
sharpness: 4
color: 5
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4.2
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Minolta 35-80 II
Minolta 35-70 f4
Minolta 35-70 f3.5-4.5
Minolta 28-80 xi
price paid:9 GBP used
positive:Sharp but never razor sharp
Minolta colour
Cheap
Range
negative:Plastic mount.
Could be sharper
comment:My copy is usable wide open and improves to be quite sharp between f8-f11 without ever reaching the sharpness of the above lenses, which are very sharp. However it does have a slightly wider range than the 35 - xx s.

Certainly no undiscovered gem but if on a tight budget worth a try - my previous copy of this lens was much sharper.

reviewer#9154 date: Jun-19-2011
sharpness: 3
color: 4
build: 3
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 3.6
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Sony 18-55
Sony 55-200
Minolta 75-300
price paid:kit lens
positive:Light
Nice range on film
Matches my silver 505si super
Nice colours
Not a bad portrait lens on aps-c
negative:Cheap plastic build
Soft focus
Not wide enough on aps-c
comment:As you can see I'm not comparing this to any stellar lenses here, but even in this company this lens is poor to adequate. The focus is soft everywhere, to the point that I was beginning to think my a700 had focus problems until I realised that noting appeared in focus. This was a kit lens with my 505si super along with the 75-300mm. The 75-300mm is in different league optically. It does have some redeeming features however. The range on aps-c and the soft focus makes it a quite decent portrait lens and it does display good colour and as someone else has mentioned here, is able to produce some fantastic sunset images. I'll be holding on to mine for those rare occasions when it will be used and when I get the 70-400 G my silver lens count will have increased to 3 ;-)
reviewer#8787 date: Mar-14-2011
sharpness: 3
color: 4
build: 1
distortion: 3
flare control: 2
overall: 2.6
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:km/sal 18-70
min 35-70
beercan
cz16-80
tamron 70-200 2.8
tamron 28-300
price paid:
missing
positive:light
Focal range
negative:All
but especially Build
focus element moves when tilted
comment:This was the kit lens on my 404si. I was able to get the odd good shot out of it but it's so cheaply made, worse than any other kit lens I've used.

When using manual focus the focus element will move when the camera tilts or if you let go of it. In af mode it will slap back and forth.

There really is no reason to use this lens if you have any other lens.
reviewer#8115 date: Oct-19-2010
sharpness: 4.5
color: 4
build: 3
distortion: 2
flare control: 5
overall: 3.7
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Minolta 35-80 AF Zoom
price paid:$1 (came with camera
positive:28mm wide-angle
Nifty lens hood
negative:None
comment:I got this lens with a Dynax 700si from a thrift store-it's a lovely wide-angle lens.

AF was very quick with this lens and the sharpness is quite fine and seems to have very little distortion.
reviewer#7852 date: Aug-25-2010
sharpness: 2
color: 3
build: 3
distortion: 3
flare control: 3
overall: 2.8
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I used to own this lens
compared to:Every decent lens I have ever owned since. i could make a long list.
price paid:CAD149.00 (used)
positive:It was cheap.
It was the second lens I owned so it helped broaden my view.
negative:It was soft, even in the viewfinder.
comment:I did not know any better when I bought this lens. But as I said in the positives, it helped me see beyond a single focal length. However, This lens was my biggest incentive to actually research what I bought, before I bought.
reviewer#7786 date: Aug-7-2010
sharpness: 4.5
color: 5
build: 3
distortion: 3
flare control: 3
overall: 3.7
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Minolta 50mm 1.7
minolta 35-70mm
minolta 70-210mm
price paid:10€
positive:strong colors
sharp stopped down >6.3
negative:contrast
blured wide open
comment:Bought on Ebay.
Good suprise to use it compared to my prime lens 50mm1.7!
Rich colors and really crisp pictures if you stop down at 6.3 minimum.
It's a bargain for that price!
reviewer#7706 date: Jul-22-2010
sharpness: 4
color: 4
build: 3
distortion: 3
flare control: 3
overall: 3.4
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:kit lens is far better image wise. 18-70 or 18-55 sony dt and sals are much better.
price paid:£10
positive:Light cheap and its got a fair reach ,nice colours sharpish at f9-12.
negative:Not very good all round its ok for a cheap len,s to fill the gap untill something better comes along.
comment:Ihave had this lens for about 6 months now , its got nice colour and a good reach with the crop jump, but its only sharpish stopped down alot , but i must say it does return some awsome sunsets.This len,s isnt that bad on my a380 to be honest ,its been a good stop gap until something better came along,no resale value though hard to resell.Buy it very cheap ,there ok for wot they are just dont expect super sharp pic,s coz it isnt going to happen, but you wont cry at wot it does also ,its ok that it lol .
reviewer#6869 date: Feb-5-2010
sharpness: 5
color: 5
build: 5
distortion: 5
flare control: 5
overall: 5
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:It's not fair to compare this cheap light weight to much more expensive and much more heavy lenses.
price paid:
missing
positive:Cheap
Nice 1:4 "macro" performance
extremely light weight
full frame (none of my lenses is APSc, I've been using Minolta since 7000 and like to be prepared for full frame digital)
Quiet and surprisingly fast AF in low light
negative:No distance scale
comment:Mine is black as well and fully corresponds with all the details given about the ugly silver one. Although it's not a perfect lens compared to my primes, I gave 5's for everything to compensate for the oldest review that rated it far below doorstopper quality.

I tried to catch some flare in full sun with the hood off, no success and I can't find any distortion or CA. If you want magnificent sharpness, colours, details, contrast, you have to pay the price, first when buying, then in carying the weight and finally in risk of theft or damage. This lens is excellent value for money.
reviewer#6704 date: Jan-5-2010
sharpness: 3.5
color: 4
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 3
overall: 3.7
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:16-80 CZ
17-70 Sigma
price paid:EUR 35 second hand
positive:Colours ok
Cheap
Ok range
negative:None
comment:I concur with Derek below. I got this lens ages ago to use on my 700xi and got it back from my father in law whom I lent it to to use on his A100. I tested this lens against the 16-80 and the 17-70 (in low light and at ISO 400 and 800) and frankly the pictures surprised me as they aren't that bad at all. The colours are a bit less warm than the 16-80 colours, but generally good. The building quality is fine, although it has a plastic mount. BTW, my copy is black. It may be that I am mistaking my lens for another, but I could not find another lens that looked like mine or has the same characteristics as mine, so there are probably black copies around as well. The lesn looks the same as on the picture on the left, just black in stead of silvery grey.
reviewer#5332 date: May-3-2009
sharpness: 4.5
color: 5
build: 4
distortion: 5
flare control: 4
overall: 4.5
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Minolta 28-105 f3.5-4.5
Minolta 35-80 II f4-f5.6
price paid:
missing
positive:Sharp Good colours
Inexpensive
negative:Nothing for the price
comment:The test shots I took with this lens shocked me. Didn't expect much but the results sent me to the cupboard for my 28-105, a lens which should outperform this easily.

Well it does, but only at maximum aperture. Once stopped down 2/3rds of astop it became difficult to tell the difference btween the images. Every bit as good as the 35-80.

Judging by the previous reviews, I was surprised at the IQ produced by this lens. I can only put it down to typical kit lens sample variations; ie if you find a good one, it can be very good.

Build wise mine seems well put together with no looseness or rattles; fast and quiet autofocus. I haven't noticed any distortion.

Sorry, I just can't explain it judging from all other reviews I have seen for this lens.
reviewer#4820 date: Feb-7-2009
sharpness: 3.5
color: 4
build: 3
distortion: 3
flare control: 3
overall: 3.3
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I used to own this lens
compared to:sony DT-18-70
sigma 24 mm f/2.8
minolta 50 mm f/1.7 RS
sigma 28-80 macro
price paid:
missing
positive:cheap
works well for it's price
negative:cheap build
plasticky feeling
metallic grey color
comment:i had this one as a kitlens on my dynax 40... when i gave away my dynax 40 to a friend, who still loves to shoot on 35 mm film, as he was devastated when his slr was stolen on a holiday in France,(what to ask for a analog slr in this case??) I also gave this lens away with it.. Why? i didn't need it on my sony a200, and i hate the color. Grey metallic..i didn't need a 28-80 on my a200 as i already had the 18-70 kitlens... It is cheap, i used it a lot on 35 mm, but it is nothing special. after some time, i noticed some grinding sound when focussing.. not very sharp, but for a beginner it is not too bad, considering the price and build-quality..i bought some time ago a very old sigma 28-80 with macro lock at 80 mm, it works in my opinion better, but only at macro..
reviewer#4203 date: Oct-10-2008
sharpness: 2.5
color: 2
build: 2
distortion: 3
flare control: 4
overall: 2.7
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I used to own this lens
compared to:Minolta AF18-70 Kit-lens
Minolta AF28-80D Kit-lens
Minolta AF35-70 F3.5-4.5
Minolta AF35-80 F4-5.6
Minolta AF35-105 F3.5-4.5
Sigma AF28-105 F3.8-5.6
price paid:
missing
positive:Very cheap (but still too expensive)
negative:Dull colours
Poor contrast
Not very sharp
Poor build quality
comment:The best application for this lens is to have one to give away when you're going to sell a camera body... So the buyer can see that the camera body is working.

All the lenses I have compared with the Minolta AF28-80 F3.5-5.6 II (Ř62) are better in regard to image quality and of cause also build quality.
Colours are very dull on this lens - contract is poor - and sharpness below average.

If you're in the market for an expendable cheap lens - go looking for the Minolta AF28-80D kit-lens (Ř55) or the Minolta AF35-70 F3.5-4.5 instead as the image quality of these lenses are surprisingly good.

This one - the Minolta AF28-80 II with Ř62 filter - is the worst lens out of 50+ that I have owned. There are many of these lenses to buy at very low prices - but walk away and just keep the present Minolta/Sony kit lens that usually comes almost for free with a new camera.
This lens is not worth buying/having - there are much, much better alternatives available for the same low price.
reviewer#2015 date: Mar-23-2007
sharpness: 2.5
color: 4
build: 2
distortion: 3
flare control: 2
overall: 2.7
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:18-70 f/3.5-5.6
75-300 f/4.5-5.6
50 f/1.7 RS
price paid:part of kit
positive:weight
negative:sharpness
build quality
comment:This is the worst lens I have. Bought it together with my
Dynax 505si and the 75-300 lens. I soon discovered that pictures taken with the 75-300mm lens looked much better.
After I bought the 50 f/1.7 lens, I was amazed by the difference in picture quality, even on 10x15cm prints.
After that, I used the 50mm for 80% of my pictures.
This kit lens was only used where I really needed to go wider than 50mm.

I never use this lens on digital, although it is up to 2/3 stop faster than the 18-70mm kit lens at some focal lengths. That could be an advantage, but the 18-70mm lens is soooo much sharper.
reviewer#1486 date: Nov-28-2006
sharpness: 3.5
color: 4
build: 3
distortion: 4
flare control: 3
overall: 3.5
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I have experience with this lens
compared to:Kit 18-70, 28-80 3.5-5.6 D, 28-80 4-5.6 Xi, Quantaray 28-80 3.5-5.6
price paid:
missing
positive:Inexpensive, light, perhaps a nice alternative if you want to avoid damaging your kit lens on an outing (bit of a stretch here...)
negative:Need to stop down to 5.6 at the wide end for decent photos, 5.6 at the long end is okay.
comment:As mentioned maybe you would buy this lens if you are on a shoot where there is a chance the lens may get banged up and this one is dispensable. If you didn't at least get the kit 18-70 and you are on a really really tight budget then maybe this lens is for you. Actually truth be told it can take nice sharp photos in the right light, it is not a toy despite the look of the silver exterior.
reviewer#1206 date: Sep-20-2006
sharpness: 4
color: 4
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I have experience with this lens
compared to:
missing
price paid:
missing
positive:Range
price
negative:Ugly!
comment:This one was part of my Dynax 505 kit and has served me well. I've litterally taken thousands of shots with it and for a kit-lens it's not bad at all. Works great on the 5D.
reviewer#385 date: Jan-5-2006
sharpness: 2
color: 2
build: 1
distortion: 2
flare control: 1
overall: 1.6
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I have experience with this lens
compared to:- 28-80 f3.5-5.6 (D)
- 28-80mm f4-5.6
- 28mm f2.8
- 50mm f1.7
price paid:
missing
positive:- price
- protects the mirror and CCD
negative:- build
- optics
- colour
- flare
- CA
comment:Ugly lens in every sense of the word. Build quality is the worst I've seen (about the same as the D version). There is so much play in the barrel that I wouldn't be suprised if it messed with the auto focus. There is a huge loss of fine details in almost any situation. This lens seems to do better than the D version, and probably better than version I when it comes to optics. The f4-5.6 version has the best build quality.

See comparisons of 28-80mm lenses on pbase while they're up:

http://www.pbase.com/dbradley/7d_lens_tests

Save money and weight and use the cap that came with your camera to protect your mirror and CCD.
reviews found: 23   

rating summary

lens image
  • total reviews: 23
  • sharpness: 3.54
  • color: 4.04
  • build: 3.00
  • distortion: 3.52
  • flare control: 3.43
  • overall: 3.51

to add your review
you need to login

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer
In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania