Minolta AF 100mm F2 A-mount lens review by ricardovaste
|ricardovaste#4008 date: Aug-26-2008|
flare control: 4
|ownership:||I have experience with this lens|
|compared to:||100/2.8 macro, 105 macro, 70-210/4, 24-105,|
|positive:||+Relatively small & compact|
+Fast max aperture
+Good amount of "reach"
+Good build quality
+Great "minolta" optical qualities
+Its a sharp lens
|negative:||-Small/bad MF ring|
-MFD isn't great, though not awful
-Didn't offer me anything over the macro
-It's generally expensive to buy and also very hard to find
|comment:||My assessment on this lens was done only over a few days as I intended to sell it, but I hope my thoughts are helpful non the less.|
It's bokeh, while is very good, it isn't anything over the Macro lens, even though it has 9 rounded blades (my original macro lens does not). I posted some sample photos and no1 could really tell the difference. At max aperture, yeah, it blurs a bit more but it the quality of the bokeh does not change.
Its focusing speed is good. But, you must make sure you're cameras AF is up to it (no BF/FF issues) otherwise its not going to be worth using it in AF really.
It did offer a more oompact, lighter and faster package over my 100/2.8 macro. But did I need that? No. The macro is far more versitile for my use. The sharpness between the two lenses? Couldn't really tell, if you can, you're probably standing too close to the print or you've got your nose up against the screen. I though the macro had the edge at 2.8, but i could be wrong. I think the 100/2 has better CA control, marginally.
But, if you're not intersted in macro and want a fast tele, i would definately say this is THE lens to get. Its small and discrete, unlike the 135/1.8, 200/2.8, 80-200/2.8, 70-200/2.8. A very handy lens to have at your disposal in that regard.