Minolta AF 17-35mm F2.8-4 D A-mount lens review by Rusty
|Rusty#11593 date: Jan-8-2014|
flare control: 4
|ownership:||I used to own this lens|
|compared to:||Sigma 10-20|
|positive:||- Low price|
|negative:||- Plastic build|
- Useless hood
|comment:||First things first, the lens feels like it's made of cheap plastic, about the same feel to handle as the Sony and Minolta kit lenses. The hood is built so wide it takes up a ridiculous amount of space in the camera bag, and it is so short it dosen't even stop stray light.|
Second, I have to admit that *for the money*, it gives very acceptable results, considering the only real alternative to this lens is the Zeiss 16-35 at almost 5-8x the price depending on the source. yes, the Zeiss is much sharper and feels much more solid and controls flare much better, but it's not 8x a better lens overall, so looking purely at the quality/price ratio, it's pretty good.
Bottom line is, IMO, if you afford more than 250$, save up and get something better. OTOH, if build quality and uber-sharpness is not an issue, this lens still offers a very good bang for the buck. I have used this lens successfully on paid jobs and for personal work for about 2 years, but in the end I found myself dissatisfied with it and sold it as part of a massive trade for higher-quality glass.