Minolta AF 20mm F2.8 RS A-mount lens reviews
 Wētāpunga#45759 date: Sep-19-2021 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 17-35/3.5 G Zeiss Loxia 21/2.8 |
| price paid: | c. $$NZ250 used. |
| positive: | Good build, colours, compact size |
| negative: | Not D-encoded Soft corners wide open. Not weather-sealed |
| comment: | I did like this lens. For a while it was my main-wide angle lens for the a900, until I got the Minolta 17-35/3.5 G. The relatively bright (f2.8) aperture in combination with the a900's OVF made it quite easy to use in the dull light conditions of the NZ forests. It had the benefit of being a good, compact lens of low weight, despite the 72mm filter size. While it did quite well stopped down (and if you're using this as a landscape lens, you will be shooting at smaller apertures than f2.8) the corners and edges were softer at wide apertures. There was also a degree of curvature to the lens that while not bad, could still distort the image if you were hoping for straight lines. Nonetheless, the Sony 20mm f2.8 lens profile could still be used to correct this in Lightroom or similar. Overall, quite a nice wide-angle prime stopped down, but for detail and contrast, the Minolta 17-25/3.5 G was superior. And the E-mount Zeiss Loxia 21/2.8 is optically, much much better. If you want a relatively light and compact wide-angle lens that will produce lovely landscape images stopped down a bit for the A-mount, it is a good option. |
; 36MP| Phil Wood#44396 date: Oct-21-2019 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Prime: Minolta - AF 20 F2.8 Zooms: Minolta - AF DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6 D Sony - AF DT 18-55 F3.5-5.6 SAM Sony - AF DT 18-55 F3.5-5.6 SAM II Sony - AF DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6 Sony - AF DT 18-250 F3.5-6.3 Tamron - 16-300 F3.5-6.3 Di II PZD MACRO |
| price paid: | 99 GBP |
| positive: | Solidly built, small, sharp., Minolta |
| negative: | Lacks modern flare control and microcontrast. |
| comment: | I have this design in the original and RS versions - there is little to choose between them. The RS has a slightly more user friendly focus ring and a smoother aperture which alters the bokeh a little not so good for stars, better for circular blobs (a good excuse for having both versions?). To be honest I tend to use them stopped down for architectural shots or landscapes with lots of DOF - where bokeh tends to be irrelevant. The body of the lens is essentially that of the 24/2.8, 28/2.8, 50/1.7, 50/1.4 with an additional flared out end for the big front element. This makes it distinctly wider and knocks the filter size up to 72mm. Ratings: Sharpness is good, not quite up to full marks but as good as might be expected from a decent prime. Colour is typical Minolta - love it or hate it. Build is solid, as proved by the fact that there are still plenty around still going strong after 20+ years. Some distortion is to be expected from a lens this wide, but Minolta did a pretty good job at squaring things up and Lightroom has a profile to correct it. Nevertheless you can still get those spectacular distortions by angling it appropriately. Flare - not its strong point, but not unusually poor for a lens this wide and this old. Overall I like this lens a lot, though it did take some getting used to on FF. It is still a nice lens on APS, but is not so much better than the 18-55 SAM II and no better than the 16-50/2.8 - FF is where it really shines. If I had to choose between the two versions I would go for the RS because of the slightly more user friendly manual focus. |
| dyxum787#44184 date: Dec-3-2018 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | sony |
| price paid: | 120 |
| positive: | by calhound Jul 12, 2016 Great lens for full framers If you use a full frame digital camera, you know finding a wide angle lens with greater field of view than 24mm can be difficult and expensive. For Sony a mount users (a99 for example) this lens is a dream come true. It is pretty much the same as the Sony version, but if you look you can find the Maxxum version for lower price. I have only used this lens a few times, but it does a very good job. I like to shoot in aperature priority and stay around f8 or f5.6 whenever I can. The images are pretty good even wide open at f2.8. They are even better at f5.6 |
| negative: | lens sold not as "excellent" the lens is obviously couldn't be described as "excellent" some light but obvious scratch on the front glass one obvious dent on the filter ring not as the one i preferred |
| comment: | I had this lens on my wish list for a couple of years. Since I prefer prime lenses to zooms, this one fills the gap between my 14 mm ultra wide and my 30 mm wide-normal in my Sony A-mount (APS-C) kit. The images that I have gotten with it are acceptably sharp for my needs. I would not recommend it, though, for professional use because of its plastic body. print stickers | http://www.printradiant.com So far I have used it for close-up, non-macro photos of flowers. It does a good job of stretching the distance behind the subject while keeping decent depth of field. I still look forward to using it for landscape work. Although I know that there must be some distortion in my images using the lens, I haven't noticed it because I haven't photographed any buildings with it. That's another thing I am looking forward to. |
| QuietOC#42988 date: Jan-19-2018 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony E 16 F2.8 Tokina 17 F3.5 Sigma 19 F2.8 DN Art Sony E 20 F2.8 Minolta AF 20 F2.8 Minolta AF 24 F2.8 Sigma 24 F2.8 SW II Rokinon AF FE 24 F2.8 Tokina AF 20-35 F3.5-4.5 I & II |
| price paid: | 150 USD (used) |
| positive: | Reasonably small Flat focus plane Heavy vignetting Lens Compensation |
| negative: | Softness Focus shift Lateral CA Color shift on sides Petal hood blocks focus ring 72mm filter thread |
| comment: | A somewhat rough looking copy missing the hood and caps purchased at an eBay auction from an individual seller. This lens has changed very little over time. The RS version adds more curved aperture blades and a rubber cover to the focus ring and that's about it. This is a fairly small lens, though much larger than the Minolta AF 24/2.8 and 28/2.8 primes. It looks a bit like a wide converter was added to the front of those lenses. The bayonet hood looks just like a scaled up version of the 24/2.8 hood. Like the 28/2.8 this lens seems to be supported by in-body lens compensations. "JAPAN" This copy of the RS is a bit sharper than the original I have. It is still nowhere near as sharp as the tiny Sony E 20mm F2.8 pancake lens. There is a little distortion and quite a flat focus plane. |
| Collingsandheal#18375 date: Oct-14-2015 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 3.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony SEL1810, Tamron 11-18, Tamron 10-24, Voigtlander Super Wide Heliar 15 mk3, Sigma 12-24 DG. |
| price paid: | £160.00 |
| positive: | Very fast focus, manual or auto. Or set to f8 and don't focus at all. It's all good. Great colours and very sharp for a super wide angle. Generally makes great looking images. |
| negative: | As with virtually all super wide angle lenses, flare can let it down. |
| comment: | If you have a full frame Sony you should own this lens. It works on E-mount with the LA-EA4 brilliantly. As a manual focus lens it is a delight ( one finger focus ) with the LA-EA3 and it's brilliant on the A-mount cameras. |
| maxfarphoto#12003 date: Oct-17-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Contax G 28/2,8 Biogon |
| price paid: | eur 200 2nd hand |
| positive: | Compact Light weight right angle of view |
| negative: | ...it's a-mount native... |
| comment: | As e-mount lacks wide lenses I decided to but this one and use on my A7R Even it needs LAEA4 to work AF it remains a quite compact and light set up which fits my needs Distortion is a no-problem so far as adobe released a correct lens profile which correct it hassle-free I recomemd this lens for any A7 shooters looking for a wide lens |
| JKLensman#11330 date: Sep-5-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Sharp from edge to edge (@f 7,1-8). Not heavy, small size. Price. |
| negative: | Focus-Shift. |
| comment: | This lens makes a lot of fun, especially in landscape-photography! I have never seen such a quality at the edges! |
| godsakes#10117 date: Apr-13-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 3.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 12-24mm KM 17-35mm |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Great corner sharpness Compact |
| negative: | Poor distortion for a prime Prone to flare |
| comment: | While it's far from being the sharpest prime I've ever used it's good by wide angle standards, most importantly unlike many wide angle lenses the corner sharpness holds up really well on this lens. However both distortion and flare control could be better, if this lens catches flare it will wash out your image. The sigma 12-24mm was much stronger on those aspects. |
| LKB#9681 date: Dec-7-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Min 50/1.7 Sony 50/1.4 Sony 35/1.8 |
| price paid: | £250 (used) |
| positive: | wide lens size/weight work with Flash |
| negative: | AF biased towards inf |
| comment: | Those are my only wide-angle lenses, bought primary for the indoor architecture work and landscape. I also tend to do portraits with them - wide lenses give a very different and stunning results, even on my APS-C body. Those lenses are sharp, and when correctly used sharp from 2.8, thought read on about AF. What I really dont like is the AF - it seems to be back-focusing and I cant verify it on my A55. Because of focal length this makes pictures less sharp that they should be - this is especial visible when taking photos of group of people. I go MF a lot just to correct for it. It seems that problem is gone by ~F7.By this time DOP is huge enough to cover the problem. I also tried short focusing or per-focusing a few times before I take a shot. Wide open they are not as sharp as 50/1.4 but once step down, they start to match. In low light they behave different to 50/1.4 or 35/1.8 giving a softer image - useful for some. Used with flash they provide stunning results - AF problem is much less visible and I just love sharpness and colors Overall, is one of my most used lenses, providing me with some really stunning photos. If only AF would be less temperamental... UPDATED: AF paragraph, sharpness notes |
| saxbike#8648 date: Feb-11-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 24mm CZ 16-80mm |
| price paid: | 300 USD |
| positive: | Sharp-corner to corner Consistent & accurate color Flare is easy to control Tough little lens |
| negative: | Distortion Takes more time to compose |
| comment: | This lens is a terrific performer on the FF a850. It allows for great coverage and appears to have no trouble with light fall-off or vignetting (except see below). The distortion is to be expected on a lens of this type, but I have either used it to my advantage or corrected it in PTLens. I will probably order the grid viewing screen for the a850 as the multiple lines will help in keeping the horizon straight. It is unquestionably a very sharp lens in the center and out at the corners. Maybe f2.8 might be a little soft but f4-8 is just outstanding. I have not tried it on the a700 simply because I have the CZ 16-80 to handle the focal range. On full-frame, it is, of course, a little wider than the 16mm on crop sensor. Very nice to have this angle of view. It is small and light. I have experimented with a polarizer and get a slight bit of vignetting. Using this filter on such a wide angle lens can also be problematic, because the tone value of the sky is affected by the angle to the sun. It is becoming a favorite on the a850; however, you must slow down and take your time in composing. Otherwise I end up with some very sloppy shots. |
| soken#8522 date: Jan-15-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Konica Minolta 17-35 F2.8-4D Minolta 24 F2.8 |
| price paid: | 378 |
| positive: | sharp, good flare control, light weight, 72mm filter for a 20mm |
| negative: | not D lens, hood is bit tight on my lens, not easy to remove |
| comment: | I bought this lens for a week and really love it, i also have a KM 17-35 which is good for its range, I am thinking for keeping both of them as I hope will get a ff soon. 20mm F2.8 is sharp on my a700, sharp even as the corner, and it is very light comparing to 17-35, like it |
| dumbasadoorknob#7868 date: Aug-26-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tokina 17 Sigma 17-35 Minolta 24 RS |
| price paid: | usd 335 used |
| positive: | Minolta colors |
| negative: | Edge distortion |
| comment: | I just can't get to like this lens. It does everything just about right, and it's small, with wonderful colors and a 72mm filter (which I like) -- but it just leaves me dissatisfied. It was enjoyable on the A700. On my A900, there's always more edge distortion than I expect, and it's never quite crisp enough in the image. I prefer the Tok and Sigma over it. I've tried the artaphot shim removal, (and it was very easy to do) but that made almost no difference to my dissatisfaction, so I put the shims back. It's exactly why some lenses are keepers -- but this one, I'm sorry to say, isn't, for me. I actually prefer to take two Min 35/2 landscapes and stitch them together to using this lens. It's not at all bad, but it's just not pleasing to me. |
| ddoctor#7512 date: May-30-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Lightweight Wide on FF and usable in APSC Nicely built Sharp wide open Fast focusing Great color 72mm ring thread MFD 25cm!!! |
| negative: | None so far |
| comment: | This is my wide angle lens. Very happy to get in mint condition. Body and optic is perfect. This lens rocks, the distortin is well controlled. Much more than 17-35 minolta. The colou is great. And above all. Its sharp from wide open. f8 for landscape just magnificent. |
| Shootist#6761 date: Jan-16-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 24/28 Minolta's Pentax SMC 28/35 |
| price paid: | $300 |
| positive: | Sharp Fast Color Distortion Control MFD! |
| negative: | Costs Money... |
| comment: | I got a good deal on this one, and the seller didn't even know it was the circular aperture RS, nor could I be sure before I bid...bonus. I liked this one's photos so much that I went out and bought a new lens hood from Sony ($35 bux!) and some chunky 72mm filters for it...but per usual I prefer to "go commando" most of the time! I love the huge Minolta Branded lens cap, hehe ; ) I guess this lens spends the most time on my camera these days (I own 25 different Minotla compatable lenses) because I can count on it to shoot fast, no MFD issues, and it's REALLY sharp....really. My subject matter at the moment is a quick little guy who can change his expression 5 times a second! Because of that I should probably sell my 24 and 28 but it's hard to do at these prices... -Shootist |
| DarkScribe#6536 date: Dec-6-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 20mm F2.8 original, Minolta 28mm F2, Minolta 28mm F2.8 |
| price paid: | au$125 |
| positive: | A good lens, my second copy of this model, good colour, well built and sharp if stopped down "several" stops. |
| negative: | Not as sharp as the original version. |
| comment: | Although I often support the RS versions as being equal to or surpassing the originals that they replace, this is one example where the RS version is not quite as good as the first version - and I both own and have used several copies of both. The original is sharp from F2.8, and razor sharp right into the corners when stopped down one stop. This version really needs to be stopped right back to equal it. Both versions, as with many lenses, need a larger and more versatile hood to combat problems with flare. I always add a large collapsible rubber hood to my copies. |
| danichtfuer#6349 date: Nov-9-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | - Minolta 24mm f2.8 - Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 |
| price paid: | 300 Euro |
| positive: | - sharp - light - fast - great build - low distortion |
| negative: | - soft corners wide-open - vignetting wide-open |
| comment: | Got this mint condition 2nd generation 20mm to fill the wide-angle gap that opened up after moving to full-frame. It's performing very well on the a900. Center sharpness is very good. Stopped down to f5.6, corners are getting sharp, too. At f11 there is nothing to complain about, great sharpness corner to corner. |
| bObO#6140 date: Sep-29-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Nikkor 14-24mm 2,8 AFS |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Sharpness, build quality, AF, accuracy, colours, bokeh |
| negative: | None! |
| comment: | This is the best 20mm fix lens on the market! Never regretted a penny! |
| nitrosyl#6064 date: Sep-16-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | - Minolta 24mm f/2.8 RS - Minolta 28mm f/2 - Konica Minolta 17-35mm f/2.8-4 - Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | - plenty sharp at f/2.8 - very sharp by f/4 - well built, more like a 4.5 - well-controlled distortion - circular aperture blades - light |
| negative: | - front element's quite exposed - tiny focus ring |
| comment: | very easy to let your fingers touch the front element while manually focusing. problem can be alleviated with lens hood attached. |
| ihlbcn#5530 date: Jun-15-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 20mm f2.8 |
| price paid: | 300 EUR |
| positive: | Focal Weigth Size Build quality Sharpness Colors Distorsion |
| negative: | Front cap difficult to remove |
| comment: | This lens has fantastic colors, it's very sharp even wide open and on f8 it is superb in all senses, just sharp center to border, no vignetting, very low distorsion. AF is really fast on A900 and size is very moderate. IQ wise it's an excellent lens. |
| MartinM#3755 date: Jun-24-2008 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | 20/2.8 (Old) 24/2.8 (RS) 28/2.8 (So) 35/2.0 (Old) 50/1.4 (So) 50/1.4 (old) 50/3.5 Macro SAL-18-250 |
| price paid: | 400 CHF |
| positive: | - Build - Zoom Ring - Weight - F2.8 - Sharpness - Circular aperture |
| negative: | - None |
| comment: | I initially was not so happy. I had this lens twice. On the first go, i would have rated it as not sharp enough. Then i changed over to a 20/2.8 (Old Style) and it became one of my favorite lenses. Be cause of that i struggled over another 20/2.8 RS and i changed back again. I am really happy with the lens. Specially doing landscape in low light conditions It has less disortion @20mm than the SAL-18250 and better speed with 2.8 compared to 3.5. The RS is harder to find and when found mostly more expensiv than the old one. Why i chaned back? Well simple. The design matches more the style my other lenses. Sony and Minolta RS. I am seaking to replace the 35/2.0 to an RS too. But hard to find. The IQ of old and new are identical. The bokeh looks slightly different due to the circular aperture of the RS. But really minimal. Highly recomended!! Get one. |
| wildeye#3159 date: Jan-9-2008 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tokina 17 3.5, Min 28 2.8, Sig 18-125, Min 24-105, CZ 16-80, Min 50 1.4 |
| price paid: | 350 USD (used) |
| positive: | Sharp, reliable AF, solid build |
| negative: | Man focus ring could be a bit wider but it's better than the old style. |
| comment: | I had purchased a Sigma 24 1.8 and must have gotten a bad copy. I sent it back and got this instead. I'm much happier with this lens. I bought it to use mainly indoors with poor light. I trust the sharpness from f3.2 on up and will use f2.8 on occasion. At f4 and above, it's as sharp as anything I've shot with. I've given it a 5 for distortion because it does exactly what I expect a 20 to do. I do like to shoot wide and close so this lens is almost always on when I'm indoors. |
| rhy7s#3057 date: Dec-9-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 18-70mm kit |
| price paid: | 350 USD (used) |
| positive: | Excellent colour and great sharpness, fast focus. |
| negative: | Flare, you still have to deal with a bit of distortion, even on APS-C. Hood and cap don't get along (should have a centre pinch cap). |
| comment: | Images have a lot more depth than the 18-70mm kit lens, and that sort of 'liquid' colour you get from the beercan. Sharpness is pretty decent once you get a stop or two down. There's still a bit more distortion than I would have expected from a prime on a crop camera but it is manageable. Flare can be a problem in landscapes when the sun gets anywhere near the frame. I still find it a fun and useful lens on a 1.5× crop sensor. |
| supeter#3034 date: Dec-4-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 18-70 KM kit Beercan 50mm (f1.7) |
| price paid: | 600 NZD |
| positive: | Sharp Low distortion Build Resolution |
| negative: | none |
| comment: | Ideal lens for landscape and city/street photography. I was a bit hesitating to buy this lens but it's well worth its price. I was looking for some serious and affordable wide angle lens with no major compromises, zooms cannot compare to this prime. |
| ja#2950 date: Nov-21-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 5 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | great build |
| negative: | not too sharp, especially wide open |
| comment: | missing |
| RacingManiac#2633 date: Aug-15-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta AF24 f2.8 |
| price paid: | 350usd(Used) |
| positive: | +Wide enough even on 1.5x crop 5D +Good minimum focus distance +excellent color rendition +Good sharpness +usable wideopen +fast AF |
| negative: | -MF ring feels flimsy -plastic body -occasional flare issue(I don't have the stock hood) -noticable distortion when shooting specific objects |
| comment: | My primary landscape/traveling/sightseeing photography lens. Relatively compact so it's not hard to find room for it in the bag. Compared to the AF24/2.8 that I owned before it has a appreciable gain in wideness on 5D, and obviously very wide for any film camera. Good for indoor use as well using higher iso at wider end of the aparture with nice and close minimum focus distance and good coverage. I love this lens. |
| infrastellar#1993 date: Mar-19-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | sigma 20/1,8 EX DG |
| price paid: | 325USD |
| positive: | size, weight, sharpness |
| negative: | flares |
| comment: | I have exchanged the sigma 20/1,8 for this lens. Only weight and size were the reason. Not able to compare the results anymore, but I think the image quality is the same, apart the DOF that 1,8 offers. The sigma 20/1,8 is better performer against the light, and is its flare control is rated to 5. While this minolta is a 3 points performance against the sun, or source of the light. I like the aperture blades on sigma more as well. Anyway, I am very satisfied, and my lineup consists of small, light lenses, that allows me to take them all whereever I go. |
| Maurus#1890 date: Feb-24-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | KM 18-70 f 3.5-5.6 (kit lens) |
| price paid: | 260 € (as new) |
| positive: | Very low distortion, very sharp from f 5.6, nice colours, quick AF, lightweight |
| negative: | AF sometimes a little undecided in low light conditions |
| comment: | A great wide angle for outdoor use. At similar apertures, it is significantly better than the kit lens, by a bit in the center but by much (!) at the borders and in the corners. Amazingly little barrel distortion (although there is still some if you really look for it). Colours and contrast are similar to other Minolta primes (e.g. 50 f 1.7). Combine these three properties and you have a brillant lens for landscapes. Sharpness decreases at large apertures but is still OK. In low light the AF needs to be checked as it may focus somewhat differently in two identical shots (on my 5D). I have no problems with the MF ring. |
| Okapi#1671 date: Jan-18-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 17-35 and MNinolta 28mmF2,8 |
| price paid: | 200USD(used) |
| positive: | It has no distorsion, before I've tried a Tamron Zoom 17-35 and put it to the trash (I sold it !) when I compare that point. |
| negative: | Same as other guys, the rubber ring but not really a problem. |
| comment: | A very good buy at a professional dealer with a guarantee, a real bargain ! |
| DcapVividOptic#1470 date: Nov-23-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Min 20/2.8 MinO & MinRS, Sig 24/1.8 EX DG, Min 24/2.8 MinO & Min RS, Min 28/2 MinO & MinRS, KM 17-35D, Canon AF 20/2.8 & 24/2.8, Voigtlander 21/4 (Bessa) |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | - size for focal length - AF |
| negative: | - price compared to Sig EX DG (new) |
| comment: | This is really a joint & comparison review with the other version (MinO & RS) The MinRS gets the edge over the MinO due to the circular aperture. Its sharp enough, but could be sharper, colors are slightly better on the MinO version I think Distortion very well controlled. Build is the same, although I prefer the MinO by a touch, feels just a little bit more solid. The manual focus ring is more user-frienfly on the MinRS, but certainly still very good on the MinO - don't let the manual focus put you off, its one of the better ones. I would recommend a good hard look at the Sig EX DG range if you are looking for a 20/24/28 prime. I've had the lot and the Sig EX's get the edge on several counts: manual focus ring, 9 blades. But if you absolutely must got Minolta, I think the MinO is better value for money |
| ab012#1201 date: Sep-18-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | KM 17-35 2.8-4D M 28/2 KM 11-18 DT |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Flare Control, Distortion |
| negative: | Vignetting |
| comment: | Distortion very well controlled, and flare control extremely good! One great thing about this lens is that the colour is very good, and cooler then the KM 17-35D. It is also more similar to the other Minolta lenses. As a old wide angle this lens vignets quite a bit at 2.8 and also a bit at 4. Contrast is also lower at 2.8. Resolution ok at all stops though. |
rating summary
- total reviews: 39
- sharpness: 4.53
- color: 4.82
- build: 4.56
- distortion: 4.26
- flare control: 4.31
- overall: 4.49
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login