Minolta AF 24mm F2.8 A-mount lens reviews
 Milan33m#44243 date: Mar-14-2019 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | MAF 28 f 2.8, MAF 28-135 F 4.0-4.5, |
| price paid: | ca.200 EUR |
| positive: | Well built, metal prime lens, wide angle view, sharp, F.2.8 |
| negative: | Not zoom. |
| comment: | Nice sharp lens, wide angle view, very sharp, good for landscapes, useful f 2.8, better than MAF 28 F 2.8. Produce good colours and sharp images. I had this lens. |
; 20MP| cooloregon#35792 date: Mar-13-2017 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 Tamron 15-30mm f2.8 |
| price paid: | 240USD |
| positive: | Very compact, quick/accurate focusing and sharp. Very nice old-school Minolta colors. Great as a walk around lens. |
| negative: | For what I paid, I can't complain. |
| comment: | This is my 1st review ever...since I received my A99ll. I love this lens over my Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 set at 24mm. Using the Tamron 15-30mm f2.8 indoors can be down right tiring without a monopod. I don't mined that it's not weather sealed because, I really don't use it outdoors when the weather isn't great. |
| macronut#35781 date: Feb-28-2017 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 2 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 3.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | dozens of lenses |
| price paid: | 140 |
| positive: | nice hood solid old school build |
| negative: | soft soft soft soft SOFT manual focus with hood attached is very difficult (buy the RS version instead) |
| comment: | my first and only one word review... CRAP |
| Dotsch#31700 date: Oct-14-2016 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 24/2,8 Minolta 28/2,8 Minolta 50/1,7 Minolta 100/2,8 Macro Sigma 300/4,0 Minolta 28-35/3,5-4,5 Minollta 35-70/4,0 Minolta 70-210/4,0 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Yery sharp, no disortions, very good flare control. |
| negative: | nothing |
| comment: | Great lens! |
| QuietOC#26545 date: Apr-6-2016 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony DT 16-50 F2.8 SSM Sony E 20 F2.8 Minolta AF 20 F2.8 & RS Sony Distagon 24 F2 ZA SSM Sigma AF 24 F2.8 II Discover 25 F1.8 Sigma 28 F1.8 HS & EX DG Minolta MD & AF 28 F2 Sony FE 28 F2 Minolta/Sony AF 28 F2.8 Neewer 28 F2.8 Sigma 30 F1.4 DC DN C & EX DC Sigma 30 F2.8 DN Art Sony DT 30 F2.8 Macro SAM Zeiss Touit 32 F1.8 Neewer 35 F1.2 Fotasy 35 F1.6 APS-C & Mini Kaxinda 35 F1.7 Sony E 35 F1.8 OSS Sony DT 35 F1.8 SAM Minolta AF 35 F2 |
| price paid: | 95 USD (used) |
| positive: | Size and weight Internal, rear focus Well-centered Low barrel distortion Reversible petal hood 55 mm filter threads |
| negative: | Minor lateral CA (blue/red) Minor focus breathing Short, uneven focus throw Small, hard plastic focus grip Not very sharp Curved focus plane |
| comment: | A nice clean copy with original hood and caps purchased on eBay. The retail price of this lens was $300 when released in 1985. "JAPAN" This is one of the smallest A-mount lenses--though Canon has a much smaller 24 mm F2.8 STM EF-S pancake. It is identical in length to the Sigma Super Wide II, but doesn't extend like that lens to focus close. The focal length remains wider than the Sigma at close focus. The Minolta build feels much nicer than the Sigma. The Sigma has a much longer focus throw and closer focusing ability. The Sigma also has a bit more barrel distortion. The 18-55 has a similar amount of distortion at 24 mm. Both old 24 mm primes are very similar in color and similar to the 18-55 kit lens. The reversible petal hood is nice though certainly small for an APS-C crop. It uses a three lobe bayonet. The larger petal hood from the 28 and 35 F2 lenses will mount as will the circular hood from the later 100mm F2.8 Macro lenses. This lens is softer than my Sony DT 16-50 F2.8 SSM which is the best 24 mm lens I've found so far. Overall a decent inexpensive prime, but unless size and weight and crucial I would stick with the zooms. |
| CKL#21424 date: Nov-13-2015 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 3.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | - Minolta 20mm f2.8 - Minolta 28mm f2.8 |
| price paid: | 100 Euro |
| positive: | - Good for ASP-C |
| negative: | - Bad for full frame |
| comment: | The 24mm is the most disappointing Minolta prime lens I've got. It's ok for ASP-C (resulting in a 36mm lens) but on full frame body the corners are soft below f5.6. The 24-85mm lens is much sharper, in center and in the corners. The Minolta 35mm, 50mm, 85mm and 135mm lenses are gold, the other 2.8 primes are so-so. It's the weakest f2.8 lens, the 20 and 28 are sharper. |
| j_alberto#21418 date: Nov-12-2015 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 28-70mm f3.5-4.5 on Maxxum 7000 |
| price paid: | £70 |
| positive: | Build quality, internal focus, metal, fast focus, sturdy hood, 55mm metal filter thread |
| negative: | None |
| comment: | This is an excellent compact lens. I use it on my full frame a900 where it delivers a nice wide field of view, shallow enough depth of field when needed, saturated colours and reasonable sharpness. With a focal length of 24mm it is a lens that I see as purposefully wide, opposed to a 35mm for example which lies in-between wide and normal. A wide prime is harder to use initially but once you start seeing wide the resulting photographs are rewarding. Good focal length for sweeping outdoor vistas with plenty of sky or foreground and unorthodox indoor portraiture, think fashion photography. I use it for portraiture, travel, art and scene setting cinema style photography. f2.8 is a bright enough aperture for this type of lens and also keeps it compact, the same size as the Minolta 28mm, 35mm f2 and 50mm. You don't use a wide lens for bokeh although the OOF areas are pleasing, you use it for composition and content, so f2.8 is plenty even for low light with the a900. The colours are well saturated. No real need for a CPL with this as you can get deep blue skies with practise. Focus is fast, as fast and possibly faster than my 200mm f2.8 HS, but may miss at longer distances. Thankfully they have a smooth focus ring for manual focus. Internal focus is an overlooked plus. It keeps the inside of the lens dust free and makes the lens feel better built overall. On APSC it has the same field of view as a 35mm, but doesn't feel wide or long enough, I'd rather use a DT 35mm on that format for a 50mm equivalent. |
| Thkpic#21417 date: Nov-12-2015 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3 color: 3 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 3.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 16-50mm DT, 50mm 1.4 Zeiss |
| price paid: | 180.00 |
| positive: | Light, small, decent build. |
| negative: | CA, corner sharpness |
| comment: | I've had this lens for a few years now. It's not bad in that- when you have a good amount of light- it can produce very nice images. It's not all that sharp though. You shouldn't expect that either given it's a 24mm. Corners are a bit of a let down even at F11. My 16-50mm DT does better at any F stop then this 24mm 2.8. You get some ghosting wide open but I suspect that's do to it being built for film not the 4mm or so thick glass on top of a digital sensor. Bokeh isn't bad either but don't expect crazy amounts of sharpness out of this thing. It just aint going to happen. |
| teejay#13215 date: Apr-2-2015 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | - sony 35/1.8 - sony 16-80 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | - useful focal length - sharp center at any aperture - fast AF - inconspicuous - minolta colors |
| negative: | - lateral color fringing - distinct resolution fall-off in the corners, even at f8/f11 - prone to flare/loss of contrast if sunshade not used |
| comment: | This is an enjoyable little lens to use on aps-c, making it a good one-lens solution if one wishes to travel light and be inconspicuous. However, optical flaws are readily observed (see cons above) due to its dated optical design and coatings. |
| Bob J#12172 date: Mar-10-2015 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 20 AF, Sigma 19, 18-55 SAM, 50 f1.4 & 50 Macro D |
| price paid: | £140 |
| positive: | Rear element focusing (so you can hold it against glass to avoid reflections and let it AF) and short snappy screw drive AF. very cheap s/h |
| negative: | None. |
| comment: | Lovely F/L on either Full-frame or APS-C, and this is a lovely lens to use. My RS was stolen but the (o) is just as nice and tends to be remarkably cheap: get one with a hood for preference. |
| Bokehmous#11831 date: May-16-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | - FE35 - 50 1.7 |
| price paid: | 118 GBP (mint) |
| positive: | - contrast - overall IQ - detail - price |
| negative: | - nothing at this price. |
| comment: | Love it, has the everything I point at looks interesting factor. |
| GlassEye#11398 date: Oct-23-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 16-50 f/2.8 SSM |
| price paid: | About $200 USD |
| positive: | Small, light, sharp, fast, well built. Fun |
| negative: | Some vignetting wide open on FF. |
| comment: | I've had this lens for about a year. It is a great companion for my a55. This combo is light and discreet. It works out to a medium wide angle with APS-C. I carry this kit around almost all the time. I love it. It is just a bit soft wide open, but after f/4 it is just fine. 10/18/18 Update: I've now used this lens on the A77mk1 and mk2, and now on FF. I still love this lens, but I do see some significant vignetting at f/2.8. |
| Fivepin#11352 date: Sep-26-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 35 f1.8 50 f1.4 sigma 10-20 f4.5 |
| price paid: | 240 CAD |
| positive: | Price sharpness f2.8 size (fits in a pocket) |
| negative: | vignette at f2.8 on A99 |
| comment: | This is a fantastic prime lens. Classic Minolta. Fast to focus. Is sharp from f2.8 very sharp at f8. I compared this side by side to my sigma 10-20 and this lens is much sharper. Even the corners are not bad at all. Colours are classic Minolta. Light weight and a steal at around $200 plus shipping. |
| Swan White#11264 date: Jul-22-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 16-50 2.8 |
| price paid: | 75 euro |
| positive: | Small Light 2.8 36 mm on APS-C Sharp Good colours |
| negative: | Hard to find the original hood. But found one on the Fotografica Fair for euro 10. |
| comment: | There was no hood on the lens, but I am not complaining for that price. Love that it is compact and an overall great performer. |
| streets#11010 date: Apr-4-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Any other mid range W.A. lens I have used. |
| price paid: | 170 Usd |
| positive: | Light Sharp Inexpensive |
| negative: | Not a thing |
| comment: | Purchased mine used in mint condition with original caps and petal sun shade. I have not detected the performance fall off that others have reported at f2.8. This is a great companion to my M.A.F. 50mm f4 macro. |
| Smegenai3000#10948 date: Feb-26-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 250 usd used |
| positive: | Sharp f2.8 Build quality colors |
| negative: | missing |
| comment: | Awsome lense,sharp, have nice colors, maby too much blue but its not a problem for me,also not that wide at crop sensor but also im fine with that. |
| Freddan_6#10716 date: Nov-20-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 Minolta 28-80 f/4-5.6 Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 Minolta 28 f/2.8 Sony DT 35 f/1.8 Minolta 50 f/1.4 Sony DT 50 f/1.8 Sigma 70 f/2.8 Macro Minolta 135 f/2.8 |
| price paid: | 800 SEK |
| positive: | Lightweight. Nice colors. Shapness. Excellent build. Small. |
| negative: | Some minor flares if sun is in the corner. Busy bokeh at f:2.8 |
| comment: | I like this lens for sharpness, colors, weight and size. Bought at swedish ebay (tradera) for 800 SEK = 118 USD = 92 EURO. Way better than the Minolta 28-80 above. Only little better sharpness than the Sony 18-55 kit lens and the tamron 17-50. Really good colors. |
| godsakes#10670 date: Nov-7-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 24mm f2.8 Carl Zeiss 16-35mm KM 17-35mm Sigma 12-24mm |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Tiny & light Classic Minolta colour Good edge sharpness & very good once stopped down |
| negative: | unimpressive sharpness wide open (especially given it's a prime) |
| comment: | Optically it's in a similar class to the cheaper Sigma 24mm f2.8, though slightly sharper edges, better colour/contrast and smoother focus. Both aren't overly sharp wide open and their sharpness rating reflects that weakness but they but improve quite a bit as you stop down. At f8 there isn't much difference between this and the cz16-35mm, given it's the kind of lens that will typically be used at f5.6-11 I don't think it's a huge practical downside. I think the Minolta is much more pleasing than the Sigma 24mm but I stop short of considering it a class above, while it's certainly worth paying more for the Minolta I don't think it's worth 3x the amount it sometimes commands. |
| Doublejayz#10437 date: Aug-8-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta AF28 f2.8 Minolta AF50 f1.7 Minolta AF50 f1.4 |
| price paid: | 198 USD (USED) |
| positive: | Sharp Cheap Lightweight Build 2.8 |
| negative: | Only 2.8 36mm on crop sensor slight edge distortion |
| comment: | Nice lens all around Can be less sharp at 2.8 Little narrow in crop sensor but 36mm is very well for everyday use. I took this to replace 28 f2.8 and it's worth for a higher price. NOTE: When use its hood backwards the manual focus is impossible. |
| JimmyMelbourne#10402 date: Jul-23-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 17 50 2.8 18 280 sony |
| price paid: | 135 CHF |
| positive: | Sharpness Works nicely on a77 minolta colours |
| negative: | had to fine tune focus adjustment, does not work on my other camers well |
| comment: | This lens is a great little performer. is light so great for walk around landscapes. kind of more limited than a zoom for walk around found mysels swapping lenses but for specific purposes very useful. I had to micro adjust this lens so without micro adjust found it was not sharp. |
| nilotek#10335 date: Jun-26-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 28/2.8 Minolta 50/3.5 Minolta 35-105 1st Gen. Minolta 70-210 1st Gen. |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Size Hood Color Sharpness Fast AF Good 35mm equivalent on aps-c |
| negative: | missing |
| comment: | This is the lens i chose, when i take no others with me. The perfect walkaround-prime for Aps-c. i think the tiny focus ring is pretty handy with the hood on! |
| chriseen#10281 date: Jun-9-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 28mm f2,8 50mm f1.4 135mm f2.8 35-70mm f4 70-210mm f4 50mm Macro f2,8 100mm F2,8 macro 80-200mm f2.8 Sigma APO 300mm f4 Sony Zeiss 16-80mm f3,5-4,5 |
| price paid: | 240 euro mint |
| positive: | Well Built,Solid construction Light and compact Good colours Outstanding sharpness and good DoF Flare resistant No distortion, very nice bokeh Super fast focusing speed Comes with bayonet hood 55mm filter thread Internal focusing Very compact Wide aperture 2.8 36mm equivalent on digital The one prime solution for travelling light |
| negative: | For what it is, I can't think of a negative. |
| comment: | Great light carry lens. Partnered with a 50mm and 135mm, this functioned well for me as part of a walkabout prime set. I wanted the 24mm for a bit of extra coverage. It covers most shooting situations, groups of friends indoors and outdoor shots of landmarks. This is a forgotten lens because it is really an excellent performer! I am very pleased about the results that it gave on last holidays. Its focal length is ideal for group photos (group size 5~15). It generates pleasing skin tone Picture is razor sharp and the colours are rich. Can get some nice 'close subject in the foreground, wide bokeh landscape in the background' shots. The prime for city photo with 36mm on Digital. If you're also shooting architecture and landscapes this is the lens you are looking for. One of the best things about this lens is the flare control. No flare or halos, totally flare resistant. Very compact and solidly built and comes with 55mm filter thread just like the most Minolta lenses. Use the top quality Skylight 1A filter for protection. There is no vigneting at all unless you stack more filters. Minolta 24mm f/2.8 is simply one of the sharpest in the Minolta line-up. I highly recommend to get this lens either used or new. I'm simply blown away by its performance and I'm sure you'll also. |
| Tomodo#10277 date: Jun-8-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | CZ 24-70mm M 28mm f2.8 S 35mm f1.8 |
| price paid: | £160 |
| positive: | Compact Solid build Sharp |
| negative: | Tiny focus ring Flare |
| comment: | I was looking for a small light wide lens to use instead of my big heavy 24-70 and on a small budget. (24mm f2 SSM was way out of budget) Sharp from f2.8 and much better build than the modern budget Sony primes. The tiny focus ring can make it sometimes difficult when using manual focus for stills or video. Seems better than the 28mm f2.8 I had some years ago. For the price you can get these you can't go wrong. |
| dandelbaum#10137 date: Apr-22-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 0 EUR (mint) |
| positive: | Compact, fast, sturdy. |
| negative: | missing |
| comment: | Great lens, a neighbour gave me a 7000 with this lens on it as a random present since he knows I love cameras. I tested it on a friends Alpha200 and it worked beautifully. |
| jfabrizio#10126 date: Apr-17-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Min 28/2.8 Tamron 17-50/2.8 |
| price paid: | 100 USD (used) |
| positive: | Sharpness Color rendition Compact size |
| negative: | I wish I had a full frame :) |
| comment: | I was lucky to find a great copy with some small cosmetic defects. I love this lens, though I've not had too much experience shooting with it yet. It's pretty sharp wide open and gets even better stopped down a bit. The color rendition is gorgeous and I prefer it in every way to my Minolta 28/2.8. Time will tell if this can compete with my Tamron 17-50, which is sharp and I love the extra range on the wide end... but shooting an old, quality prime just feels so right. |
| KCG#9634 date: Nov-27-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 28mm F2.8 |
| price paid: | USD 310 |
| positive: | Sharp, Minolta Colour, light and convenient. |
| negative: | missing |
| comment: | missing |
| derekw#9240 date: Jul-17-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 28 f1.8 EX DG Minolta 24-85 |
| price paid: | 156 GBP (mint) |
| positive: | Sharpness whe stopped down a touch, Colours Size and weight |
| negative: | Sharpness below f4 Flare - fitted rubber hood to my copy |
| comment: | Nice lens, but disapponting below f4. Sharper than the Sigma at all comparable apertures. Needs effective hood. Surprisingly (but not if you look at MTF ratings) the 24 mm end of the 24-85 equals it from f5.6 upwards. |
| ekan_singapore#9225 date: Jul-10-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony SAL 18-250 |
| price paid: | 250 USD (ebay) |
| positive: | Everything |
| negative: | Focus can hunt or fail occasionally for low contrast shots - not to the point of being a problem The focus ring could have been a little larger. |
| comment: | I picked a copy on Ebay and I am very happy I did. It gives sharp images right from wide open, even though the depth of field is small enough at f/2.8 to make it look not so, for some subjects. Colours are pleasing and accurate. Free of distortion, which is noticeable for my all-in-one zoom (18-250) at 24 mm, as expected. It also makes the skies slighly more blue (my personal feeling, not a precise measurement) than 18-250, which is a big plus for tropical (harsh sunlight) and often hazy/overcast Singapore. I believe this lens deserves more than 4.6 (current review score), so I give it 4.8. Built-wise, the lens is light, made out of good hard plastic except for the mount, which is metal - this is a positive. It is convenient to tote for long walks and can serve as walk-about glass nicely on APS-C bodies, @ 36 mm 35-mm equivalent. This lens has very slighly rounded shape and it looks cute even if a bit small on my A300. I shot with it under the scorching tropical noon sun without a hood and there was no flare to speak of. Autofocus is usually fast but it occasiobally hunts or fails to focus for some low-contrast subjects, which is a common issue for many lenses - not to the point of being a problem. Shooting at infinity focus with this glass is just great. Overall, an excellent performer for its price. |
| slantyyz#8931 date: Apr-16-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 50/1.7 Minolta 28/2.8 |
| price paid: | 300 CAD |
| positive: | colour sharpness |
| negative: | nothing major for my uses (ymmv) |
| comment: | This is one of my 3 favorite lenses to use (the others are the 50/1.7 and Tamron 90/2.8). In my mind, it's noticeably better than the 28/2.8 in terms of colour and sharpness, but it is a more expensive lens. |
| PeteMag#8882 date: Apr-7-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | 28-135mm Min 12-24mm Sigma Tokina 20-35mm |
| price paid: | 120 |
| positive: | Colour and sharpness Portability |
| negative: | slightly underwhelmed by it |
| comment: | This lens is very good, there's nothing wrong with the way it works and can suit FF very well as a standard wide angle. However I felt it lacked the overall brilliance to justify having this lens + a UWA sigma 12-24mm + a Tamron 28-75 f2.8. I only felt that I needed it a couple of times because it offered little that I didn't have with these two lenses. Pleased with the results but not enough. |
rating summary
- total reviews: 102
- sharpness: 4.49
- color: 4.82
- build: 4.80
- distortion: 4.61
- flare control: 4.22
- overall: 4.59
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login