Minolta AF 17-35mm F2.8-4 D A-mount lens reviews
 mikiha#1727 date: Feb-1-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 2 flare control: 2 overall: 3.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | tamron 20-40 Sp |
| price paid: | 280$ used |
| positive: | very sharp stopped at F4 nice colors light af speedy |
| negative: | hood is weird not that good feels a little plastic |
| comment: | good lens for the price range better than the sigma version not a G but a bit vetter than the Tamron Di version if you dont have another lens in that price range with that wide range - it's a must have. |
; 10MP| dimi_dinev#1657 date: Jan-15-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 4 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | detailed comparison to 28/2,8 |
| price paid: | 180€ |
| positive: | nice sharpness, especially at 28mm fast at 17mm fast AF bargain for me very few CA |
| negative: | almost useless hood, I never use it the officially announced "circular aperture" isn't circular too high officially listed price |
| comment: | (Same text as in my 28/2,8 review...) I bought the old 28/2,8 some weeks ago and tested it against my zoom KM 17-35/2,8-4 (at 28mm) on my 7D. The latter means that my results are founded on an image from a cropped sensor! I have USED both lenses on my 800si, but haven't COMPARED them in detail under full frame conditions. Both lenses are practically new. I bought the 28mm almost unused, and it's in a very good shape for such an old model, completely clean. Generally I am very careful with my equipment, so the 17-35, which I bought in July is also in best possible shape. Wide open, the zoom (f3,5) has a slight better performance in both upper edges, the other two edges are almost equal The 28mm (f2,8) has a very slight advantage in center performance. Above f5,6: The center performance of the 28mm is at every f-stop just slight better than the zoom, but really a tiny advantage (a little more contrast). The zoom delivers at the contrary a visibly better edge performance at each f-stop. The zoom's CAs are visibly less. On the whole, the zoom performs better. It can be considered sharper at every f-stop and has visibly less CAs. I'm a little disappointed from the 28/2,8. As it's a prime lens, I had expected a better performance than my 17-35. The latter I consider as a very good and useful zoom. Here the thread in the forum where I have published my test of both lenses: http://dyxum.com/dforum/forum_posts.asp?TID=10201&PN=2 |
| jaccojacco#1583 date: Dec-28-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 24-105mm |
| price paid: | 140 EURO (new) |
| positive: | Solid |
| negative: | missing |
| comment: | I could get this bargain through the internet (comparable to Ebay) and I am very pleased with this solid lens that provides excellent pic's. I wanted it because my 24-105 mm wasn't enough wideangle on my new 5D. |
| vtube#1519 date: Dec-7-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | 50/1.7, beercan, 35/2 |
| price paid: | 300Euro (new) |
| positive: | - good range (24-52mm 35mm equivalent) for a walk-around lens |
| negative: | - not so sharp - not so fast (f/2.8 only for the first millimeters, then 3.5-4) - plastic build |
| comment: | [7D] Average sharpness, need more USM in Photoshop that my other prime lenses... Good colors, nice range for a walk-around lens, I used it a lot for my honeymoon in Cuba. Some distortion and softness at 17mm. Good with flash shooting indoor, has ADI. [A850] 17 is very... wide on my new a850. Extreme corners are not perfect, even at f/13. No too bad, indeed. Range now is reduced, not a walk-around lens anymore. My 35/2 is much better. |
| maxfarphoto#1462 date: Nov-22-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | KM 18-70 DT (kit lens) |
| price paid: | € 320,00 (2nd hand) |
| positive: | Sharpness Color Weight Build |
| negative: | Flare control (because of hood) |
| comment: | Very sharp lens and nice colors Excellent at f5,6 - f8 - f11 Little bit soft at 17mm, great at all other lenghts Waitinf for a FF to get as nice photo as with film camera |
| vedran#1459 date: Nov-21-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 350 (used from KEH) |
| positive: | Color, sharpness great if stopped down a bit, weight-more stable, wide angle |
| negative: | flare, too short, distortion on 17mm |
| comment: | Great lens, not too expensive. Needs to be stopped down for landscapes but that wide angle is great. Also for indoor,weddings. It's weight is a plus, feels more stable than lighter lens,so less handshake (at least in my case). |
| faithlessnomad#1451 date: Nov-20-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 3.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | Canon FD 20mm f2.8 |
| price paid: | 400AUD (2nd hand) |
| positive: | Well suited to the Sony A100 format, better than the kit lens if you're after a wide angle. I'm not happy about buying DT lenses and prefer glass suited to FF applications |
| negative: | Lightweight construction. |
| comment: | I bought this lens off ebay and cannot really say a bad thing about it. Ask me in three years time and I might be more worried by wear and tear, but since I couldn't find a 17-35mm G I'll settle for this. The 77mm filter application is well suited for me as it means I only need one polariser |
| pedrocr#1304 date: Oct-11-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | 24mm f/2.8 18-70 DT |
| price paid: | 200 EUR (used) |
| positive: | Very nice walkaround range on 1.5 crop. Well built and sharp. Took a little while to learn how to use it but now it works great. Got a nice shot the other day at 1sec exposure f/2.8, ISO1600 at 17mm. |
| negative: | The 5D seems to not be too great about auto-focusing it. Not too sharp wide open at 17mm, don't know if it's the focusing though. It flares a little even if the sun isn't in the frame, but I guess that's to be expected from such wide angles. Probably needs an APS-sized hood. |
| comment: | It's a nice lens although not a top performer like the 24 or 100 macro. Need to try it on the A100 since it supposedly is better on it. |
| stefanDynax#1303 date: Oct-11-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | Konica Minolta 28/75 2.8 |
| price paid: | 180 |
| positive: | Colors, Sharpness, Quality construction, AF speed |
| negative: | Nothing |
| comment: | Very good lens, for quality construction, AF speed, beautifull colours, sharpness. I will use for works, very fine. |
| Panito#1277 date: Oct-6-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 4 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | 12-24/4.5-5.6 EX DG 17-35/3.5G 24/2.8 35/2 |
| price paid: | 200€ |
| positive: | Nice color Very sharp in the center Very good price |
| negative: | A little strong distorsion at 17mm Not as sharp in corners at widest apertures, ok from f8-f11 |
| comment: | missing |
| Duur#1115 date: Aug-24-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta AF 24/2.8 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Color |
| negative: | Flare sensitiveness |
| comment: | I got it as Kit lens with the Dynax 7D. It is the widest lens I have. On the film 7000AF It has a lot of wanted distortion and you can get everything on the picture. At 24mm it has a little more distortion as the 24mm. On the 7D. It is a very nice lens for making pictures inside smaller rooms. With it effective range of 25 to 52mm it is very usable. |
| jimbo#1076 date: Aug-8-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 19-35mm |
| price paid: | 150 GBP (new) |
| positive: | Good value, full-frame, good handling, good allround performance, fast at wide end. |
| negative: | Auto-clutch focus ring would've been nice, awkward hood. |
| comment: | I use this mostly for landscapes, so stop down to f8 or f11 where it seems to be sharpest. I don't notice any CA, and it produces lovely colours. Can't comment on distortion much: I wouldn't attempt to use any lens like this on architecture where it would be apparant, I'll just say it's not an issue for my purposes. Not the sharpest wide open, but what is? I only use wide open for things like family events indoors etc... where sharpness isn't crucial. By the way AF is accurate and quick wide open. Flare/ghosting is well controlled for a zoom. With the sun in or near the frame only a small green smudge is apparant, not bad for this type of lens. Build quality is good, it feels substantial and weighty for a plastic lens. |
| 800si#989 date: Jul-6-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | I think this is a great wide angle lens. |
| negative: | Maybe a bit heavy, but I don't really care. |
| comment: | I just bought the lens yesterday and shot a few with the 7D, and I will g shooting with both digital & film bodies next week. I think this will be a great lens for infrared. |
| harumpel#981 date: Jul-5-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 3 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 2 overall: 3.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | KM 18-70, Sigma 24/2.8, Minolta 28/2.8, KM 28-75/2.8 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | good sharpness stopped down, good center sharpness even wide open, low distortions |
| negative: | edge sharpness needs F8.0, flare sometimes ruins the whole image, hood too small for APS-C, range |
| comment: | Payed 140,- Euro for it so its performance is ok for the money. |
| kadebo#942 date: Jun-25-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | KM 28-75/2,8 Sigma 28-70/2,8 ZEN KM 100/2,8 macro (my gauge) |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | sharp when stopped down |
| negative: | heavy/evident distortion under 28 mm weak performance at 17 mm |
| comment: | Wide open soft at 17 and 35 mm, but acceptable at 28 mm. Performance at 17 mm at all openings rather weak, but at 28 and 35 mm good when stopped down to 5,6. Heavy distortion at 17 and 24 mm, still perceptible at 28 mm, but less than KM 28-75 and Sigma 28-70 at 28 mm. Needs a large filter; special PVC filter cover of B&W slim 77mm does not fit firmly and falls off easily. |
| tomas.lebeda#924 date: Jun-21-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 50 / 1,4 Minolta 35-70 / 3,5-4,5 Sigma 28-70 / 2,8-4,0 UC |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Sharpness Build Very good colors Very good contrast |
| negative: | More expensive 77mm filters Small original hood for crop factor 1,5x Distortion at 17mm |
| comment: | I can recommend better hood for using at 5D or 7D with 1,5x crop factor. Try Tokina BH-776 hood. It needs just small hand made adjustment and it fits on KM 17-35 / 2,8-4,0 D very well! I have used it for one year and it is far better than original very wide hood. Look at the photos: http://forum.fotografovani.cz/file.php?50,file=362452 http://forum.fotografovani.cz/file.php?50,file=362453 Instructions in Czech: http://forum.fotografovani.cz/read.php?50,1559287,1574252#msg-1574252 |
| Aleq#884 date: Jun-5-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | - 28/2.0 - 18-70 kit lens |
| price paid: | 215 EUR (new) |
| positive: | - Sharp when stepped down (a bit) - Nice colors |
| negative: | - Range - Flare - Overexposures with flash (ADI, 3600HS(D)) - Terrible vignetting on 17mm on Full-frame |
| comment: | This lens surprised me - I wish 18-70 had 17-35 qualities... If 17-50/2.8 offer similar quality, I'll consider that. If you can live with 17-35 range on digital and get a fair price, go for it. It must be perfect lens on full-frame body (if it doesn't vignette). Update after 4 years, A900 - mediocre performance, terrible vignetting (17mm). My standards are now higher :-) |
| Tsja#861 date: May-31-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | KM 50mm 1.7 KM 28-75 2.8 KM 18-70 3.5-5.6 Olympus OM 28 3.5 Olympus OM 35 2.8 Olympus OM 50 1.8 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Sharp trhoughout the zoom- and apperture range, Build, Weight, Size, relatively fast. |
| negative: | Just a tad too short on the long end. |
| comment: | == Contrast == Excellent contrast, on all focal lengths and all appertures == Flare == Unfortunatly a little less flare resistant then the 28-75, or it is just that I take more pictures with this lens where this could be a problem. Overall reasonably flare resistant == Sharpness == My copy is pretty sharp at all appertures and all focal lengths. Stopping down one stop improves image quality just a hint, but I don't hesitate to use it wide open. == Build == I actually like the build, very similar to the 28-75. It extends very little while zooming. Very solid for the weight and price. I think this size and weight is ideal for a normal sized DSLR like the KM 5D. The rotating MF ring doesn't bother me at all. == Purpose == I don't use it as often as I thought. It's just a little short on the long end to be a true general purpose lens (I like the range of the kitlens more and use it actually more often on holidays etc.). However, teamed with the 28-75 2.8 it makes a great duo for high quality shots, where I have the time to change lenses every couple of shots. A great landscape lens and does well at indoors and nightphotography as well. == Price/perfomance ratio + Conlusion == For the price I paid, it's pretty hard to beat. I love the size, weight, perfomance and price! I just wish it was a tad longer. I'm actually looking at selling in to purchase a Tamron 17-50 2.8 or Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5, but I'm just waiting to see what Sony rolls out. If you think you like the zoomrange it is highly recommended however! |
| natamambo#834 date: May-24-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | No AF wide lenses owned before, but better than my old MD mount Tokina 24mm which it replaced for landscapes. |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Very sharp, excellent colour rendition for landscapes. |
| negative: | Need to watch for flare but careful shooting solves the problem. |
| comment: | I really like this lens and use it as a walk-around lens for landscapes (I don't really do architecture). I have had one of my favorite beach shots cropped to 1/3 of image (to create a panorama) and then blown it to 18"x6" and you can see every grain of sand. The whiteness of the sand and the blueness of the water are captured perfectly. Some say it is not sharp stepped down but I never use it that way, always shooting at f8 or beyond for depth of field so I have never noticed any problem. For landscapes, I love this lens - it was my first zoom that I considered as good as my Minolta MD primes. |
| sinee#789 date: May-15-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | AF 18-70 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | sharp when sopped down, very good performance at 25-35mm |
| negative: | barrel distortion when wide open, large filter size |
| comment: | can be pretty sharp stopped down to f8 or f11. When traveling You will probably need carry two lenses, 35mm is not enough. Very nice colour. accurate autofocus. |
| peterVL57#767 date: May-10-2006 | |
|---|---|
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 AF 28-75 f2.8 (D) + Minolta AF DT 18-70 f3.5-5,6 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Good performance for a good price |
| negative: | Large filtersize and unpracticle large hood |
| comment: | This lens is from the same family as the AF 28-75 f2.8 D, witch is an excellent lens and I use it as my walk-around lens. Buildquality is fine. The performance-quality of the AF 17-35 f2.8-4 D is IMHO equally good, except pictures could be a little sharper at the lower apertures. Also handling distortion could be a little better at widest angle (nothing photoshop could not fix though), but overall I give it the same appreciation as it's bigger "brother" (the AF-28-75): This lens is also a reliable companion and highly recommended. |
| addy landzaat#707 date: Apr-22-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 24-85/3.5-4.5 RS Minolta 70-210/4 Canon EF 100-300/5.6L (EOS) Canon EF 50/1.8 (EOS) Consumer grade EOS lenses |
| price paid: | Kit with Dynax 7D |
| positive: | Build, optical quality in general for the price |
| negative: | dull, lacks character |
| comment: | Good lens, but misses some character. I have replaced it with the 17-35/3.5, which is much better but also much more expensive. Colors are not bad, autofocus is reasonable fast and never hunts. It does show flare and it has some purple fringing (more noticable then on all my older minolta lenses - and this is the only one that has digital coating!). Sharpness is oké, good for a FF wide-angle zoom. Color rendering is neutral but tends to be boring. Build is good enough for most uses, just don't take it into a warzone. I wasn't bothered by distortion, but if you look closely, you can see some. Had some flare and a little purple fringing. But in general it copes well. Pricewise it is a lot of bang for your buck. Bottomline: I don't love it. It misses character, my 24-85/3.5-4.5 is more special. |
| gregphotnath#682 date: Apr-12-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 3.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | missing |
| negative: | missing |
| comment: | very nice lens, light, compact he is always on my D7D |
| recnahne#681 date: Apr-12-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 3.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 2.8/20, Tokina 3.5-4.5/20-35, Sigma 2.8/24 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Compact, good sharpness when stopped down, reasonable price |
| negative: | Flaring, moderate wide-open performance |
| comment: | The lens offers quite good wide-angle performance for a reasonable price. Stopping down one or two steps is a must for acceptable sharpness. A direct comparison showed that at 20 mm image quality is equal to that of the 2.8/20 when stopped down to f/11 (on the other hand, the 2.8/20 shows almost the same quality already wide-open!) I recommend this lens as a good wide-angle zoom for almost every photographer except available light wide-angle enthusiasts. |
| terrylloydsmith#641 date: Mar-30-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 17-50/2.8 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Lightweight and nicely made. |
| negative: | missing |
| comment: | This is a nice lens that can be used on my film 7 and 7D. Good, but not great, sharpness and color OK but my example was not as sharp as I had wanted so I sold it. Tamron 17-50/2.8 is much better. |
| ph0t0man#580 date: Mar-15-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 28-75/2.8 28/2 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Decent size for large aperature wide focal length lens. |
| negative: | Range is a little awkward, wide enough for me, but I need more reach often. |
| comment: | I'm glad I picked up this lens. It gives me what I needed it for, the wide angle shots. It is pleanty wide for my needs, but I often wish I had a longer lens on my camera (this is why I use the 28-75 much more often). It is decent wide open, but not great. Stop down a bit for good performance. Haven't had much of a chance to test it yet. |
| lifephoto.it#547 date: Mar-4-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 2 flare control: 4 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | All optical feautures |
| negative: | Not negative, but the build level is not really professional |
| comment: | Very good lens, finally a wide angle for 7d Camera. The base for life reportage. Unfortunately to much Distortion at 17 mm. |
| Bernie_King#545 date: Mar-1-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | KM 18-70 DT |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Great Details Meters well Color Reproduction Range Build Quality SHARP |
| negative: | Flare (Going to try a different hood) |
| comment: | I was about to give up on any kind of WA photography with my 7D after experiencing the horror that is the kit lens! This lens is worth every penny of the $275.00 I paid for it (second hand). The build quality is supurb, image quality is outstanding. A definate must have if you, like me, can't afford G glass. |
| thegoodhuman#544 date: Feb-27-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 20mm 1.8 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Sharp Good contrast Smooth manual focus ring Really wide on film Not to heavy |
| negative: | Wide filters (exp. cr.pols) |
| comment: | The newest lens in my line up is also one of the best all-around performers I own. The decision for me between a wide-angle zoom or a really nice wide prime was a though one I chose the zoom only because I will be using it a lot indoors where physically moving my body is an issue. I’m truly impressed with the fine detail and contrast this lens offers when slightly stopped down above 3.5 at the wide range. Great colors and accurate skin tones. Compared the Sigma 20mm the lens is lighter and the filter size is smaller. |
| bbrat#520 date: Feb-19-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | AF speed, color, contrast, size and weight, pretty sharp. |
| negative: | larger filters size |
| comment: | a very good lens for landscapes. colors and contrast very good. AF spedd is very good and a sharp lens for the most part. obviously there are wider lens available, but for the price a great value. filters and the hood are the only negatives for me. |
rating summary
- total reviews: 132
- sharpness: 4.27
- color: 4.58
- build: 4.14
- distortion: 3.74
- flare control: 3.60
- overall: 4.07
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login