Minolta AF 135mm F2.8 A-mount lens reviews
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Minolta 28-135 f4/4.5 Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f3.5 MC |
price paid: | £175.00 |
positive: | Small Lightweight Built-in hood Fast |
negative: | Nothing worth mentioning |
comment: | A really compact prime 135mm that is a joy to use. Produces stunning portraits, but can be used as a short range wildlife lens, or indeed for some longer landscape shots. Not super sharp wide open, but stopping down produces clear, crisp images, with beautiful colours. When compared to the renowned 28-135, it is much sharper at say f5.6 (to be fair to the zoom lens) and of course so much smaller and lighter. Comparing it to a Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar MC 135mm f3.5, it holds its own, so not bad at all. A great addition to the camera bag for a day out with a wide angle and standard lens to accompany it. Definitely a keeper. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | minolta 28-135mm secret hand shake minolta 70-210mm beercan sony 55-200mm |
price paid: | €18 |
positive: | great color and nice dof |
negative: | really hard to turn the focus wheel on my lens. |
comment: | this minolta 135mm i bought got taken apart (luckiliy i am really handy with this stuff so i was able to save this lens from the scrap) and to be honest the lens is very easy to take appart, clean and rebuild with the service manual. i haven't tested the lesn, i haven't had the lens long enough but as it stands it's a really nice lens in my collection! |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 2 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Zeiss 135/1.8, Minolta 85/1.4, Minolta 28-135, Tamron 70-210/2.8, Konica 135/2.5, ... |
price paid: | 150 (new) |
positive: | Small and light for the speed/focal length. Sufficiently sharp for most purposes. Built-in lens hood that actually works fairly well. (And see the comments for a rather unusual strength). At least on my copy, the stop at infinity gives essentially perfect focus on infinity. |
negative: | Flare can be a problem (for a fixed focal length lens), though the hood works pretty well. I guess it could be sharper--the Zeiss 135/1.8 is definitely sharper. |
comment: | One point that most people probably don't care about at all, but a few will find extremely interesting: this lens seems to be almost completely free of coma or astigmatism. I use it quite a bit for astrophotgraphy, because stars remain round and sharp right out to the corners of the (full) frame. With many (most) other lenses, lights near the corner (or even edge) turn into strange and unusual shapes, but with this they remain essentially perfect across the entire frame. |
![]() | |
---|---|
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 100 f.2.8 Macro Minolta 28-135 f4.0 Minolta 200 G HS f2.8 Minolta 100-200 f4.5 Sony 70-200 G SSM f2.8 Sony 135 STF T4.5 Sony 85 Zeiss f1.4 Angenieux 45-90 f2.8 and many more... |
price paid: | 120 Euro |
positive: | + Minolta colors + Small and light + Very good sharpness + Inexpensive + Good AF speed |
negative: | - Mfd - nothing - sometimes bad bokeh (depends on subject) |
comment: | The Minolta 135 f2.8 is a little germ. It is small - but well build. For the price i paid it`s a bargin. Sharpness @f2.8 is very good and get`s better at @f3.5. Bokeh is good but with cateyes. Colors a typical Minolta. Vigneting is around 1,5 EV at f2.8. If you are low on budget, get this lens. If space in your baggage is a problem, get this lens. If you need more sharpness, stunning bokeh etc., pay 8-10X more. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Minolta 100mm D macro Tamron 16-300mm Sony 18-250mm Minolta 28-135mm Minolta 70-210 (all variants) Minolta 75-300 (all variants) |
price paid: | 105 GBP |
positive: | Small, sharp, solid lens. |
negative: | Nothing major - shorter MFD would be nice. |
comment: | I'm not a huge fan of nicknames like 'pocket rocket', but you can see where it comes from. This is a lovely little lens, some of the G zooms might have it beat, but I don't have one of those. It holds its own very well against my zooms - faster, lighter, smaller and better IQ. The 100mm macro is sharper and has better IQ and has macro - but it is heavier and it isn't 135mm. The Ziess 135 is reportedly better - and so it should be considering it's decades newer and ten times the price. If you shoot A-mount and want a 135mm prime you can't get better value than this little gem. That said mine doesn't get a lot of use - I prefer the 100mm macro and the Sony 85mm f2.8 as short teles, I don't know why but I've never got on that well with 135mm. Update 12 Sep '19: I forced myself to use this lens by using it in a Dyxum Challenge - and it grew on me. I now use it regularly on FF and APS-C; it's a gem. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | ZA135/1.8, Minolta 80-200 HS G. I like both of these lenses better.... but then they are both tanks - all have their niches. ;) |
price paid: | 70 USD |
positive: | Sharp. Small. Minolta Colour. Pretty fast focusing. Locks on well, and quickly. Works great with eye AF on A99ii. |
negative: | Purple fringing. |
comment: | My copy quite sharp - if a bit travel worn. Glad I picked it up. Will pack it along when weight and size are an advantage. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Well, what to compare with? |
price paid: | ??? |
positive: | First, it is not this lens but a Minolta MD Rokkor 135mm f2.8 MD-I. Second,can't say the price as i bought a lot of gear in a "pack" from a seller on FB. Very sharp at f2.8 close but not close to infinity. Lovely old Minolta colors. Rendring is top-notch as Minoltas used to be. Built like a tank and very smooth focusing and so also the f-click aperture ring. Small and lightweight for a 135/2.8 lens Works really great with the a7RII and the Lens Compensation app. |
negative: | Kind of short builtin lens hood, else nothing. |
comment: | Lovely lens, thats all. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Sigma 28-200 3.8-5.6 UC Sigma 28-135 F3.8-5.6 Minolta 75-200mm new Sony 16-35 f4 e-mount Sony 28-70 kit lens e-mount Tamron 28-300 185D |
price paid: | missing |
positive: | Sharpness Size Colours Contrast Build Weight |
negative: | Bookeh Price MF Distance |
comment: | Very sharp lens very good quality especially for its age. I love using it and it makes exceptional portraits. The Min focus distance is 1m which is so-so. Price is a bit expensive but I suppose for what you buy its not that much Only downside for me is the bookeh which I find a bit.. meehh. I like a well rounded bubbly bookeh and this one feels a bit nervous. Of course it depends on each photo |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Min 100 f2.8 macro RS Min 100-200 f4.5 Min 28-135 f4-4.5 |
price paid: | 135USD |
positive: | sharp compact typical Minolta image feel no linear distortion no vignetting, even on FF |
negative: | C/A and PF hood could be deeper so-so MFD |
comment: | 4 distortion because of chromatic aberation (since linear distortion is non-existant). Probably deserves a 3.5 for flare control, but then any vintage lens is likely to flare when shot straight into bright light. It's been said before; this is a sharp, lightweight, easy handling short tele, thats shortcomings are limited to C/A when shot wide open, bokeh C/A, moderate purple fringe on hot highlights and contrast reduction with the occasional colored blob when shooting into a very bright scene. The bokeh isn't the best, but isn't bad either and it's easy to forgive the failings because images made under conditions that don't exacerbate the C/A or flare issues look fantastic. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Minolta AF 100-200mm F4.5 Minolta AF 70-210mm F4 Minolta AF 100mm F2.8 Macro (D) Minolta AF 80-200mm F2.8 HS APO G |
price paid: | € 180 (Used) |
positive: | * Compact and light weight * Great sharpness * Internal focus * No distortion |
negative: | * CA at F2.8 * Small MF ring |
comment: | A very nice little lens, that gives you great pictures. Easy to take along, small enough to fit into your pocket. Build in hood is nice, but too small. Build quality of the lens is great. Picture quality of my copy surpasses the Minolta 100-200mm F4.5 and Minolta 70-210mm F4 considerably, and comes close to the Minolta 100mm Macro and even the Minolta 80-200mm F2.8 HS APO G at 135mm in regard to sharpness and colour. However, at F2.8, there is clearly visible CA. The 80-200 F2.8 HS APO G does a lot better here, but that lens is in a different league all together. Focus speed is fine. If you want travel light and to go out with your camera with only a set of small primes, this one is highly recommended. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 3 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Sony FE 85 F1.8 Tamron SP 85 F1.8 USD Canon EF 85 F1.8 USM Minolta MD 85 F2 Sony 85 F2.8 SAM Tamron SP 90 F2.5 Macro Canon EF 100 F2 USM Minolta MC 100 F2.5 Minolta AF 100 F2.8 Soft Focus Minolta AF 100 F2.8 Macro RS & D Cosina 100 F3.5 Macro Sony 135 T4.5 STF Canon EF 135 F2.8 Softfocus Vivitar 135 F2.8 Close Focusing Minolta MD 135 F3.5 |
price paid: | 156 USD (used) |
positive: | Compact and solid Internal focus Little focus breathing Flat focus plane No distortion Minor lateral CA Nice smooth rendering Generous 1/3 turn focus throw Common 55 mm filter size Easy to service |
negative: | Alignment/Variation Heavy Axial CA Small circular hood Minimum flare control Tiny, recessed, plastic focus ring Reduced focal length with close focus |
comment: | Purchased and used five copies of this lens. The first was a beautiful looking early edition with crossed XX's. This lens is about the same size and weight as the Tamron SP 60 F2 Macro. It is much smaller than the older Vivitar Close Focus or the STF. On APS-C it acts like a 200 mm f/4 lens on full-frame. This was tied as the second cheapest Minolta AF lens when originally released in 1985. The original retail price was $140--the same as the 28 F2.8 and $35 cheaper than the 35-70 f/4. It now often sells for much more than those lenses. "JAPAN" During my initial testing of the first copy many of the manually-focused, tripod/delayed timer pictures were blurred in the center, but occasionally one in a sequence was sharp. After a thorough dis-assembly and cleaning the lens seems to be more consistent. It may have been a slightly sticky aperture causing the blur. The second copy is much sharper at least as sharp as the 55-300 though with much less CA control. It does have better CA control than the MD 135mm F3.5 at the same aperture setting. This the first lens I have had that shows very little change in field-of-view while focusing. At close focus it acts much longer than the end of the internal focus zooms like the 18-135 SAM and 28-135. The angle-of-view is a bit wider than the unit focus MD 135mm F3.5. The built-in plastic hood is rather undersized and doesn't lock into place like the one on the Minolta AF 50 F1.7 RS. The second performs well enough wide-open to consider it superior to the best zooms. The heavy axial CA can still be a problem. A modern design with similar specifications would be a nice alternative to the larger, faster 135 mm offerings. Test chart comparison with 11 inexpensive zoom lenses. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Minolta AF20. Sigma super wide 2. Minolta AF28f2. Minolta AF35f2. Zeiss FE2,8/35. Minolta AF50. Sigma 50mm f1:4. Zeiss FE1,8/55. Sony 2.8/85 SAM. Minolta AF135. |
price paid: | £190.00 |
positive: | Compact, well made, super sharp, fast and great colours. |
negative: | Dated look. |
comment: | My example is mint and cost less than £200.00. This is a brilliant long portrait lens that is super sharp, solidly built and small enough for photographers that need to carry several lenses. In "back to back" tests I have found this lens to be as sharp as any 135mm lens, at just about any price. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Minolta 80-200mm f/2.8 APO G |
price paid: | 400 USD |
positive: | Fast and accurate AF Lightweight Minolta colors Built-in hood Price |
negative: | Purple fringing |
comment: | The nickname "pocket rocket" is absolutely accurate for this lens. I bought it originally to shoot in low light action situations and it definitely doesn't disappoint there. The AF is fast and accurate and I've had great success with it in those situations. It's now my go to hiking lens when out with the dogs. Just enough reach to get photos of them running on the trails, lightweight (far lighter than the 70 or 80 to 200 lenses), and does great work. The only downside is the purple fringing can be pretty extreme, especially in snow photos. But Lightroom does a decent job of cleaning that up. It really is a fantastic lens. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Sony 50mm f1.4, Tamron 17-50 f2.8 |
price paid: | GBP149 |
positive: | This lens is tiny, it really lives up to its nick name of the pocket rocket. The build is solid as it is all metal, and the focussing on the A700 is pretty quick and it locks on first time every time so far. This lens really does deserve to be classed as one of Minoltas legendary ones. The 55mm filter helps too, as it is the same size as the 50mm and 24mm |
negative: | none so far |
comment: | a crackingly good lens, well worth the wait to get one and at a bargain price too. If you want one and see one, then get it, you wont regret it. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Tamron 90mm f 2.8 |
price paid: | 299 USD |
positive: | Very sharp Small Light for it's all metal build Clever hood |
negative: | A touch soft wide open Some CA wide open |
comment: | This is a very nice lens, great build, wonderful sharpness between f3.5 and f8, great color. Mine is a crossed X so it is quite old, but has been well cared for, looks almost like new. This was my favorite focal length in my film days. Makes for a very fast 200mm equivalent on APS-C. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Minolta 50 2.8 Zeiss 50 1.4 SSM |
price paid: | 200 CHF |
positive: | Minolta colours Sharpness throughout Small Fast AF Practical built in lens hood. |
negative: | Not great with flaring, but this is almost always the case with older minolta glass |
comment: | This lens is just a great piece of equipment. I picked this up as I had a prime gap at 135 and this lens was the lowest cost, smaller size option with good review. Tried it out today and can say am very pleased with it. Typical Minolta prime sharpness and rendering. Reminds me of the 50 2.8 Macro in terms of colour and sharpness. Cannot see any downsides, especially if used on a modern full frame such as the a7. Seems a great size when coupled with that camera, so looking forward to using it if going down this camera path. Otherwise will get a lot of use on the a77, a37 and possibly a77ii cameras. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 3 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Canon 135L |
price paid: | 300 USD |
positive: | Sharp Beautiful color and contrast Small and Light weight Snappy focus |
negative: | Chromatic Aberration |
comment: | I only discovered the Minolta 135 2.8 in the last couple of months. The first thing you will notice is that this lens is super short and lightweight for a telephoto; it's about the same size as the FE 55 1.8 which makes for excellent pairing with the A7. Second the lens is super sharp even wide open, not as sharp as the Canon 135L but still plenty sharp; where it beats the Canon is in colors, it produces beautiful saturation and contrast. Also the Minolta has a very snappy and relatively quiet autofocus though not as impressive as the Canon version. The lens' one con is its near lack of control for chromatic aberration. That said, I'm not sure if it's because of improvements in LR5 or the uniform nature of the len's CA, but it is remarkably easily to completely remove in LR. I love using teles for discreet street shooting but I'm often hampered by the weight and size, the Minolta solves this problem for me; and it's of course a wonderful portrait lens to boot. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | other primes |
price paid: | 250 CHF |
positive: | Everything: size, colors, sharpness, focus speed, Bokeh ... |
negative: | Nothing i can tell |
comment: | Just one word to say " A MUST HAVE GEM!!!" |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Sony 85 2.8 Minolta 70-210 f4 |
price paid: | 265usd used |
positive: | Sharp even wide open Small and light Great colors and contrast |
negative: | Can hunt for focus Soft corners on full frame |
comment: | For an older lens, this lens is nearly perfect. The colors are amazing, and it's my sharpest lens wide open at 2.8. With the compact size, it's easy to keep in my bag. With the size, affordable price, and just great image quality, it makes a nice substitute for a 70-200 2.8, if you can live with just the 135mm. Becomes a decent telephoto on APS-C sensor. So truly a great lens for portrait headshots, or for a low-light telephoto. Focus can be slow, limiting the lens ability slightly for action. When shooting on full frame, the corners do soften a bit. Should only bother you if you are pixel peeping. |
![]() | |
---|---|
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: | 200USD |
positive: | Small, handy, sharp, nice hood, fast focus. |
negative: | None |
comment: | What can i say, i got a really good copy of this lens. I love this lens and will never part with it. Nice as portrait. And i use it to shoot birds that are close. I really have not found anything to complain about. Just buy it if you are looking for a 135mm f2.8, i don't think you can do any better. not much anyway ;-) |
![]() | |
---|---|
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: | missing |
positive: | Great colours Bokeh Integral hood Razor sharp at f/8 Sharp enough at f/2.8 |
negative: | Not much at all |
comment: | My go-to lens for stage and concert work. It's a perfect pub/club gig lens. I've owned this one since the early 90s and it has never once been less than perfect. Together with my Tokina AT-X 11-16 and my Minolta 50mm f/1.4(although all for completely different reasons) this lens never ever leaves my gear bag. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | minolta 35-105 minolta 17-35 |
price paid: | €150 |
positive: | great colours sharp well built |
negative: | none |
comment: | best lens |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | SEL50F18 SEL24F18Z Minolta APO 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 D |
price paid: | 350 GBP for lens + LA-EA2 adapter for NEX |
positive: | thin DOF, fast speed, great colors, good value, small |
negative: | noticeable purple fringing wide open, non-circular aperture blades, AF sometimes misses |
comment: | I'm a NEX user eager to use some old AF glass, so I got the adapter and the lens from a forum member as it's a relatively small lens with long focal length and a large aperture. I was pleasantly surprised at the extremely thin DOF, as well as the "Minolta colors" many were talking about. However there are some negatives. Purple fringing was more prominent on the Minolta than my E-mount lenses, but this may just be due to the fact that telephoto lenses are more prone to it to begin with. I also noticed AF to miss occasionally, which could be due to the thin DOF or user error. My copy also seems to focus better when the subject is closer. It also has to be stop down half or a full stop to reach the sharpness of the E-mount lenses listed above. Then again I am comparing a 1985 made lens to 2012 ones! And it performs better than the also nice Minolta APO 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 D in terms of sharpness and color rendering. Overall I highly recommend this lens for prosumers. It has its flaws but it's a great value lens that can do the work of much more expensive lenses. Plus it's adorable even on the tiny NEX bodies! |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | 100/2.8 Macro, 85/1.4 original, Leica Elmarit-R 135/2.8. |
price paid: | 350 used (mint) |
positive: | Fabulous Minolta color, very good bokeh, sharp. |
negative: | Flares easily, only f2.8. |
comment: | 135mm was the very first accessory lens I purchased as a teenager (K-Mart Focal 133/2.8 for Minolta MD - Kiron made) and as such was my first exposure to shallow depth of field and compressed perspective. As a teenager, I didn't appreciate quite what I had (that lens and SRT200) and moved on to an X570 and some cheap zooms, trading quality for convenience. My favorite lens on APS-C and full frame digital has been and remains the 85/1.4 (original, non-G) which is the ultimate cream machine with bokeh to die for. One reason I liked that lens so much on APS-C was that it was very close to the 135mm focal length perspective on full-frame (film) that I remembered so fondly. So, once I had my A850, it was time to find a good 135mm lens and before spending $1700 on the Zeiss, I thought I would give the old Minolta a try. KEH had one in LN- condition (absolutely flawless, by the way) for $350, so I bought it. The lens does not dissapoint, and while the bokeh is not in the same league as the 85/1.4, I wouldn't expect it to be given the relative position in the original lineup and the original prices of the two lenses. Where the 135 really surprised me was its sharpness, which is fully the equal of the 85, as well as that luscious Minolta color, which to me appears identical. The 135 is also considerably smaller and lighter than the 85 as well, making it, the 50/1.4 and 28/2.8 my regular travel 3-lens travel kit. For film I currently use the Leica R system with latest version 35, 50, 90 and 135mm lenses (all f2.8 except for 50/2.0). While film and digital have very different looks and I shoot exclusively black and white film, I can somewhat compare sharpness, rendering and bokeh between the Leica and Minolta 135s. The Leica is definitely softer (the Minolta is clinically sharp), but has better bokeh. Surprisingly, the difference is less than I expected it to be. While the Minolta 85/1.4 remains my best portrait lens with the best bokeh I've ever captured, I honestly use the 135 a lot more due to its compact size and light weight. I could only keep one telephoto lens for any camera, it would probably be the Minolta 135. Its not as nice as the 85, but its close enough. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Tamron 200-400mm. Minolta 28-85mm. |
price paid: | 400 |
positive: | Very Sharp Fast Light Small Great build quality |
negative: | Chromatic Aberration. |
comment: | Great lens overall. Fast and sharp especially using my A77 wit steadyshot enabled. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Minolta 100 f2.8 Macro |
price paid: | 199 GBP mint |
positive: | Sharp from f2.8 Wonderful Minolta colours Compact and lightweight but well built |
negative: | None |
comment: | Superb lens. Nothing else to say |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | 105 sigma macro 85 Sony Sam 50 Minolta 35 Sony Sam |
price paid: | 220 CAD |
positive: | Sharp Light weight Small size Solid build |
negative: | No new version Slight purple fringe wide open |
comment: | This little lens is a gem. Sharp from corner to corner. The contrast on this lens is excellent. Sharp wide open. Slight purple fringing if high contrast backgrounds are being shot but it is very minor. for the price I paid I didn't need another prime but couldn't resist trying it. I am in Arizona on holiday and have shot about 300 photos with it this week. Amazing is all I can say. It's my new favorite prime. The focus is very very fast on a77. If you see one and enjoy primes don't hesitate. Grab it and fall in love. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.9 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Multiple zooms |
price paid: | $135 |
positive: | The bigest thing for me is the compact size. The color, bild rating, lack of distortion and good flare control are very good. |
negative: | None sofar |
comment: | I find this camera is sharp, light weight and pocket sized. This is a winning combination. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | - Porst 135/2.8 |
price paid: | 225 EUR |
positive: | + small + light + fast AF + superb IQ + hood is always there |
negative: | - PF wide open to about F/4.5 - bokeh can be rather busy |
comment: | Brilliant lens. I bought this lens early in my DSLR days, and the only other two primes that I had were the 24/2.8 and 50/1.7. Never used telephoto much till then, but this lens just makes me take portraits of everyone I see. It is a little long on APS-C but on FF it's excellent in this regard. Just watch out for bright contrasty areas, as wide open this lens will fringe badly all over the frame. If the background is busy and not really far away, you can get swirling bokeh quite easily. All in all the bokeh is in my eyes not as smooth as for example the 200/2.8, 85/2.8 or even the 50s. As for IQ, there are no complaints. Sharpness, contrast and colour are all perfect. |
![]() | |
---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
ownership: | I own this lens |
compared to: | Beercan |
price paid: | missing |
positive: | Colours Sharpness Speed Size Weight 55mm filter thread |
negative: | Hood's a bit flimsy Recessed focus ring |
comment: | Bought this mainly for gig photography where its size, weight and speed have been invaluable. Previously I'd been using a combination of 50mm f/1.7 + Beercan for this task, and whilst I still sometimes bring the 50, I can thankfully now leave the beercan at home. Very sharp, very fast focusing and amazing colours. No doubt the CZ 135mm f/1.8 is miles better, but hey it's 5x the price, 3x the weight and easily twice the size. |
rating summary

- total reviews: 139
- sharpness: 4.69
- color: 4.92
- build: 4.65
- distortion: 4.91
- flare control: 4.44
- overall: 4.72
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login