Minolta AF 24mm F2.8 A-mount lens reviews
 monte920#2171 date: Apr-18-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 24-105mm (D) 24-50mm 28mm f2.0 |
| price paid: | 150USD (used, mint) |
| positive: | Compactness Good sharpness/contrast/color Relatively milder distortion compared with zoom lenses |
| negative: | Not much, maybe a little bit plain No (D) version Wish it could be f/2.0 |
| comment: | This is a forgotten lens. With 24-50, 24-85, 24-105 starting at 24mm f3.5/f4.0, many will skip this 24mm f2.8 lens. Sony did not even bother to revive this lens, either. This is a shame, because it is really an excellent performer! Compared to the zoom counterparts, it has not only a half-stop aperture advantage, but better in light fall-off, distortion and color. Its color is vivid and saturated, but less so than the Nikon 24mm f2.8D, that means Minolta's color is more balanced. I have to admit that I do not use this lens very often. But I am very pleased about the results that it gave on last year's Xmas family reunion. Its focal length is ideal for group photos (group size 5~15). It generates pleasing skin tone, vibrant X'mas color, and little distortion to worry about those people standing at the edge of a picture! |
; 12MP| The Shoeman#2153 date: Apr-14-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 20/2.8 Minolta 28/2 Minolta 35/2 |
| price paid: | 144.00 USD (used) |
| positive: | Small and light. |
| negative: | Not as sharp as others but acceptable. Not very wide on Digital. |
| comment: | Nice little lens. I used it often until I got my Minolta 20/2.8. For the money, it's great. |
| DavidB#2061 date: Mar-27-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 20mm 2.8 28-135mm 4/4.5 |
| price paid: | Forget, bought new |
| positive: | Light, reasonable cost and performance, low distortion compared to 20mm 2.8. Sharp with classic M colour. |
| negative: | CA green/magenta in corners can be hard to remove in pp. |
| comment: | I acquired this lens because in certain situations (straight horizons near top or bottom of frame, vignetting apparent in shots with even tonal range into corners) I found the 20mm lacking, although I am generally happy with that lens in most circumstances. I think the 24 is a very good performer at reasonable cost, and is sometimes a little easier to compose with than a wider lens. It's not really wide enough for me with the 7D. A very nice wide angle on the a900. Examples can be found at : web.mac.com/davidbannister |
| stickbreitling#1990 date: Mar-19-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 28-80/3.5-5.6 Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5 |
| price paid: | 150GBP |
| positive: | Sharp and good DoF Very compact and light |
| negative: | Mine didn't come with a lens hood! Edit: now has a hood Might want to consider a 20mm for extra coverage? |
| comment: | Great light carry lens. Partnered with a 50mm, this functioned well for me as part of a walkabout prime set. At times I felt myself wanting the 20mm for a little bit of extra coverage. However, it covers most shooting situations, such as a group of friends indoors and outdoor shots of landmarks. Picture is sharp and the colours are rich. Can get some nice 'close subject in the foreground, wide bokeh landscape in the background' shots. Edit: got hold of a second hand genuine Minolta hood. Now it's complete. Looks short and stumpy, but cool on the A100. |
| mavan#1975 date: Mar-16-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 24-105/3.5-4.5 AF Minolta D 17-35/2.8-4 AF Minolta D |
| price paid: | 350e new (1989) |
| positive: | sharp good color |
| negative: | missing |
| comment: | missing |
| raphdedge#1973 date: Mar-16-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 20/1.8 MinO 50/1.7 |
| price paid: | 150 USD (used) |
| positive: | Size Weight Filter size |
| negative: | Not as sharp as others |
| comment: | Nice, small, unobtrusive lens. Doesn't draw much attention on my A100 which is a good thing in my book. Sharpness is above average, but not as good as my Sigma 20/1.8. Usual Minolta build quality - excellent. |
| kimare#1530 date: Dec-11-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | 18-70mm DT 50mm 1,7 (o) |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | 36mm equivalent on digital colours sharpness |
| negative: | none yet |
| comment: | missing |
| dtrph#1505 date: Dec-5-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | KM 24-105, KM 28F2, KM 17-35 |
| price paid: | 150 USD (used) |
| positive: | small size, fast af, well built, |
| negative: | flare control, |
| comment: | This is a very nice little prime lens, renders nice warm colors, sharp enough for wide landscape photos. not nearly as sharp as the 28f2. with aps-c its a 35mm which i don't find particularly appealing. i preferred to use my km 17-35 or km 11-18. When prices when up ended selling at ebay for 240 and i don't really miss it. |
| DcapVividOptic#1471 date: Nov-23-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | 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: | - price - size - build - AF - filter thread size |
| negative: | nothing |
| comment: | A joint/comparison review of the 24 MinO and MinRS. Tiny, I think Minolta's smallest AF prime. Great for going light. Delivers the image with bags of punch. Highly recommeneded. Af performance is good, distortion and colors great. sharpness could be better. Pricewise the MinO is the better value of the two. The MinRS is harder to find and is certainly a better handling lens if you like manual focus. Shouldn't be compared with the Sig 24/1.8 EX DG ... size and aperture means you are looking at different needs (Min for going small, Sig for going fast) |
| kathyk#1362 date: Oct-30-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta AF 24-85 F3.5-4.5 |
| price paid: | $225USD |
| positive: | Nice solid feeling, good quick focus. |
| negative: | For what it is, I can't think of a negative. |
| comment: | I used it in medium to low light, and the sharpness was just slightly lacking. The color seems extremely good though, and I did not notice any distortion. A very nice lens. |
| Oxigun#1346 date: Oct-24-2006 | |
|---|---|
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: | KM 17-35/2.8-4 D KM 28-75/2.8 D Minolta 50/1.7 [RS] |
| price paid: | 200 EUR |
| positive: | Sharp No barreldistortion (on fullframe!) Bokeh |
| negative: | Corner sharpness on fullframe |
| comment: | I've bought this lens because I wanted a wide-angle prime for landscaping (for my 7D and 7) and also a decent performer at F/2.8 in low-light. I used my 28-75/2.8D for that which I don't think is sharp enough wide open (still a great lens thou) for this. I's not as sharp as the 50/1.7 at F/2.8 but very acceptable. I've shot a wall with my 7 to check for barrel distortion but I couldn't find any. Corner sharpness on fullframe isn't superb but not bad at all. One thing I noticed is that while it looks very similar to the 50/1.7 it has one big difference. The filterring is a few millimeters further from the focusring which makes it easy to manual focus with a Cokin filtersysteem attached. This lens will always be in my camerabag, and I will never sell it. |
| pedrocr#1305 date: Oct-11-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 17-35 2.8-4 18-70 DT |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Very sharp No distortion Well Built Light and compact |
| negative: | Would be great if it was f2 |
| comment: | I really like lens although lately I've considered it too wide for my taste. It's very compact and on a 1.5 crop factor is a 36. It would be much more useful if it was f2 so the 28/2 might be a better option if you can find one. |
| Panito#1279 date: Oct-6-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | 17-35/3.5G 24-50/4 35/2 |
| price paid: | 100€ |
| positive: | Very sharp from f4 Nice color Very low distorsion Good price |
| negative: | Not so sharp wide open |
| comment: | missing |
| Duur#1116 date: Aug-24-2006 | |
|---|---|
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 17-35/2.8-4 D |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Small, good hood |
| negative: | none |
| comment: | A nice wide angle lens on the film body´s On the 7D, it is a beautiful wide standard lens, rather light strong and very acceptable distortion. I got it as a gift, but that kind of gifts you can´t get enough :) |
| H20boy#1024 date: Jul-16-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Min 28-75 2.8 D, Tam 11-18, Min 85/1.4 & Tamron 90mac |
| price paid: | Can't remember |
| positive: | Very sharp after stopping down. Perfect colors. |
| negative: | None |
| comment: | This is my "go to"m lens for the typical construction site photos and interior of rooms The bokeh on this is very nice when you want it, but only if you can get close enough to your subject. This is also my widest prime, and I'd rather use this than my Tamron 11-18mm which has moderate distortion at the wide and even long end. I'd trust this over the 28-75 zoom if distance can be traversed easily. *Update* After comparing it to later owned 28/2's and other nice primes like the 85 and the Tamron 90 mac, this older lens of mine wasn't AS nice as I had thought. Sharp, sure, but after you stop down. It was still very nice, but I won't get another one down the road. |
| aleksandr#201 date: Nov-3-2005 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 24 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Quite sharp in a very small package. |
| negative: | Would be nice at f2.0 or even f1.8 |
| comment: | Very nice lens from the 'old days'. Small, pretty fast, fairly wide. Acts like a normal (35mm) on a dSLR, but a little more distortion - especially when it comes to portraits, etc. Very nice colour. Very little flare, though I seem to get a bit more flare with a filter attached . . . probably a little refraction between the front element and the filter (I've experienced this with several different filters, polarizers, ND, etc). Maybe a coating issue? Very good lens. Excellent walk-around prime. |
rating summary
- total reviews: 106
- sharpness: 4.49
- color: 4.83
- build: 4.80
- distortion: 4.58
- flare control: 4.20
- overall: 4.58
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login