Minolta AF 28-85mm F3.5-4.5 A-mount lens reviews
 AVLB#45577 date: Sep-5-2020 | |
|---|---|
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 28-135 Minolta 24-105 D Minolta 35-105 MkI Minolta 28-100 D Minolta 50mm f1.4 |
| price paid: | £49.99 |
| positive: | Good focal range for FF cameras Sharp when stopped down below f5.6. Good solid lens |
| negative: | None in particular, but strange it zooms out to 28mm and then retracts to 85mm |
| comment: | I have just purchased this lens to compare it to a range of other Minolta lenses I have been using on the A850. I took a total of 138 shots with this lens and the other three mentioned above. I then did a comparison as a base with a Minolta 50mm f2.8 Macros and the Sony 85mm F2.8 SAM. All of these were done on a tripod, outside with ISO of 100 and auto WB. It was calm and partially cloudy. I did a series of shots using f4.5, f5.6, f8. f11 and f16 at all the focal lengths of 28,35,50,70 and 85. All of the shots compared well and even the prime lenses did not stand out particularly good against all of the zoom lenses (apart from the 28-100). As these were not "in the field" shots, I cannot comment on why some people have been disappointed with this lens, as I see it as a perfect walkabout lens and especially for landscapes, as I always use at least f11 for that type of shot. Colours are good and as good as the 28-135 and 35-105. It will stay on my camera as an everyday lens now and if a longer reach is needed, I would step up to the 28-135, which I do not find particularly heavy when compared to the 70-400! I would not consider mounting this on my APSC cameras, as I have better and newer lenses for those, better suited to the cameras, but cannot fault it on FF. UPDATE I have recently purchased a Minolta 50mm f1.4 and was curious to know how this zoom lens stood up to the f1.4. My test shots were at f5.6 to f11 and all hand held. Amazingly, even at full size, there was very little to choose between the zoom and prime. I must have got an exceptionally good 28-85 IMO. |
; 36MP| claude#44449 date: Jan-3-2020 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | autres objectifs zoom de la gamme minolta des 80' |
| price paid: | 0 euro |
| positive: | Belle qualité de fabrication. Très agréable à manipuler. Bagues de zoom et de mise au point fluides. Encombrement modéré. |
| negative: | Cet objectif est mou ! Piqué et contraste absents. Distance minimale de mise au point. |
| comment: | Cet objectif m'a été donné, dans un état cosmétique irréprochable, avec un filtre UV. Il est très bien fini, solide, agréable à manipuler. Là où ça ne va plus, c'est au sujet de ses performances. Je l'ai testé sur sony alpha 55 et 99. Dans l'ensemble, c'est très moyen. Chose curieuse, les performances (déjà médiocres) s'effondrent en milieu de range, à savoir au delà de 50mm... Donc bien avant le maximum de 85mm. J'ai également testé ce zoom en studio, à 60mm sur sony alpha 99... Au secour ! C'est mou, sans matière, sans piqué et sans constraste. S'il y a bien un objectif qui m'a déçu dans la gamme minolta de la même génération (80'), c'est celui-ci. |
| Dotsch#44293 date: May-17-2019 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | 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: | unknown |
| positive: | - Good build - Good price / vaule rating - Very cheap to get used |
| negative: | - sensitive to flares |
| comment: | missing |
| QuietOC#29652 date: Aug-9-2016 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 3.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony DT 16-80 CZ Sony DT 16-105 F3.5-5.6 Sony DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6 Sony DT 18-135 F3.5-5.6 SAM Sony DT 18-200 F3.5-6.3 Minolta AF 24-85 F3.5-4.5/RS Minolta AF 24-105 F3.5-4.5 D Minolta AF 28-80 F3.5-5.6 D Minolta AF 28-100 F3.5-5.6 D Minolta AF 28-105 F3.5-4.5/RS/Xi Minolta AF 28-135 F4-4.5 Minolta AF 35-70 F4 Minolta AF 35-80 F4-5.6 II Minolta AF 35-105 F3.5-4.5/New Vivitar 28-85 F3.5-4.5 Sigma AF 28-105 F2.8-4 Sigma AF 35-135 F3.5-4.5 |
| price paid: | 15 USD (used) |
| positive: | Decent zoom throw Little purple fringing F4 to 60 mm 800 mm minimum focus 55 mm filter threads |
| negative: | Reverse zoom action (it extends to 28 mm) Warm color cast CA Small circular hood |
| comment: | My first well-used copy came with a Maxxum 5000 that I won for $12.50 shipped. The second cleaner copy was $23 by itself. The third copy was $15. The suggested retail price was $298 in 1985, slightly more than the 70-210 F4 and the same price as the 24 F2.8 and $125 more than the 35-70 F4 kit lens. "JAPAN" The second copy of this lens definitely redeemed this lens for me. It definitely fits in with the other original Minolta zooms. It is not quite as wide as the 28-135 at close focus. It is fully retracted at 70 mm and barely extends at all the 85 mm end. Like the 28-135 the macro mode is engaged at the wide end. The 800 mm normal close focus is much nicer than its contemporary 28-135, 35-70, and 35-105 zooms. The focus throw is longer too at about 120 degrees. The larger clip-on hoods from the 70-210, 75-300, and 100-300 lenses work well for APS-C usage. |
| MarcoZ#25508 date: Feb-27-2016 | |
|---|---|
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 af 28-105 f3,5-4,5 xi |
| price paid: | €69 |
| positive: | Nitidezza,ottima riproduzione colori Solidità costruttiva ottima, ben bilanciato su Sony Alfa A850. |
| negative: | Nulla da segnalare |
| comment: | La nitidezza e il contrasto si pongono su livelli elevati, così come il colore, tipicamente Minolta "old style". Da acquistare senza indugi. |
| Miranda F#15254 date: May-21-2015 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3 color: 3 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 3.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 28-100 SOny 18-55 SAM II |
| price paid: | 50UKP |
| positive: | Classic looks lovely to handle FF capable |
| negative: | My copy not sharp disappointing macro colours not as good as Sony |
| comment: | I bought this lens partly to try out one of the Minolta classics and partly to use the dedicated macro setting in nature photography, but I'm too disappointed to keep it. The macro setting (manual only) occurs only at 28mm meaning that you end up shading the light from the subject while using it, and quite apart from the lack of sharpness (possibly my copy only) the colours are disappointing too compared with other lenses. On FF my 28-100 is sharper and has better colours, and can be used for reasonable close-ups at all focal lengths. It's also lighter and wider in range. If you want macro, the Minolta 35-70mm is far better - macro is at 70mm and gives better magnification, and it seems to work well with a Kenko 2x TC in macro too. On the A58 crop-sensor, the 18-55 SAM II leaves it for dead everywhere - sharper, better colours, and far better for close-ups of flowers and insects. I wanted to like this Minolta lens but in the end I couldn't. Maybe I'll try another copy some time, but for nature photography I'll stick to the Sony lens. |
| mambo#12192 date: Mar-19-2015 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 1 overall: 3.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 35-105, Minolta 50mm f1.7, Sony SAL2470CZ |
| price paid: | 15 USD |
| positive: | A great walkabout lens on the camera. Delivers on most fronts. great minolta colours |
| negative: | Not a sharp, bokeh |
| comment: | Great cheap lens that I bought for my son and ended up using myself. |
| transiently#12092 date: Jan-14-2015 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta AF 35-70/4, Zuiko 35-70/4, Canon FD 35-70/4, Minolta MD 35-70/3.5, Minolta AF 50/1.4, Minolta AF 35-105 3.5-4.5 first series, and all kinds of lenses over the last 25 years or so! |
| price paid: | came with other gear |
| positive: | Sharpness levels on APS-C 16MP are excellent. (And I have to say that I am quite a heavy pixel-peeper). Colour is superb. I find something special about the way it renders, particularly when compared with Minoltas made in the 1990s and later. It may be the micro-contrast or more to do with the basic high overall contrast, but, rather like the 70-210 beercan and original 35-105, colour can really pop like a good prime. If you can stop it down a little (I usually choose F 6.3), about 35mm to about 60mm renders punchy results as perfectly outstanding as the those of the 35-105 beercan. The long end of the range needs just a little more stopping down to attain similar excellence by about F8. The wide end is only worse because you might possibly notice the distortion with some subjects. Build is extremely solid...not much plastic in this thing! Particularly smooth zoom control, probably feels even better than all my other Minoltas. |
| negative: | Linear distortion at 28mm is a bit high, which is unfortunate, even if it is fairly typical for this lens type. Flare is a definite problem in very bright light unless the sun is behind you. It needs hand shade to avoid purple shapes and maintain contrast in many contre-jour situations, and problems are unavoidable when the sun is within the frame in such situations. Flare control is even poorer than other first generation zooms. Flare control rating: 2.5. Minimum close focus is a bit on the inconveniently long side at 0.85m (though nothing like as bad as on the original series 35-105, which only focuses to 1.5m unless you go into manual "macro" mode!). You can focus closer at 28mm using manual focus. There is a reduction in contrast at wide apertures at 85mm, but the detail levels are still high. It's heavier than I am now used to at nearly half a kilo, though I quite like the balance on camera. Probably the biggest negative is not actually attributable to this lens itself, and is the fact that the 35-105 is capable of similarly outstanding results with less need to stop down, and with possibly slightly lower levels of distortion at the wide end, and with an even lower risk of colour fringing. I think that in the early 80's when these lenses were designed, it was simply a little harder to come up with a really great 28-85 than it was an epic 35-105. On its own merits, this is a very good lens. Although the build is technically first rate and almost all metal, there is a clunkiness to the manual focus on both samples of this lens that I've used. Like almost all 1985-88 Minolta AF zooms, the focus is also a little rattly-sounding in AF. |
| comment: | I used this lens extensively in the early 1990's and liked it a lot, only selling when I changed systems sometime later in the 90's. I recently picked up another, slightly more battered one as part of an outfit, and didn't have incredibly high expectations of its performance on digital. Maybe I got a good one (there is always going to be sample variation with 30 year-old zoom lenses; hell, there's enough variation when they're new!), but I'm very seriously impressed. I can hardly believe how well the results hold up, and how fast the A37 manages to move the elements in and out to focus it. I don't know if there's a reason other than sample variation that explains quite why this particular lens divides opinion so very sharply. I consider it an excellent lens on 16MP crop sensor. I have some doubt that it would please me quite as much on high res full-frame. I recall that this was a very expensive lens when first launched, although used prices fell pretty sharply and my first one was bought used from a camera dealer around 1990 for 60 GBP. My current one was found with a not quite working 9000 body, a nice 50/1.4 and 100-300 4.5-5.6, and a 75-300 original series in very imperfect condition in a secondhand shop in Valencia in late 2014. I think I paid 100 EUR for the whole kit; he took my first offer although he wanted something like 130 or 150. I have several Minoltas around this focal length, but won't be selling this one. I hope to try it one day on Sony full frame. |
| Photopia#12053 date: Dec-9-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 18-250 DC HSM Minolta 70-210 f4 Beercan Minolta 50 f1.7 Sony SAM 18-55 kit Sony SEL 70-210 f4 G OSS Sony SEL 35 f1.8 OSS |
| price paid: | $100 used |
| positive: | Good color and detail. Macro functionality useful for close focusing. |
| negative: | High CA near backlit contract areas. Heavy. |
| comment: | Good medium range zoom. |
| awa54#11750 date: Apr-1-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 24-85 3.5/4.5 Minolta 35-70 4 Minolta 35-105 3.5/4.5(old) |
| price paid: | approx. $30 |
| positive: | Great early Maxxum build and color Very decent macro performance |
| negative: | So-so sharpness on the wide end Unforgivably soft past 50mm |
| comment: | I want to like this lens for its great color and image feel, but the overly soft images at the tele end make it useless for anything except soft-focus effects. The only reason I gave a 3.5 for sharpness is the good macro performance. |
| kamabazi#11124 date: May-19-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 35-70mm Minolta 28-105mm Sony 18-70mm |
| price paid: | 55 USD |
| positive: | Minolta colors Build Quality IQ |
| negative: | Heavy Sharpness at extreme ends |
| comment: | Nice lens for the price. Colors are vibrant and truly Minolta. Sharpness near 28 and 85mm is not as sharp as in the middle. This has been my walk around lens for almost 2 years and just recently acquired the Minolta 28-105mm, I am in process of comparing the two. Being heavy and short on the long range is really the only big concerns with this lens |
| steve kobe#11105 date: May-11-2013 | |
|---|---|
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 28mm/2.8 Minolta 35mm/2.0 Minolta 50mm/1.4 Minolta 85mm/1.4 Sony 85mm/2.8 |
| price paid: | CHF45 |
| positive: | Good sharpness in medium zoom range Great colors Versatile zoom range on FF Great build quality |
| negative: | Flimsy hood |
| comment: | This is a very useful walk around lens. In the medium zoom range it is sharp and actually compares quite well with the primes when stopped down to 5.6 or 8. At 28mm and 85 mm corners are soft, but actually at least as good as with the 28mm/2.8. Of course it does not reach the superb IQ of the 35, 50 and 85mm lenses and you are limited regarding DOF. Colors are great and the build quality is excellent. Plus you can't beat the price quality ratio. I am thinking of getting the Tamron 24-70/2.8, but whenever I look at the pictures of the Minolta I am wondering whether it is worth the extra money. Would appreciate comments on this "problem". |
| shadowgunner#11066 date: Apr-25-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-70 kitlens Mino 35-70 F4 Mino 35-105 RS |
| price paid: | 50 USD |
| positive: | sharp throughout the range Minolta colors tank like build I use the beercan type lens hood: no flare issues. Macro mode |
| negative: | a little heavy for the range. not as useful in low light (without flash). Minor CA in strong light and high contrast situations. |
| comment: | This has evolved into my go-to lens for most situations. I bought it a number of years ago on ebay attached to a Minolta 7000. I wasn't satisfied with the kit lens on my new A300. This lens has covered my favorite range and shooting conditions (outdoors with good light). I find that indoors it definitely needs light from a flash unit. With the macro mode it handles moderate closeups nicely. It is almost always sharp, whereas the kitlens it replaced was never sharp enough. I use it currently on an A700 and the performance is still excellent. My copy exhibits a touch of barrel distortion at the short end; but is easily corrected in PP. The CA is also easily corrected. The standard hood is a joke; doesn't help much. I use the beercan style hood which came with my RS 35-105; it works perfectly on this lens. If I lost the use of this lens, I would definitely replace it. |
| Freddan_6#11056 date: Apr-20-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta AF 50 f/1.4 Minolta AF 35-70 f/4 KonicaMinolta AF 28-75 f/2.8 Minolta AF 28-135 f/4-4.5 Minolta AF 35-105 f/3.5-4.5 Minolta AF 100-200 f/4.5 Sony AF DT 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 Sony AF DT 18-135 f/3.4-5.6 Sony AF DT 50 f/1.8 Sony AF DT 35 f/1.8 Tamron AF 17-50 f/2.8 DI II Sigma AF 70 f/2.8 EX DG Macro |
| price paid: | 48$ |
| positive: | Sharpness (especially short end), colors. Very sharp wide open from 28-70. At 70-85 you need to stop down to f:8 to get full sharpness. Usable macro even though in the wide end. Very good build. |
| negative: | flares, brightness |
| comment: | This lens is very prone to flares. In Nordic countries it is best for the cloudy days. Colors are wonderful. Built to last I think. It is much darker than the other lenses I prefer, so the narrow dof photos I am into right now is not that easy to take. But at the long end it is brighter than the kit lens. If you plan portraits with nothing disturbing behind you can get wonderful pictures. At f/4.5@85mm there is a small softness that is perfect for portraits if you don't have anything disturbing objects behind. OK bokeh. |
| derekw#11050 date: Apr-18-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 35-105 Minolta 28-105 (original) Minolta 24-85 (original) |
| price paid: | £35 GBP |
| positive: | Sharp Minolta colours Build |
| negative: | Needs hood Noisy Af |
| comment: | Not quite as good as the above lenses, but at this price couldn't resist. Another addition to my beercan zoom collection |
| Titticec#10994 date: Mar-26-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 28 euro |
| positive: | ben costruito, vecchia concezione(lenti in vetro), colori eccellenti, funzione macro |
| negative: | pesante |
| comment: | belli i colori!le lenti sono in vetro e pesano un po' ma la resa è decisamente eccezionale!per i nostalgici dei vecchi obiettivi minolta questo è un cult! si trovano a basso prezzo su ebay, molti in pessimo stato, come la mia copia che aveva il barilotto molto rovinato! se si prende in buono stato a meno di 40euro è un vero affare! |
| homeranger#10898 date: Feb-3-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | N/A |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Build Quality Affordable & Value Macro Minolta Colors Great for portraits, flowers, and landscapes. |
| negative: | Maybe a bit heavy for some. I actually liked the weight. Some CA. |
| comment: | I really enjoyed this lens. It was on my camera a lot because of the versatility of focal range. Great walk around lens. I primarily used it for flower and landscape photos. I really liked the color this lens produced. I also liked the heft of this lens. You could feel the quality that went into to build this lens. I would definitely recommend this lens. |
| evtansk#10727 date: Nov-25-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 35-105 RS Tamron 28-200 F3.4-5.6 XR IF DT 18-55 |
| price paid: | 115 |
| positive: | Sharpness, Solid, Colour, Macro |
| negative: | Size & Weight, 85mm must at least F8, not so good in low light cond. |
| comment: | Owned this lens right after I jump ship from Nikon D90 and got my self the a57. All I can say is the performance of this lens is superb! 28-85mm is just nice for me to carry around for street photography anywhere I go. Sharpness is good from 28mm all the way to 85mm although start from 70-80mm, things got tricky. Those who facing sharpness drop, just set your aperture all the way to F8 and problem solved (at least on my copy). Macro quality is great too! With the help of Peaking Function available, shooting in MF macro mode is fun and the red-colour-peaking-zone helps in determine which area u preferred to be sharp/focused. The only downside of this lens is the weight and the size. I can live with it, but for those who travel frequent and size&weight is always 1st priority, I would say too bad then :) |
| kerplunk#10320 date: Jun-22-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta - AF 28-105 F3.5-4.5 RS Minolta - AF 28-135 F4-4.5 Minolta - AF 35-70 F4 Minolta - AF 35-105 F3.5-4.5 Tamron - SP AF 28-75 F2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical IF |
| price paid: | 40 USD (used) |
| positive: | Nice size, weight, feels solid. Sharp at 28mm. Colors are great. |
| negative: | Not sharp at 85mm, pretty bad really. Flare is pretty bad, a common issue with lenses of this age. |
| comment: | The lens has the nice solid feel of the older Minolta lenses with the metal construction without being too large or heavy. It it pretty sharp at 28mm wide open, but somewhere in the range up to 85mm that goes away, and it gets pretty bad. I'm not sure if it came with a hood, mine didn't, but I'm sure if there was one, it was similar in size / shape as the other lenses of this era, and piratically worthless, combined with a lack of modern coating to defer flare, it can be an issue. Some of the better Minolta lenses might cost a little more, but it's not that much more, and it's money well spent. |
| JamieZ#10143 date: Apr-24-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 35-135 macro Sony 18-55 kit lens Tamron 17-50 f2.8 |
| price paid: | 35 USD used |
| positive: | Sharp Minolta color Great short range macro Great for flowers and landscape |
| negative: | A little short on range for a walk around. |
| comment: | This is a walk around lens in the spring woodlands. Shooting lots of flower macros and family photos. As always the Minolta built like a tank standard we all know and love. It has been rained on, splashed with mud, dropped and banged around yet still shots like a champ. |
| pbagley#9954 date: Feb-21-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 18-55 SAM kit lens 18-70 KM kit lens 24-105 D 50/1.7 (2) |
| price paid: | 60 USD |
| positive: | Sharp at 28 and 50mm Great colors |
| negative: | Not so sharp at 85mm |
| comment: | This is a recent e-bay purchase, and it was purchased based on reputation. I wanted to compare it to the other lenses I own in this range using my a580. I used a remote shutter release for all shots, camera on a tripod, natural window light. ISO 400 for all shots. comparisons of near 1% center crops (535x804 pixels) were done. First the good - 28mm - I compared to the 18-55 SAM and 24-105 D this lens is sharpest at f4, 5.6, and f8. Colors are very slightly better than the 24-105. 50mm - I compared to all the listed lenses. Sharpest of the bunch at f4 and 5.6. At f8 the SAM and 24-105 are sharper, and at f11 everything except the 18-70 is sharper. note - One of the 50's is not as sharp as the other. I need to clean both 50's and try again. Now the bad - 85mm - Not as sharp at any f stop compared to the 24-105D. Conclusion - I'll keep this around for the excellent performance between 28 and 50mm, but for longer focal lengths I'll reach for something else. |
| derekw#9431 date: Sep-16-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 24-85 (original and RS) Minolta 35-105 (original) Minolta 28-105 RS |
| price paid: | 45 GBP |
| positive: | Sharp Wonderful colour Build |
| negative: | Macro at wide end Flares without hood |
| comment: | Good lens, but not as sharp as my copies of 24-85s, 28-105 RS and the 35-105, which I rate as the sharpest zoom I have ever used, along with the Tamron 20-40 which I foolishly sold. Very sharp at 28mm, but sharpness falls gradually away past 50 mm. Notwithstanding, considering its price compared to the lenses above a very good buy if on a tight budget. Needs a big hood to combat flare (I use the beercan hood) |
| piano0047#9425 date: Sep-15-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 28-105, 35-105 (not beercan version). Fixed 28mm 2,8,50mm 1,7 |
| price paid: | 85USD |
| positive: | Cheap,solid,sharp,especially at the wide end,beautiful colour. |
| negative: | Not quite as sharp in the tele range. |
| comment: | Everything seems to have been said before. But shortly: my copy of this lens is WONDERFUL in the wide end. The colours are simply beautiful and the lens gives punchy pictures with exellent contrast. I can really say that it is as good or better than the fixed 28mm 2,8.Same sharpness- but more saturated colours. Already from 3,5 actually. And clearly sharper than 28-135mm. But vice verca at the 85mm setting, and even 50mm. A little bit (5,6)stopped down it is ok even here. And at 8 very good. But the exellent pictures you get at 28mm-40mm is not reached in the rest of the focal range. At 28mm the lens would have got 5+++ overall, except flare control. |
| sonya300#9150 date: Jun-18-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 60.00 |
| positive: | Sharp Build Colours Macro |
| negative: | Heavy Not true macro |
| comment: | A great lens, fab colours, a must have and cheap. |
| olegoo#8854 date: Apr-1-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Beercan Sony Kit 18 -55 Exakta 28 - 105 2.8 Praktika 50 1.8 Minolta AF 50 F1.7 |
| price paid: | 25€ |
| positive: | Definitely Minolta Colors Sharp Build Like A Tank Macro Mode |
| negative: | Nothing, for this price |
| comment: | I bought this lens today from an old german man and it shows me again how great an original Lens from Minolta can be. My copy is brand new, which was bought in 1986 by the man. Absolutly sharp either normal Mode or macro Mode. The colour ist great und build Like A Tank with metal and glass. I'm in love with it and it becomes my walk around Lens now. |
| blek#8833 date: Mar-26-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 3.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta AF 35-70 F4 "Baby Beercan" Sony AF DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6 |
| price paid: | 800.000 IDR |
| positive: | Definitely Minolta Colors Sharp Build Like A Tank Macro Mode |
| negative: | Nothing, for this price. CA? Well, there is, but again, that is normal for this price and you can correct it later. |
| comment: | Sharp, sharp, shaaarpp!!! You got nothing to worry cropping anything came out from this lens. Acceptable images even from 100% crop. Sweet bokeh from macro mode. Definitely Minolta. |
| mee#8781 date: Mar-13-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | CZ1680 |
| price paid: | US$ 30 |
| positive: | Sharp Minolta colours Full Frame Solid built like a tank |
| negative: | Weight for it's size Focal length is short vs CZ1680 Bokeh & Macro at 28mm Flare control as good as the Zeiss Simply useless hood |
| comment: | This is the second copy that landed in my hand. It is underrated - maybe because of it's age. As sharp as the Zeiss. Love looking at the colour coatings on the front element that is richer than the Zeiss. Produce great colours like the other beercan series. Not a slouch performer compared to the Zeiss. I will definitely look out for more copies just in case I damaged or loose those copies that I have. Worth every penny. |
| 12AMS#8744 date: Mar-6-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 3.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony SAL 18-55mm SAM Minolta 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5 |
| price paid: | $65 CDN (used) |
| positive: | Excellent build Beautiful colors Great on a film camera |
| negative: | Poor sharpness Lateral CA |
| comment: | I got this lens when I used film exclusively, and it was amazing on the 7000i. In fact, it was my favorite lens. Unfortunately, this opinion did not carry over to digital. Although the build is typical original Minolta (think of a battleship made by Swiss watch-makers; tough and precise), and the rendition of skin colors are sublime, the almost blurred images that my copy gave me on digital made me want to rub my eyes every time I looked at a picture for any length of time. Also, even though it had absolutely no longitudinal CA, the lateral CA drove me nuts. I could often see it in a full-screen image; forget pixel peeping. And lateral CA does not go away when you stop down. My copy of the Sony 18-55mm is quite sharp with absolutely no CA, and my copy of the original Minolta 35-105mm is simply outstanding, so I'm going to thank this lens for all the great memories it has provided on film and let this little bit of history go. |
| dreamknight#8639 date: Feb-8-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 3.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-50mm (kit lens) Minolta 50mm F1.7 Minolta 135mm F2.8 Minolta 24mm F2.8 |
| price paid: | 40€ (Used) |
| positive: | + range + inexpensive + Good build + Macro |
| negative: | - front element rotates on focusing - Heavy - No AF in Macro |
| comment: | Reasonable lens, color has quite good when compared with the kit lens (sony 18-50mm). It is a little big and heavy. |
| SChurchill#8637 date: Feb-7-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 3.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 35-105 F3.5-4.5 original 28-135 35-70 f4 |
| price paid: | part of bundle |
| positive: | Solid build 55mm Filter |
| negative: | Awful CA Very soft especially at corners |
| comment: | I bought this by mistake as I thought it was 35-105 included in a bundle of lenses and 8000i body. Unlike the 35-105, which it looks almost identical to, this lens performs very badly. It's very soft especially at the corners. Even when stopped down on an APS-C sensor. It also exhibits all forms of CA to a high degree in any moderate contrast areas. Ironically the 8000i body that came with it has become one of my favourites so I guess there was a silver lining. |
rating summary
- total reviews: 112
- sharpness: 4.29
- color: 4.69
- build: 4.85
- distortion: 4.16
- flare control: 3.62
- overall: 4.32
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login