Minolta MD Zoom 24-35/3.5

Aanything · Expire: 2014-05-30

I have always been curious about this lens, and now I have the chance to get one for what looks a reasonable price.
Since the lens is kind of rare, I'd like to know about it's qualities from your experience and what would a good price be for it.
I am planning to use it on my nex5r as size and range seem very interesting for it.

Lightshow · Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3669 Location: Calgary

I look forward to some shots if/when you get it.

shapencolour · Joined: 03 Oct 2013 Posts: 270

I tried this lens on the A7 recently and all I can say is don't go for it if you shoot FF.At 24mm it is not usable - corners and sides (about 50% of the sensor area),are soft/chromatically aberrated,no matter the aperture.28mm and 35mm are okayish at f8-11,but nothing to write home about.This lens can be used on croppers like my NEX7/5Ns,where overall IQ is acceptable,though 24mm setting still lags behind.

peterqd · Expire: 2014-01-04

I gave up searching for the Minolta, not because of its qualities but because it hardly ever appears on Ebay for a sensible price. I put the
Pentax-M 24-35 on the list instead, and just missed one last week. I'm curious how they compare.

Aanything · Expire: 2014-05-30

peterqd · Expire: 2014-01-04

Did you buy the Minolta Aanything? Let's see some pics please! Smile

I was fortunate to find a Pentax-M 24-35 for sale here in Australia and for a walkabout lens on the NEX-7 I must say I'm very pleased
with it. Ian will probably chime in and say primes are better, and he's right, but when you don't want to carry a number of lenses or
don't have time to change them, a zoom like this is just right for APS-C. Compared to the 18-55 kit lens, mounted on the adapter it's
only a tiny bit longer, but it's a fair bit heavier and has a much nicer solid feel. I read on the Pentax Forum that a number of people have
found it fiddly to use but that's not my experience.

Here is a sample at 24mm and f8. There's some purple fringeing and softness near the edges but nowhere near as bad as I'd
feared - look at the tree trunk on the left and the white gate on the right. On FF this could be a problem. I'm pleased there's very
little barrel distortion, I'd rather not have the hassle of correcting pics in PP. The contrast and colours are superb, and this is without a
hood. I'm sure there are better zooms at this range, but for the price I paid - 75 GBP - I'm very pleased.

Aanything · Expire: 2014-05-30

LucisPictor · Expire: 2013-12-03

I used to have the Minolta Rokkor 24-35 and I really liked it, but I shot with it on the NEX-7, so not on fullframe. I can believe if someone says that at 24mm it is not really usable on fullframe. But it's more than just decent on APS.

And together with a good 35-70, it makes a great two-lens-walkaround-set for a NEX-7 (or whatever APS-model):

hemeterfilms · Joined: 04 Jul 2012 Posts: 80 Location: Mexico City

I have a copy of this lens which I think is very good with a Lens Turbo II and so assume even better with a dumb adapter (but without the nice FOV of course) Compared to my 35-70mm it has lower contrast (easily fixed), but it looks sharp enough to me.

Check out some shots with it here:

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1899864608/albums/lens-turbo-ii

the shots of the plaza were taken with the 24 -35mm and the 35 - 70mm for comparison and the contrast difference is clear - but it is sharp.

Its a bit prone to flare so if you find one with the original hood all the better.

DigiChromeEd · Joined: 29 Dec 2009 Posts: 3462 Location: Northern Ireland

I have the Minolta as well and use it with my Sony NEX5T. In my experience, on APS-C, it is sharp, has very little distortion and minimal CA.

tf · Joined: 29 Sep 2017 Posts: 162

Hello,
Just finished review - Minolta MD 24-35 1:3.5 Zoom
Much better than expected actually, looks very useful lens

DigiChromeEd · Joined: 29 Dec 2009 Posts: 3462 Location: Northern Ireland

Excellent review, thank you!

As mentioned above, I have this lens and agree with your conclusions although I've only used it on a crop sensor camera.

tf · Joined: 29 Sep 2017 Posts: 162

Big R · Joined: 29 Nov 2010 Posts: 42

I had an MD 24-35 on my Sony A7. Perhaps nothing special but a good lens. Sharp in the center even wide open, liked the bokeh. Corners very good from f11 on. Main problems CA and flare resistance.

the_morning_after by CommanderBrot, auf Flickr

Astrup Fearnley Museet by CommanderBrot, auf Flickr
Sold it because i found a tokina 24 f2.8 which is lighter, faster and cheaper. And I somehow prefer primes. Used the minolta anyway mainly at the narrow end. The Minolta is sharper, though.

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3754 Location: Switzerland

tf · Joined: 29 Sep 2017 Posts: 162

tf · Joined: 29 Sep 2017 Posts: 162

One more dedicated article for this Zoom - comparison with corresponding primes - all are Minolta MD III
MD 24mm F2.8
MD 28mm F2.8 (5el 5gr)
MD 35mm F2.8

sergun · Joined: 01 Jun 2017 Posts: 283 Location: наша раша

Bravo. Test is good. I think to decide whether it is necessary , I would like to see examples at the wide end and the closed diaphragm (f11) in the far field.

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3754 Location: Switzerland

I may quickly compare the Canon nFD 3.5/20-35mm L with the Minolta MD-III 3.5/24-35mm tomorrow. We all may be surprised.

Stephan

tf · Joined: 29 Sep 2017 Posts: 162

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3754 Location: Switzerland

tf · Joined: 29 Sep 2017 Posts: 162

sergun · Joined: 01 Jun 2017 Posts: 283 Location: наша раша

I'm offered $ 100. Someone put samples from it on FF camera to solve. )

Rigel · Joined: 26 Nov 2015 Posts: 121 Location: Belgium

Can anyone advise here ? Would €80 be an acceptable purchase price for this lens ? It seems to be in a "good" state ... (I already have the 35-70 macro version)
TIA!

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3754 Location: Switzerland