Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Minolta MD Zoom 24-35/3.5
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Jul 12, 2014 7:50 pm    Post subject: Minolta MD Zoom 24-35/3.5 Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Sat Jul 12, 2014 8:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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


PostPosted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 8:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.

Last edited by shapencolour on Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:32 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 8:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 9:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

shapencolour wrote:
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 and 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.


Interesting, this is a very different opinion from the few reviews I found around, which were all generically praising the lens performance.
So, thank you very much for sharing the info.
However since I plan to use it on aps-c, I have a special passion for minolta lenses, and the price seem good for an uncommon item ( 50+shipping) I am still tempted.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 9:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.



PostPosted: Sat Oct 25, 2014 12:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

peterqd wrote:
Did you buy the Minolta Aanything? Let's see some pics please! :)

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.



No, unluckily the seller stopped answering me for some reason, and I basically forgot about it.
Too bad because I'd really like to try it, especially because of the range that, as you confirm, seems pretty much ideal for aps-c.
Your pentax look good, it must be a nice walk around lens.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 25, 2014 10:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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):


PostPosted: Sat Oct 25, 2014 1:58 pm    Post subject: md zoom 24-35mm Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Sat Oct 25, 2014 2:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Wed Jul 04, 2018 10:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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


PostPosted: Wed Jul 04, 2018 12:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Wed Jul 04, 2018 5:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DigiChromeEd wrote:
only used it on a crop sensor camera.

I think it even better on crop-sensors, because in the middle and in the center this lens absolutely has no any issues with sharpness.
Thank you too!


PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2018 5:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2018 9:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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


Thanks for the test - and your cross section of the 24-35mm looks really nice! Much nicer than mine, in fact ... congratulations Wink!!

Stephan


PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2018 8:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
Thanks for the test

Thank you too, Stephan
About remaked optical schemes - I've just started this 'refurbishing' for Chiyoko lenses because the most sources in internet are in bad conditions or simply too small, like this one:

It was a maximum size which I was able to find. And Andrea Apra later sent me another one but also close the same size. So, in such cases I had no choices except to redraw schemes, and I just continue to do it for all my reviews. Of course I use many of your schemes, but not only yours, so circulation of information in the internet in progress, thank you a lot! Smile


PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 9:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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


PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2018 9:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 6:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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


PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
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


Hello. Any news about this comparison? It is very interesting for me at least


PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2018 9:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

tf wrote:
stevemark wrote:
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


Hello. Any news about this comparison? It is very interesting for me at least


No, not yet. Too much work - three large books with totally nearly 900 pages to be finished until October ... i may be able to do a "quick and dirty" test over the weekend; nothing to be published, but a good "preview" for a real test. I always run several of these pre-tests; they give a me good hints about possible quirks and problems which otherwise might ruin the later real test.

Stephan


PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2018 11:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
No, not yet. Too much work....
Stephan


Ahh, got it, OK


PostPosted: Sun Jul 15, 2018 10:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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


PostPosted: Mon Jul 23, 2018 2:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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!


PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 9:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rigel wrote:
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!


It is a "common" price ... the lens is OK, but a contemporary prime (Minolta MD-III 2.8/24mm, MD-III 3.5/35mm or MD-III 2.8/35mm) has a much better performance on 24MP FF. These little primes even clearly outperform the Canon 3.5/20-35mm L or 3.5/24-35mm L.

The MD 24-35mm is quite small, and if you don't need perfect corners, the lens might be a valuable companion.

Stephan