SLRGear.com: Interactive Lens Reviews and Opinion.
Digital Camera ReviewsDiscuss lenses in the SLRgear.com Forums (separate login!)



Reviews Views Date of last review
2 19831 7/16/2013
Recommended By Average Purchase
100% of reviewers $225.00
Reader Review Rating Averages
Readers' rating for
Construction Quality
Readers' rating for
Image Quality
Readers'
Overall Rating
spacerspacer
8.50
spacer
10.00
spacerspacer
9.00
1km17-35f28-4.jpg


Keywords: Konica Minolta Wide Zoom 35mm


Chris Munden Bauer

Registered: July 2013
Posts: 4
Konica Minolta 17-35mm f/2.8-4 D AF review by Chris Munden Bauer
Review Date: 7/16/2013 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: $225.00| Rating: 9 

 
Pros: SHARP AT MOST APERTURES, BUT EXCELLENT AT F/5.6/8
Cons: PRONE TO FLARE, STOCK HOOD NOT THAT EFFECTIVE, KEEP FRONT ELEMENT IN SHADE

The Konica Minolta 17-35 F/2.8 was built for Minolta by Tamron as were some other KM lenses. Infact it looks like Sony placed a lot of faith in Tamron as a couple of the Carl Zeiss A mount zooms were made by them as well.
I tested this lens on a Sony A-37 and the results were stunning, provided you stop down a tad from F/2.8 although that isn't bad either. Flare can be a problem even with the stock hood so I bought a 77-mm Ultra wide screw in hood that seemed to work better, just have some thing that casts a shadow over the front element.
Its equivelent to 35mm - 55mm on APS-C, so a great standard zoom for your Sony A mount camera. Kurt Munger gave it high marks as well.


Construction is superior in most cases to Sony's own lenses but its on the heavy side by comparison, its what you get for quality.
Thoroughly recommended for Sony A mount users
If you can find one in good condition that is.
CMB
Tsja

Registered: May 2006
Posts: 3
Konica Minolta 17-35mm f/2.8-4 D AF review by Tsja
Review Date: 5/31/2006 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: None indicated| Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Very sharp, even wide open, decent size and weight, reasonably flare resistant, cheapish, great team with the equally good 28-75 2.8
Cons: limited zoomrange, too short on the long end

== Contrast ==
Excellent contrast, on all focal lengths and all appertures


== Flare ==
Unfortunatly a little less flare resistant then the 28-75, or it is just that I take more pictures with this lens where this could be a problem. Overall reasonably flare resistant


== Sharpness ==
My copy is pretty sharp at all appertures and all focal lengths. Stopping down one stop improves image quality just a hint, but I don't hesitate to use it wide open.


== Build ==
I actually like the build, very similar to the 28-75. It extends very little while zooming. Very solid for the weight and price. I think this size and weight is ideal for a normal sized DSLR like the KM 5D. The rotating MF ring doesn't bother me at all.


== Purpose ==
I don't use it as often as I thought. It's just a little short on the long end to be a true general purpose lens (I like the range of the kitlens more and use it actually more often on holidays etc.). However, teamed with the 28-75 2.8 it makes a great duo for high quality shots, where I have the time to change lenses every couple of shots. A great landscape lens and does well at indoors and nightphotography as well.


== Price/perfomance ratio + Conlusion ==
For the price I paid, it's pretty hard to beat. I love the size, weight, perfomance and price! I just wish it was a tad longer. I'm actually looking at selling in to purchase a Tamron 17-50 2.8 or Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5, but I'm just waiting to see what Sony rolls out. If you think you like the zoomrange it is highly recommended however!


 






This document copyright © 2009-2014, SLRgear.com, all rights reserved.