Minolta 24-85mm RS f/3.5-4.5 on Full Frame

Started Feb 1, 2013 | Discussions thread
Waardij
Junior MemberPosts: 48
Like?
Re: Mr. Friedman sir!
In reply to DavieK, Feb 3, 2013

DavieK wrote:

Waardij wrote:

Is this lens much different to the 24-105? from what I have been reading the 24-105 might even be better. Or am I mistaken here and should I have bought an 24-85?

for me it is just a matter of weight. I have the CZ24-70 and that lens is great, but sometimes heavy.

I had the 24-105mm which had been used on the A700 and previous KM/Sony models with great results. I tried it on the A900 and from day 1 it was clear that the extreme distortion and CA at 24mm, beyond the APS-C zone, were not going to work for professional stuff.

I first bought a mint, as new 28-105mm and then a similarly new 24-85mm. I also had a 24-50mm, and a KM 28-75mm f/2.8. I tested all the lenses and also compared results with my 16-80mm and 16-105mm on A700, and with the 24mm end of my 12-24mm Sigma. Final result: the lens kept is the 24-85mm RS.

In the next four years I also tried a couple of Tokina 24-200mms of which one was very sharp, but both had real problems with contrast/flare/tonal compression. I acquired a 24mm f/2 CZ but I rarely use it; by the time you've stopped the 24-85mm @ 24mm down to a sensible f/8 or f/11 normally required for the correct depth of field in travel/landscape/interiors, there's no benefit. I've also changed the 28-75mm for a new SAM version, and that has shown a small benefit, but the loss of the excellent close focusing of the original Tamron/KM. I also have a new Sigma 12-24mm which is far better at 24mm than the original model.

However, nothing beats having 24mm plus a resonable zoom range on the camera. I've worked with Canon's 24-105mm L plenty of times, and Nikon's 24-120mm in all its versions. None of these come close to the quality of the 24-85mm RS (which might surprise Canon L owners). I've also used the new 16-50mm f/2.8 on A77 and that is a travesty of a lens by comparison; I've used three of these, only owned one, and for technical quality (projection/drawing, flatness of field, corner sharpness, vignetting, frame coverage) the 24-85mm on A99 betters it substantially. I sold my 16-50mm; for the A77, the old 16-80mm I've had since 2006 does a better job.

And yes - I would love a revised 24mm-xx, preferably a 24-120mm scaled up from the CZ 16-80mm with improved build, for FF.

Thanks for sharing your experience! Ordered one, lets hope it is a good copy.

Hans

David

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow