Minolta lenses vs 3rd party for Maxxum

hackettsan

New Member
I've been torn between the minolta 24-105 (D) or the Sigma 24-135 (D) for my Maxxum 7. The Sigma is faster (2.8 vs. 3.5) and has the slightly longer FL (135), but it is larger and not made by Minolta. Does anyone have any info which might help me with this decision. By the way, I also use the Minolta 100 Macro 2.8 (D) and the tamrons 28-300 (3.5-5.6) and 200-400 (5.6).
 

natamambo

New Member
Get the secondhand (no longer made) Minolta 28-135 f4. Slower yes, but a better lens than both of these, made on the same factory lines as the "G" series in the days when Minolta was trying to make inroads into Nikon lenses. A "G" lens for around $150US - can't go wrong!
 

sherbern

New Member
problem finding lens

I'm highly interested in the Minolta old lens but finding them is so darn hard. I already have the minolta 50mm apart from the kit lens. was looking for the minolta 100 and minolta beercan for a good price. I understand that the quality of the Minolta lens is better and I agree with that statement after I bought the 50 mm.
 

randy_k

Member
Late to the discussion: I have a Minolta 28-135 f/4-4.5 lens. It's great! It offers terrific color rendition and sharp focus and worth the investment. In daylight, the higher f-stop is insignificant. It's often called the "Secret Handshake" lens because it's is believed it was designed by Leica as a gift to Minolta. Minolta was building lenses for Leica at the time. The design is unlike any other Minolta lens with the focus ring very close to the camera body (a surprise when the ring moves during autofocus if you accustomed to balancing the camera with your hand at the back of the lens!). I hunted on eBay for months until I found one that was in near perfect shape at a reasonable price.
 
Top