Đánh giá lens 35 70 f3.3 4.6 d
|
I want so badly to give this lens a 5 on sharpness. It's that good but, in fairness, my Sony 35mm prime beats it if you pixel peep. Surprisingly, my Minolta 35-80mm lens and Sony 18-55mm kit lens edge it out too. However, in the real world I much prefer this lens. The IQ is just... wow! Does pixel peeping really matter with a lens like this? It's not like I'm going to use it on a National Geographic assignment with editors scoping out prints with magnifying glasses. The bottom line? I'm very satisfied with its sharpness. Color-wise this lens is the best example of classic Minolta colors I own. Better than my legendary Minolta beercan even. Better than my Minolta 500mm AF Reflex by a bit. My copy didn't come with a hood so I bought an inexpensive metal screw-on vented one. It works far better than the bayonet one that came with my Minolta 35-80mm which I assume would be similar to what would have come with it. Still, there's the occasional problem pointed near the sun that's probably worse than modern lenses but far better than my 35-80mm which has problems with veil haze. Put it all together and there's a wonderful synergy. I posted some pics in the samples forum. I only wish my humble skills could do this lens justice. All this gushing aside, I know right off the bat a lot of people won't like this lens. It's not for the all-medal crowd being one of the lightest plastic lenses you can imagine. You'll forget it's in your pocket so don't run it through the wash. It's not for the folks who only want the finest best-of-breed G or Zeiss glass. Unfortunately, my a65 firmware won't correct this lens' distortion. I can't recommend this as a walk-around lens because of its limited 2x range which simply doesn't fit enough use cases. However, the beauty of this lens is you can drop it in a pocket for those times it does work. To extend its range, I've toyed with a Tamron 1.4x teleconverter. Yeah, call me strange but it works extremely well. No real loss of sharpness even pixel peeping but it does add a touch of CA that's only noticeable magnifying an image far beyond your typical enlargement. I tossed an example of this in the sample forums too. Hey, this is a hobby for me. I like playing with lenses. In that spirit I highly recommend this lens. 11002 date: Mar-27-2013sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4 tested on:
missing price paid:12GBP (used)positive:+Very sharp +Light and compact +Extremely cheapnegative:-Poor AF -0.7m focus distance -All cheap plastic -Range on APS-C cameracomment:Cheap Minolta version in this focal range, it's not the more expensive and valued Minolta small "beercan" with constant F/4, and is made of cheap plastic, instead nice aluminium finish. But, anyway, it's a nice piece of kit in my bag, at the moment, my most used eBay product photo lens, it's very very sharp, maybe my copy, but I read, other has very sharp copies too. You can`t beat the price/performance for this lens :) 9872 date: Feb-1-2012sharpness: 3 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 tested on:
Compared to the Minolta 35-80 F4-5.6 II, it feels much better built and I expected its IQ to be better, but the 35-80 is simply better at every aperture and focal length. I realise I am going against the general consensus in stating this, as almost everyone else seems to score the 35-70 higher than the 35-80 and this is what I expected as well, but it simply hasn't been born out in practice. I read FullFrameShooter's review with interest below mine, maybe this lens performs much better on a full frame sensor than APS-C for some reason, but I only shoot APS-C these days. |
