Lens
|
Minolta AF 28-135mm F4-/4.5
|
Box contents
|
Front and rear caps, users manual, no hood came with this lens.
|
Cost
|
Available on eBay at the time of this review for around $350, depending on condition.
|
Build quality
|
Good, to very good
|
Additional information
|
Original Minolta AF lens design. Quite expensive back in its day.
|
Specifications below |
|
Optical configuration
|
16 elements in 13 groups
|
Angle of view
|
75°-18° full frame, 50°-12° APS-C.
|
Aperture
|
7 blades, straight
|
Full frame and APS-C
|
Yes, full frame and APS-C. APS-C equivalent, 42-202.5mm
|
Depth of field and focus scales?
|
Distance window, and IR index marks at 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 70mm, 100mm, and 135mm.
|
Minimum focus, image plane to subject
|
9.6″ (244mm) Using macro switch
|
Minimum focus, end of lens barrel to subject
|
3.4″ (86mm) Using macro switch
|
Hard stop at infinity focus?
|
Yes
|
Length changes when focusing?
|
No |
Focus ring turns in AF?
|
Yes
|
Filter size
|
72mm
|
Filter ring rotates?
|
Yes
|
Distance encoder?
|
No
|
Max magnification
|
0.09x, or 0.25x with macro switch engaged
|
Min. F/stop
|
F/22-25 or F/27 using half stop Exposure steps.
|
Sony teleconverter compatible?
|
No
|
Length changes when zooming?
|
Yes
|
Dimensions WxL (my measurements)
|
2.95″ x 4.3″ 75mm x 109mm widest at filter ring
|
Maximum extended length (my measurements)
|
5.75″ (146mm)
|
Weight bare (my scale)
|
26.6oz (753g) 27.5oz (780g) with caps
|
![]() |
Front element |
![]() |
Backside |
![]() |
Side view, fully extended |
![]() |
Side view, fully drawn-in |
![]() |
28mm, moderate barrel distortion. |
![]() |
Mild pincushion at 135mm. |
Lens flare/ghosting examples
28mm F/5.6, massive ghosting with sun just out of image
|
28mm F/11 sun in shot
|
![]() |
![]() |
135mm F/5.6, sun just in picture
|
135mm F/5.6 sun out of shot
|
![]() |
![]() |
28mm F/4
|
28mm F/5.6
|
![]() |
![]() |
135mm F/4.5
|
135mm F/5.6
|
![]() |
![]() |
coma 28mm, F/4
|
coma 28mm, F/5.6
|
![]() |
![]() |
Aperture/focal length guide for the Minolta AF 28-135mm F/4-4.5 This lens zooms from 28mm to 40mm staying at F/4, at 45mm, you’ll get F/4.5. Look below for guide.
Maximum aperture
|
F/4
|
F/4.5
|
Range
|
28mm-40mm
|
45mm-135mm
|
28mm F/4
|
28mm F/5.6
|
![]() |
![]() |
135mm F/4.5
|
135mm F/5.6
|
![]() |
![]() |
F/4 center
|
F/4 corner
|
![]() |
![]() |
F/5.6 center
|
F/5.6 corner
|
![]() |
![]() |
F/8 center
|
F/8 corner
|
![]() |
![]() |
F/11 center
|
F/11 corner
|
![]() |
![]() |
F/4.5 center
|
F/4.5 corner
|
![]() |
![]() |
F/5.6 center
|
F/5.6 corner
|
![]() |
![]() |
F/8 center
|
F/8 corner
|
![]() |
![]() |
F/11 center
|
F/11 corner
|
![]() |
![]() |
At 50mm, the centers look very good at F/4.5, and appear as sharp wide open as they do stopped down. The corners nearly match the centers in sharpness at F/8-11.
Below are centers and corners from 135mm.
F/4.5 center
|
F/4.5 corner
|
![]() |
![]() |
F/5.6 center
|
F/5.6 corner
|
![]() |
![]() |
F/8 center
|
F/8 corner
|
![]() |
![]() |
F/11 center
|
F/11 corner
|
![]() |
![]() |
Full frame section next.
Full frame results using the Sony A900 below.
Check out the differences when using a film or full frame camera below. I’m only pointing out the noticeable issues as compared to the APS-C bodies, so if I don’t show it here, the results are not significantly different enough to warrant posting an additional set of images in this section.
Light fall-off
Light fall-off is definitely stronger with full frame coverage. I see moderate levels at 28mm, with a hard fall-off wide open, diminishing greatly just one stop down. Check out the sample of additional light fall-off as a result of using a regular type UV filter at 28mm, It’s a little more noticeable than normal, that’s why I’m showing it. At the long end, there’s mild light fall-off, but it blends evenly towards the center and doesn’t show in regular pictures.
Full image from A900 below.
![]()
This boring full scene shows light fall-off from 28mm, F/4. It’s noticeable, but not distracting in my opinion. In bright sunny conditions like this, you don’t have to use F/4, use F/5.6 or smaller instead, and you’ll have no dark corners to worry about.
Lateral color fringing.
![]()
This full frame 28mm, F/11 crop shows color fringing, which is a little stronger with a full frame camera. Look at the magenta and cyan colors around the rocks, tree trunks to the left, and car tire. It’s noticeable if you look for it, but not bad by any stretch. This crops comes from the last 700-800 pixels on the left side of the image as you would see it on your computer screen at full size.
28mm corner samples next.
The 28mm full frame corners look pretty soft wide open, and things don’t change much until F/8-11. I threw in a center shot comparison, just to show you how soft the extreme corners are. The size differences between the center and corners are not from moving in, they were shot from the same spot, that’s just the nature of wide angle lenses, and how they render objects in the corners.
50mm corners below.
Moving on to the 50mm corners, which show better than the wide angle crops at all apertures. The corners sharpen up nicely by F/8, and are almost, but not quite as sharp as the centers. At F/16, the corners start to degrade due to diffraction. Exposure differences are from light fall-off.
135mm corners.
The 135mm corners show some veiling haze wide open, which makes the lateral color fringing more apparent. Stopping down the aperture sharpens the corners up, and hides some of the color fringing. This kind of color fringing really doesn’t go away as you stop down, it just seems that way when the image is going from soft to sharp; (axial color fringing goes away as you stop down, but this lens exhibits low levels). F/11-16 corners seem to be the sharpest. Exposure differences are from light fall-off.
Distortion next.
There is moderate to strong barrel distortion at the 28mm end, and moderate pincushion distortion as you zoom in. The distortion curves here are gradual across the frame, and are easy to correct in post processing.
Coma results below.
Coma is not really an issue with this lens. At F/4-5.6 there is mild coma at the extreme corners at most focal lengths, but one stop down and it all but goes away.
|
The Minolta AF 28-135mm F/4-4.5 is one of the original Minolta AF lenses from the mid 1980s, and is now over 20 years old. It’s well built, with a minimum of plastic components, which makes it heavy for its size. This lens was also quite expensive when introduced, and came with odd features, as mentioned above. Sony has a current lens (Minolta designed) similar in focal length, the 24-105mm F/3.5-4.5, but it doesn’t perform as well overall.
Focusing accuracy is quite good, most likely the result of the low F/4 maximum aperture. It’s also not speedy, but typical for the day. Color fringing as well as light fall-off are kept to a minimum, and both are controlled well, with average, to above average performance. Flare and ghosting are strong, and by today’s standards would be considered poor, but are average for a 1980s Minolta AF zoom. Bokeh or background blur is also not very smooth, but the few items mentioned should not overshadow the most impressive characteristic, the overall sharpness of this lens, which is excellent. If Sony put in a circular aperture, SSM-not SAM, and some modern coatings to try and eliminate some of the ghosting (like they did on the 50mm F/1.4) this lens would probably get a “G” designation and sell like hot cakes!
For APS-C users; If you can live within the equivalent focal length of 42-202.5, then I’d buy one without delay, especially you landscape shooters out there. At F/5.6-8, it’s nearly a perfect lens if sharpness is a primary concern. There’s only one real downer, which is ghosting. When the sun is in or near the image at wide angle, you’d better pay attention and try and block the sun with your hand, otherwise, you’ll be sorry. If you can’t live without real wide-angle coverage, then I’d probably go with the CZ 16-80mm, or Sony 16-105mm.