Minolta 24-105 f3.5-4.5

[Anbesol]

Anybody here used this lens? Thoughts? $350 seem like a decent investment, its a great range. Is there another lens I should look at instead of this one?

[Canuck935]

I was looking into this lens a few years ago, and I ended up going with the Tamron 24-135 f/3.5-5.6 instead because of a rebate. It's bigger/heavier and slower on the long end than the Minolta. However, it is a little bit longer and has a zoom lock. Anyway, from what I remember when I was shopping for this lens they are both pretty comparable optically. I think you would be happy with either one. However, for $350 you should also consider the Konica Minolta or Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. Sure it's got much less range but it is a great joy to use. Check out the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 Thread in the Pentax forum. Personally, my 24-135 was retired because of my KM 28-75 and hasn't seen daylight in about a year.

[NoKnees]

I've heard mixed views on the 24-105 length, as it's basically been re-reviewed by a few folks with the introduction of the a900 camera. For $350, it doesn't strike me as a good bang for the buck option. The old Minolta 28-135 generally received better marks for sharpness, but it's a little bit heavier and gives up 4mm on the wide end. Like Canuck, I too picked up a KM 28-75 f2.8 to replace my 28-135mm lens for most "walk about" use on my a700...

It will come down to what zoom range you can live with. For me, the extra speed of the shorter lens out weighed the added zoom of the longer ones. If I want a true single lens solution, I have a Tamron 18-250mm that is acceptably sharp in general, but very good when stopped down to the f7.1-f8 range and it can be found for $400-$450 these days...

Just my opinion, I think the $350 is better spent on the speed than the zoom. But if full range is really important, the 18-250mm lenses have been working quite well for a lot of people...

[Anbesol]

Well, I was looking for a balance between the two, quality and range. I keep hearing things about the 28-75 f2.8, but I thought that was upwards of $700. Is this not the case? I can't find any ebay listings of it right now, but yeah f2.8 for standard zoom range would be really cool, if I could get that for $350 then I'm all in. I'm using a 24-50 f4 right now and totally satisfied with the quality, a little flarey at times but thats an easy fix, its just so danged tight of range, 50 isn't very much.

I would definitely sacrifice 30mm on telephoto and 4mm wide for an f2.8 - especially as awesome as that particular lens is touted to be.

[Canuck935]

The KM version is getting hard to find these days, but the Tamron is easily found.

Here is the listing for it at B&H, though it is currently out of stock..
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...2_8_XR_Di.html

Adorama has it listed for $359..
http://www.adorama.com/TM2875MAX.htm...8-75&item_no=3

[NoKnees]

And if you really want Minolta, and don't mind paying a little more, Central Camera actually has a small selection of lenses still new in box... This is where I grabbed my 28-75 f2.8 early this year. Good service, and mine was definitely new, in box... Current price is $427 + free shipping...

http://www.centralcamera.com/Lenses/.../Minolta-Sony/

However, the Tamron version is said to be truly identical, can be found for less as noted above, and carries a current warranty. I'm not sure how Sony is dealing with KM lens warranties, I know they've been good about certain repairs on KM digital cameras...

For the best price, give Adorama a call and gram the Tamron... I've had good luck purchasing from them as well..