Maxxum 28mm f2.0 lens

[jeffery_pool]

so my 28mm f2.8 finally ate it hard. I bought it a few years ago for a paltry

sum of $50 and managed to drop it a few times, so that the lens elements rocked

back and forth in the plastic casing. It slowly got worse and worse over the

years, and now its finally bad enough that it probably drastically effects

sharpness or focussing. I see Minolta lists a 28mm f2.0 lens, but I've searched

high and low for it on the auction site and on google but haven't found any

information on it at all. I assume its pretty rare but I'd like to hear some

reviews? Besides it being a 2.0 vs a 2.8, are there any quality differences?

I've never been stunned by the 2.8's sharpness compared to the 50mm 1.7, but at

the same time I'm not really one to look at a print with a magnifying glass.

[ivan_dzo]

yes it's hugely better than the f2.8. It's about the finest lens that Minolta made. that's why they don't come up for sale often and I wont be selling mine. But I'll sell you my f2.8 to replace yours if you want ;-)

[weatherman]

I have it and can say is as sharp as 50 f1.4

Has better bokeh than 50 f1.7

I had to wait some years to find a second hand one.

Never regret and I would never sell it either!

[weatherman]

Samples:

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4223010

 

You can have a look at my Scotland photos as well. Wide angle ones are shot with 28 f2

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=477420

 

and also these

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=517292

 

Good luck

[wesley_chang]

I asked a similar question a little over a year ago:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CFiK

 

My overall impression from everyone's advice: get the 2.0.

I did and I was not disappointed. I got it on e-bay. You have to be patient, though.

 

Good luck,

Wes

[jeroen_b1]

Just a thought: I read in the post from a while back that the 28mm f/2.8 is as sharp after f/8. So for wide angle shots on a tripod the f/2.8 should be just fine (when there is enough light!). With more open apertures the f/2.0 is king.

 

I would think that when you shoot typical wide open shots, at close range, to shoot a sharp isolated subject with a nice bokeh background, the 50mm f/1.7 or equal would also be good enough? Do you need a 28mm f/2 for this?

 

Any comment is welcome!

[weatherman]

I would think that when you shoot typical wide open shots, at close range, to shoot a sharp isolated subject with a nice bokeh background, the 50mm f/1.7 or equal would also be good enough? Do you need a 28mm f/2 for this?

 

-----------

surely not. But 28mm is a wide angle lens that happens to have good bokeh as well. That is what I meant. 50mm 1.7 also serves well for bokeh purposes, if that is your only concern.