Re: Minolta MD 35-70/3.5 Macro versus 28-85/3.5-4.5 Macro
My coworker made the decision easy; all he wanted in trade was a handful of 39mm color filters for which I have no use. How could I say no? I used it this afternoon on my bare-sensored mono converted a7rII (most flim-like performance I can get from digital). I think, for landscapes, it could work out as well, though the distortion at 35mm is stronger and more complex than the 35-70. They're about even at 50mm, and the 28-85 is a tiny bit ahead in resolution at 70. I hate the macro mode is on the wide end and not very good. It's not a huge issue, but it will force a different solution.
The bigger question for me is can it truly be a single lens solution, or, like with the 35-70, will I still feel the need to carry a wide (24 or 28) and will I still want a short tele? I have the feeling the answer will be yes to both, but I'm going to give it a try with the X-570 over the next few weekends and see how it goes.
Nov 20, 2025 at 07:36 PM
Previous versions of freaklikeme's message #16933011 « Minolta MD 35-70/3.5 Macro versus 28-85/3.5-4.5 Macro »
