What lenses for Minolta Maxxum 5

I have decided to go for a 50mm f/1.7 lens with Maxxum 5. What other
lenses should I buy? I am just a beginner with hobbyist intentions
only. I prefer shooting landscapes/panorama, the occasional portrait
that I find interesting, and indoors (parties/marriages). I rarely zoom
but don't mind having a zoom also for some trip to forest reserves
where a zoom may prove useful.

A few candidates:
- Minolta 70-210mm f/4
- Minolta 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6
- Minolta 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6
- Minolta 24-85mm F3.5-4.5
- Minolta 28-105mm F3.5-4.5
- Tamron 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 ASPHERICAL LD INTERNAL FOCUS SUPER
- Tamron 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 ASPHERICAL XR INTERNAL FOCUS MACRO
- Tamron 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 ASPHERICAL LD INTERNAL FOCUS MACRO

These are just a few I found at keh.com that might be good. If you see
any other below $125 that are good, please do suggest.

Ideally, I just want one lens apart from the 50mm. But if need be, I
might pick-up more than one apart from the 50mm.

Thanks,

Siddhartha

"John Doe" wrote in news:ci94j1
- Minolta 70-210mm f/4

Awesome lens. Very sharp, very well made. A little slow to focuus on
older cameras, but should be OK on your 5. Quite heavy - you will want
to support it with one hand while shooting.

- Minolta 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6

OK - some very good results have come from it, but not as good as the
above.

- Minolta 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6

Surprisingly good for the price, but you cna do a lot better. However,
it is very light.

- Minolta 24-85mm F3.5-4.5

Extremely sharp, quite contrasty. The weird distortion puts me off the
lens though. This distortion is evident at all focal lengths.

- Minolta 28-105mm F3.5-4.5

Very good lens. I have 11x17s from it which are very sharp indeed.
Under rated, and a good example of why not to believe everything lens
tests tell you.

- Tamron 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 ASPHERICAL LD INTERNAL FOCUS SUPER
- Tamron 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 ASPHERICAL XR INTERNAL FOCUS MACRO
- Tamron 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 ASPHERICAL LD INTERNAL FOCUS MACRO

I've never been able to keep these straight. I have the second
generation Tamrom superzoom, and it's OK for what it is, If you stop it
down to f8 and hold it steady, it does a passable job.

Of the lenses you mention, if you had to choose only one I would go for
the 28-105. Also look for a 24-50, which is simply a superb lens and
gives you a very handy 24mm wide end. It's my favorite lens for general
carry on my 7. Of the telezooms, the best one by a wide margin is the
70-210 f4. Get one with a lens hood to prevent flare. KEH should have
the factory lens hood for that lens around somewhere.

Mike

"John Doe" wrote in news:ci94j1
- Minolta 70-210mm f/4

Awesome lens. Very sharp, very well made. A little slow to focuus on
older cameras, but should be OK on your 5. Quite heavy - you will want
to support it with one hand while shooting.

- Minolta 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6

OK - some very good results have come from it, but not as good as the
above.

- Minolta 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6

Surprisingly good for the price, but you cna do a lot better. However,
it is very light.

- Minolta 24-85mm F3.5-4.5

Extremely sharp, quite contrasty. The weird distortion puts me off the
lens though. This distortion is evident at all focal lengths.

- Minolta 28-105mm F3.5-4.5

Very good lens. I have 11x17s from it which are very sharp indeed.
Under rated, and a good example of why not to believe everything lens
tests tell you.

- Tamron 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 ASPHERICAL LD INTERNAL FOCUS SUPER
- Tamron 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 ASPHERICAL XR INTERNAL FOCUS MACRO
- Tamron 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 ASPHERICAL LD INTERNAL FOCUS MACRO

I've never been able to keep these straight. I have the second
generation Tamrom superzoom, and it's OK for what it is, If you stop it
down to f8 and hold it steady, it does a passable job.

Of the lenses you mention, if you had to choose only one I would go for
the 28-105. Also look for a 24-50, which is simply a superb lens and
gives you a very handy 24mm wide end. It's my favorite lens for general
carry on my 7. Of the telezooms, the best one by a wide margin is the
70-210 f4. Get one with a lens hood to prevent flare. KEH should have
the factory lens hood for that lens around somewhere.

Mike

Mike wrote:
"John Doe" wrote in news:ci94j1
- Minolta 70-210mm f/4

Awesome lens. Very sharp, very well made. A little slow to focuus
on
older cameras, but should be OK on your 5. Quite heavy - you will
want
to support it with one hand while shooting.

- Minolta 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6

OK - some very good results have come from it, but not as good as the

above.

- Minolta 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6

Surprisingly good for the price, but you cna do a lot better.
However,
it is very light.

- Minolta 24-85mm F3.5-4.5

Extremely sharp, quite contrasty. The weird distortion puts me off
the
lens though. This distortion is evident at all focal lengths.

- Minolta 28-105mm F3.5-4.5

Very good lens. I have 11x17s from it which are very sharp indeed.
Under rated, and a good example of why not to believe everything lens

tests tell you.


I forgot to mention the 28-85mm F3.5-4.5.

Apart from the 50mm, I am leaning towards:
Minolta 28-??(85/105) + 70-210mm

Thanks,

Siddhartha

Mike wrote:
"John Doe" wrote in news:ci94j1
- Minolta 70-210mm f/4

Awesome lens. Very sharp, very well made. A little slow to focuus
on
older cameras, but should be OK on your 5. Quite heavy - you will
want
to support it with one hand while shooting.

- Minolta 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6

OK - some very good results have come from it, but not as good as the

above.

- Minolta 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6

Surprisingly good for the price, but you cna do a lot better.
However,
it is very light.

- Minolta 24-85mm F3.5-4.5

Extremely sharp, quite contrasty. The weird distortion puts me off
the
lens though. This distortion is evident at all focal lengths.

- Minolta 28-105mm F3.5-4.5

Very good lens. I have 11x17s from it which are very sharp indeed.
Under rated, and a good example of why not to believe everything lens

tests tell you.


I forgot to mention the 28-85mm F3.5-4.5.

Apart from the 50mm, I am leaning towards:
Minolta 28-??(85/105) + 70-210mm

Thanks,

Siddhartha

"John Doe" wrote in news:ci9amk


I forgot to mention the 28-85mm F3.5-4.5.

Apart from the 50mm, I am leaning towards:
Minolta 28-??(85/105) + 70-210mm

Thanks,

Siddhartha

A bit sharper than the 28-105 - it's a great choice as well. I prefer
the 28-105 for the extra 20mm, but really there is very little left
wanting in the 28-85. It is a bit longer than the 28-105, and a bit
thinner and heavier. Slower to focus as well, as is common with the
original series AF lenses. But it sure is great optically. One of the
sleepers of the Minolta line.

A great pair would be the 28-85 or 28-105 and the 70-210 f4.

Mike

"John Doe" wrote in news:ci9amk


I forgot to mention the 28-85mm F3.5-4.5.

Apart from the 50mm, I am leaning towards:
Minolta 28-??(85/105) + 70-210mm

Thanks,

Siddhartha

A bit sharper than the 28-105 - it's a great choice as well. I prefer
the 28-105 for the extra 20mm, but really there is very little left
wanting in the 28-85. It is a bit longer than the 28-105, and a bit
thinner and heavier. Slower to focus as well, as is common with the
original series AF lenses. But it sure is great optically. One of the
sleepers of the Minolta line.

A great pair would be the 28-85 or 28-105 and the 70-210 f4.

Mike

John Doe wrote:

I have decided to go for a 50mm f/1.7 lens with Maxxum 5. What other
lenses should I buy? I am just a beginner with hobbyist intentions
only. I prefer shooting landscapes/panorama, the occasional portrait
that I find interesting, and indoors (parties/marriages). I rarely zoom
but don't mind having a zoom also for some trip to forest reserves
where a zoom may prove useful.

A few candidates:

YES - Minolta 70-210mm f/4
NO - Minolta 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6
YES - Minolta 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 -latest v. is apparently 'ok'.
YES - Minolta 24-85mm F3.5-4.5
NO - Minolta 28-105mm F3.5-4.5

Reccomend: 24-105 (D)

- Tamron 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 ASPHERICAL LD INTERNAL FOCUS SUPER
- Tamron 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 ASPHERICAL XR INTERNAL FOCUS MACRO
- Tamron 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 ASPHERICAL LD INTERNAL FOCUS MACRO

I have no opinions on the Tamrons, but suggest that extreme zooms
such as above are generally not very good. At least they are
very convenient ...


--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

John Doe wrote:

I have decided to go for a 50mm f/1.7 lens with Maxxum 5. What other
lenses should I buy? I am just a beginner with hobbyist intentions
only. I prefer shooting landscapes/panorama, the occasional portrait
that I find interesting, and indoors (parties/marriages). I rarely zoom
but don't mind having a zoom also for some trip to forest reserves
where a zoom may prove useful.

A few candidates:

YES - Minolta 70-210mm f/4
NO - Minolta 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6
YES - Minolta 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 -latest v. is apparently 'ok'.
YES - Minolta 24-85mm F3.5-4.5
NO - Minolta 28-105mm F3.5-4.5

Reccomend: 24-105 (D)

- Tamron 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 ASPHERICAL LD INTERNAL FOCUS SUPER
- Tamron 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 ASPHERICAL XR INTERNAL FOCUS MACRO
- Tamron 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 ASPHERICAL LD INTERNAL FOCUS MACRO

I have no opinions on the Tamrons, but suggest that extreme zooms
such as above are generally not very good. At least they are
very convenient ...


--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

Alan Browne wrote in
:

NO - Minolta 28-105mm F3.5-4.5

Nothing wrong with that one AFAIK. You may be thinking of the 28-100 which
seems like a pretty bad lens. However, the two have nothing in common.