Minolta MD 28mm f/2.8 Lens Review

2000 1125 Sroyon Mukherjee

When Christopher Columbus, returning from his second voyage to the Americas, brought a pineapple back to Europe, it caused an instant sensation. “The most invincible King Ferdinand relates that he has eaten another fruit brought from those countries,” reported the historian Peter Martyr. “Its flavour excels all other fruits.”

It took nearly two centuries before European gardeners learned to cultivate the prized fruit in hothouses, and even then, they were rare, difficult to grow, and fiendishly expensive. Inevitably, pineapples became a symbol of wealth and status. As this BBC article relates, “Concerned about wasting such high-value fruit by eating it, owners displayed pineapples as dinnertime ornaments […] to be seen and admired but surrounded by other, cheaper, fruit for eating.” There’s an almost irresistible parallel here with how some people treat expensive lenses – but this article is not about that. Let’s resist that unworthy temptation, and press on.

As cultivation and transport became easier and less expensive, pineapples became cheaper.  Today, you can buy a “medium pineapple” for £1 at Sainsbury’s. Indeed, you could argue that the modern pineapple is so ubiquitous that it is actually under-priced, and consequently under-appreciated. Much like the Minolta MD 28mm f/2.8, the excellent but rather unglamorous lens which I’ve been using for the past three years.

Minolta 28mm lenses in SR-mount

The Minolta MD 28mm f/2.8 is a manual-focus lens for the SR-mount (colloquially called “MC/MD mount”). There are multiple versions of this lens; mine is the late-model MD-III introduced in 1983.

Minolta’s earliest 28mm was the Auto W.Rokkor-SG 28mm f/3.5 (1963). The SG in the lens name was a code, further explained here, for the number of groups and elements in the lens construction: ‘S’ denotes 7 groups (septem in Latin) and ‘G’ denotes 7 elements (7th letter of the alphabet). A nice system for naming lenses!

Subsequently, faster 28mm lenses were introduced with maximum apertures of f/2.8 (my lens), f/2.5 and even f/2. Each of these had multiple variants, known to collectors by esoteric codes like AR-II, MC-X, MD-III and so forth. In some cases the variations are merely cosmetic, while in others they are more significant – like differences in the minimum focus distance, filter size or lens construction. I won’t go into that level of detail, but if you’re interested in the minutiae, knock yourself out with the SR Lens Chart on eazypix, Ad Dieleman’s page on SR mount 28mm lenses, or minman’s pages on the f/3.5, f/2.8, f2.5 and f/2 versions.

The f/2 was one of Minolta’s premium offerings, with nine lens groups and a highly-corrected, floating element design. It is a full stop faster than the f/2.8, and image quality is reputedly better. At least, that’s what the internet says; I’ve not tested it myself, so I can’t say if the difference is practically significant. Anyhow, used prices for the f/2 are four to five times higher, and as such, it was outside my budget.

The f/2.5 is only one-third stop faster than the f/2.8, but significantly more expensive. It also has an older lens formula and coatings, and contains mildly radioactive rare-earth elements.

The f/3.5, on the other hand, is cheaper than the f/2.8, but only by a few pounds. So unless you get a cracking deal, I don’t see a good reason to give up a half-stop of speed (and remember that with an SLR, you’ll also be looking at a dimmer viewfinder).

That brings us to the f/2.8 28mm, the subject of this review.

Minolta 28mm f/2.8 versions

There are multiple versions of the Minolta 28/2.8, the main ones being the MC W.Rokkor, MD W.Rokkor and MD (sometimes called the MD-III or “plain MD”). These designations appear on the front of the lens, which helps with identification. Other variants include the Celtic (budget line, usually with the same optical formula but cheaper construction and coatings) and the Rokkor-X versions with orange lettering (identical to the corresponding Rokkor versions without the X, but produced for the North American market).

In general, later models are slightly smaller and lighter, but also have more plastic in their construction. The filter ring changed from 55mm in the earlier versions to 49mm in the later ones – this may be a factor if you sometimes use the same filters on different lenses, as I tend to do. All versions focus down to just 0.3 meters (1 foot) which is a nice feature to have.

All but one of these versions have an optical formula of 7 elements in 7 groups (7/7). But the plain MD has two variants. The first, introduced in 1981, is a 7/7 formula like its predecessors, while the second – my version, 1983 – has a 5/5 design.

Externally, the plain MD 7/7 and 5/5 are almost indistinguishable. There is a tiny cosmetic difference in the front ring which you can see on Ad Dieleman’s page (the 5/5 has an extra inner ring). And on the 7/7, the red IR dot on the depth-of-focus scale is slightly closer to the 4, while on the 5/5, it’s slightly closer to the 8.

Come to think of it, I have no idea why I know this stuff, because the difference in image quality between the 7/7 and 5/5 (which I will come to in a later section) is negligible. I need to get out more.

Specifications

The specifications given below are for the lens I own, the plain MD with a 5/5 construction. For other versions, please see the eazypix chart and Ad Dieleman’s page.

  • Mount – Minolta SR mount (MC/MD)
  • Year introduced – 1983
  • Focal length – 28mm
  • Angle of View – 75°
  • Aperture range – f/2.8–22 (half-stop detents)
  • Aperture blades – 6
  • Lens construction – 5 elements in 5 groups
  • Minimum focus distance – 0.3 meters
  • Dimensions (L×D) – 40×64mm
  • Weight – 170 grams
  • Filter thread diameter – 49mm

Look and feel

The lens is compact, not much bigger than a golf ball. Like other MD series lenses, it has a rubber waffle grip for the focus ring, and mostly white lettering (orange for feet, and green for the smallest aperture, f/22). It also has the “MD lock” designed to be used on the Minolta X-700 in Program mode, so that the lens does not accidentally switch away from minimum aperture. A clip-on hood (screw-on in the older versions) was sold separately, but I don’t have one.

Build quality and “feel” are on par with MD series lenses – not necessarily mind-blowing, but perfectly acceptable. On my copy the focus ring turns smoothly, with a throw of a little under 180° from 0.3 metres to infinity. The aperture ring is snappy, with half-stop detents except at the two extremes (i.e. no detents between f/2.8-4 and f/16-22).

Lens design and optical quality

The 28mm focal length is significantly shorter than the Minolta SR-mount’s flange focal distance, that is, the distance from the mount to the film-plane (43.5mm). So like almost all wide-angle SLR lenses, the Minolta MD 28mm f/2.8 is a retrofocus (aka inverted telephoto) design. This ensures that the rear element is sufficiently far from the film plane, leaving enough space for the SLR mirror.

As I mentioned, my lens is a 5/5 design (5 elements in 5 groups) while earlier versions have a 7/7 formula. Vintage lens reviews claims that the 5/5 is slightly inferior. On the other hand, Tony at Lens QA Works did a side-by-side comparison and found that the 5/5 is “definitely better”. However, as you can see from his comparison, these differences are really only visible at wide apertures, at the corner of the frame, and at high magnification.

Moreover, bear in mind we’re talking about vintage lenses, used or stored in all sorts of conditions. Three decades after their manufacture, there are a host of reasons why there could be sample variation between copies. If you’re in the market for a Minolta 28/2.8, I would not lose sleep over whether to get the 5/5 or the 7/7. For normal photography, I think the differences are practically irrelevant.

Distortion and vignetting

Most wide-angle lenses exhibit two types of distortion: perspective distortion where objects closer to the camera appear disproportionately bigger, and radial distortion where straight lines appear curved.

Perspective distortion is not a lens aberration, but a consequence of the wide-angle perspective. If you don’t like it, don’t blame the lens; take a few steps back and use a longer focal length. Radial distortion, on the other hand, is a lens aberration, often manifesting as barrel distortion on wide-angle lenses.

A while back I did some “tests” with this lens, taking photos of optical charts and so on. (I do these tests for my own amusement, but I don’t reproduce them in reviews because I think “real-world photos” are more informative and fun. But I wonder if some readers might be interested after all?) Anyhow, in these tests I noticed a bit of barrel distortion, nothing extreme, and filed this information away for future reference.

More recently, I was shooting a series of building facades in my hometown, Kolkata – taking photos straight on with lots of horizontal lines in the frame. I was using the MD 28/2.8, so I thought barrel distortion might be an issue, and I was all set to correct it in post. But the (uncorrected) photos look just fine, as you can see below. If an aberration is mainly visible in test charts and not in real-world photos, I can live with that.

All sample photos, by the way, are taken on film, using a Minolta X-370s or Minolta X-700.

Likewise, my tests showed a bit of vignetting wide open, practically gone at f/5.6. Again, this is not something I notice in real-world photos. If anything, it can add some visual interest to portraits and night scenes – the most common situations where I shoot at f/2.8.

Bokeh and flare

A wide-angle lens with a maximum aperture of f/2.8 will never be a bokeh monster, but wide open and up close the lens does produce pleasing bokeh. The photo of the sunflowers below shows both near and far bokeh, and you can see other examples in the portraits. Stopped down, background bokeh is only really visible if you focus quite close. The lens has six aperture blades, so out-of-focus highlights appear hexagonal.

Although I use the lens without a hood, flare resistance is surprisingly good. I know this because I kind of stress-tested the lens, shooting in situations most likely to produce flare. In the photo of the single sunflower, the sun was in the frame, partially obscured by the flower. In the photo with the monkey, the sun was just outside the frame at top left. In both photos, there is good contrast and very little veiling flare. There is a hint of ghosting (you can see it on the monkey’s left hand) but again, far less than I expected.

Minolta MD 28mm f/2.8 in use

50mm (or its full-frame equivalent) is my favorite focal length, but 28mm is not far behind. This is obviously subjective, but to my eyes, 28mm is a nice balance – wide enough to look interesting but not so wide that perspective distortion becomes the defining feature of an image. I use (and love) wider lenses too, some of which I hope to review later. But the 28mm focal length is really versatile. I especially like it for street photography where it allows me to get close to the action and still capture a lot of the scene.

With faster film, the maximum aperture of f/2.8 is wide enough (just about) for handheld night photography. A good rule of thumb is that the slowest shutter-speed at which a lens can be safely handheld is the reciprocal of its focal length (so around 1/30 sec for a 28mm lens). This effectively makes it almost one stop “faster” than a 50mm lens which, according to our rule of thumb, has a slowest safe speed of 1/60 sec.

I also use it for portraits, though on photo-forums and Facebook groups you often hear “rules” like “Never take portraits with a wide-angle lens.” But I think wide-angle portraits have their own charm – the unusual perspective, and the fact that you can include a good deal of the subject environment, thanks to the wider angle of view and greater depth-of-field.

Final thoughts

I started this review with a story about pineapples, and also about economics. Rare objects tend to be valuable, and conversely, commonplace things are cheap. In 1986, the Minolta MD 28mm f/2.8 sold new for $140, almost $360 in today’s money. Even at that price it must have been a worthwhile investment, because Minolta sold thousands of copies. As a result, the lens is widely available today, and at the time of writing used copies in good condition sell for around £30–50 on eBay UK auctions.

Here’s another economics anecdote. In 2017, scientists at the University of Bonn found that the same wine apparently tastes better when it’s labelled with a higher price tag – a phenomenon which has come to be known as the “marketing placebo effect.” Participants were given two wine samples with price tags of 6 euro and 18 euro. Most participants rated the 18-euro wine higher, but in fact, both samples came from the same 12-euro bottle.

There’s a lesson in this too – sometimes, instead of being guided by our senses, we allow ourselves to be swayed by price. Online reviews of the Minolta MD 28mm f/2.8 often damn the lens with faint praise. “A very good, but not stellar performer,” says Rokkorfiles. “An ok lens for the money,” says a user on the MFlenses forum.

Now I’m not sure if this is the flip side of the marketing placebo effect – thinking that if something is cheap it must therefore be average – or whether these users are checking corner-sharpness at wide-open apertures and 5x magnification. But in scans viewed at full-screen on my laptop, or 8×10″ darkroom prints I don’t notice image quality issues. The limiting factor, as usual, is not the lens, but my own ability.

Having used the lens for over three years in a variety of situations, here is what I think. The Minolta MD 28mm f/2.8 is not merely “an ok lens for the money”, not even “a very good lens for the money.” It is just a very good lens, period.

Buy your own Minolta MD 28mm F/2.8 lens on eBay here

Find a lens in our shop, F Stop Cameras


Follow Casual Photophile on Facebook and Instagram

[Some of the links in this article will direct users to our affiliates at B&H Photo, Amazon, and eBay. By purchasing anything using these links, Casual Photophile may receive a small commission at no additional charge to you. This helps Casual Photophile produce the content we produce. Many thanks for your support.]

Sroyon Mukherjee

Sroyon is an amateur photographer who likes making images with pinhole cameras, smartphones and everything in between. He also enjoys working on collaborative projects, alternative processes, and developing and printing in the darkroom.

All stories by:Sroyon Mukherjee
23 comments
  • Merlin Marquardt August 4, 2021 at 6:31 am

    Fabulous review!

  • Glad to read this review, given that I started out shooting Minolta, and consider the brand to have been vastly under appreciated.

    However, I wonder why there are few, if any, reviews of the MD 28mm F2 lens. Seems to be a very good lens which faded into obscurity, for whatever reason. My particular personal favorite, though, useful in all kinds of situations. Bought mine new in 2002, suspect it was one of the last made…

    • Hmm I think there aren’t that many Minolta lens reviews in general, compared to Nikon, Canon, etc. But I’ve seen reviews by the usual people, like Phillip Reeve, Lens QA Works, etc. But yeah the 24mm is probably more famous. I haven’t tried either, so… 😀

  • Great review, really informative and nice technical info links.
    A haven’t got a Minolta wide angle but have been enjoying shooting with 28/F2.8 Vivitar on a PK mount strapped to a Super A.
    I must say that the wide angle has really impressed me, especially when using it indoors or up close. A 50mm prime is usually my limit.
    I’ll have to look out for a 28/MD, as the widest Minolta I have is 45/F2, especially if it’s as good or better than the Viv.
    Looking forward to your up and coming reviews. Cheers.

    • Yes I like 28mm, I think it’s a great complement to normal lenses in the 45-58 range. 🙂 I can’t say how the Minolta compares to the Vivitar, but if you do get one, I’d be interested to hear your thoughts!

  • Sroyon : yesss Fabulous review to quote one of the readers.
    Especially very happy to meet you again on board. We miss you.
    We hope all the world will recover soon from Covid, and especially India, we have thought about you.
    This lens is really a winner, better, according to the price to my Nikkor 28mm/2.8 Ais. Minolta is very good for 28mm, the Rokkor for M mount is also a winner when find in good shape without spots, probably the best 28mm for M.
    I love your review.
    Thank you one more time.

    • Thanks Eric, yes the situation in April and May was really bad but it seems to be somewhat stable again (…for now!) That’s actually one reason why I didn’t post an article for a while, I wanted to shoot a couple more rolls before writing this review but I was mostly staying indoors. Ah yes the M-Rokkor! I was actually thinking of getting one for my Leica, but I was worried about the spots, so instead I got the Voigtlander Ultron which I reviewed last year 🙂

      • 😉
        Happy.
        Your review is deep about the philisophy of gear acquisition.
        There is a great bag from Dan Castelli at Japancamerahunter.
        And I love the 40mm, also for my M3.
        I have a lot 40mm.
        From the Summicron-C Leica, the Minolta Rokkor, the Voigtlander Nokton, the Rollei for Rollei 35 RF one of my favorite RF with the M3, I can say that the Minolta Rokkor is the best, it is better than the Summicron which is branded Leica Germany, the Zeiss Rollei Branded Germany made in Japan, and the Rokkor is actualy the cheapest, but in use, it is the best for BW and color. This is the reason why, after long time I wanted only the “best branded”, my M3 is actually share with the Canon Ltm 50mm f/1.4 which for 150 $ gives me all I want from a lens.
        Photography like everything as nothing to do with price, with brand, there is good lens everywhere, any time, we must like you and a lot of one here, search, search, make real test, and we can can be surprised by a fantastic lens like your Minolta 28mm.
        By the way, I have only one limit, I do not buy any product from modern dictatures who sales very cheap product to break all the markets. I do not want to finance the chains of my freedom.
        Also by buying this old lens, we give a new life to them, and we participate to a good spirit of limitated crazy buying which destroy the earth.
        You show us like Juliet and many people here, that there are marvelous gems, and this is not about the shape, the price, this is about the intelligence of the buyers. When I see the bag of Dan Castelli on Japancamerahunter, I say to myself whaouuu such a so clever man, … compact, light and pretty extremely powerful. Minolta I did not want when I was young because I were not clever, is really the brand to discover again and again.

  • Very nicely presented snapshot in prose reflecting harmonic aesthetics. What you describe as wide angle portraits is previously defined as the “art of street photography”. Your enjoyable shots fit comfortably within the genre of street photography; or perhaps the ponderable sub-category of urban architectural? Whatever the label, you forgot to mention this extra wide angle manual lens’s great ability to pre-focus at the hyperfocal or zone focus distance for the most candid of street shots. ie with 400 film shoot at 1/15th at f4 focus set at 12 feet and everything beyond about 8 feet will be in acceptable focus. Then, while strolling along, shoot quick and from the hip or sometimes without even bothering to look through the viewfinder. This will open up a great world in those tight back streets of your hometown. Learn a couple of tricks to help stabilize without a tripod, use fast film and be ready to run.

    • Thanks John! Yes wide-angle lenses can be used in the way you describe, but run-and-gun, shooting from the hip is not my style, so I didn’t think to mention it. If I’m making pictures of people I like to have an interaction, but it’s just a personal thing 🙂

  • Really lovely images, Sroyon, not to mention the great review!

  • I just bought one today. It’s in pristine condition and for a very good price but I still hesitated so I read your review. You’ve convinced me with your well-written review and beautiful photographs. I know the lens isn’t what makes them beautiful, but it seems to have helped adequately so I hope it will work for me too.

  • Hi Otis, apologies for late reply, I missed this comment. Thanks for your kind words, and I hope you like your new lens!

  • My favourite wide angle in single reflex cameras is 28mm.
    On Praktica and on Contax i use a single coated Pentacon electric 29mm. Wonderful and inspiring lens, both with coloured or black and white film. It delivers nice pictures in all situations, indoor and outdoor, even in shooting closeups.
    On Minolta i’m searching for the right 28mm lens, actually i’m testing two different MD 28mmf2.8 ( they changed the lens design in the ongoing series ), furthermore a MC 28mmf2.5 and a MD 28mmf3.5.
    But in any ( shooting ) case i have a 28mm lens in my bag.
    Sroyon, thanks for the Minolta 28mm lens review. Like the portraits and low light pics very much !

    • Thanks Jens, I am glad you enjoyed my review! Yes the 28/2.8 had at least two variants that I know of (5 elements and 7 elements). I hope you find one you like!

  • Great review! I got an MD II version a few days ago!

  • Hi Sroyon,
    Thank you for your time to make such a detailed analysis of the Minolta lenses.
    I do have Minolta MD11 camera with 28mm f2.8
    50mm f1.7
    135mm f3.5
    I would like to use the lenses on the Fuji X-t3 as I have stopped using film many years ago.
    Any words of wisdom and or recommendations?
    Other than 28 becomes 42
    50=75
    135=202.5
    Thank you for your response in advance,
    Jan

  • Hi Jan, thanks for your kind words! I’ve never actually used a vintage lens on a digital camera, so I’m not the right person to ask 🙂 There’s a Facebook group called “Vintage Lenses on Modern Cameras”, if you’re on Facebook maybe you could try asking them.

  • Hallo Sroyon,
    habe in der letzten Zeit die – weiter oben im letzten Kommentar genannten – Minolta 28mm Objektive oft getestet.
    Natürlich immer auf Minolta-Kameras mit verschiedenen Filmen.
    Dabei haben für mich die MD 28mm f2.8 Linsen gewonnen, ich nehme jetzt nur noch diese mit auf Fotoausflüge. Das ist zum einen das Minolta MD I 28mm f2.8, das ist ein 7/7 Design. Zum zweiten habe ich das MD III 28mm f2.8, das ist ein 5/5 Design.
    Diese beiden Linsen sind in der Bildqualität sehr ähnlich, wie du in deinem Review ja auch schreibst. Ich kann beide empfehlen.
    Eventuell ist die Beschichtung beim MD III hauchdünn besser, weil die Flare – Resistenz besser ist, aber das sieht man nur auf wenigen Fotos mit extremem Seitenlicht.
    Das Minolta Rokkor 28mm f3.5 ( ich habe die MD II Version ) ist sehr schön leicht und klein, die 28mm f2.8 sind aber auch sehr kompakt.
    Dieses Objektiv ist mir positiv aufgefallen bei Indoorphotographie ohne Blitz, da ist es schon bei f3.5 gut.
    Aber Outdoor sind die 28mm f2.8 mindestens genau so gut und sie sind vor allem bei Nahaufnahmen besser als das f3.5.
    Ich schätze auch die halbe Blende mehr Licht, der Sucher ist auch etwas heller.
    Insgesamt ist aber das Minolta 28mm f3.5 auch empfehlenswert.
    Dann habe ich auch das MC Rokkor -SI 28mm f2.5 getestet.
    Dies hat aus meiner Sicht verloren, weil es a) deutlich größer und schwerer als die 28mm f2.8 ist und weil b) die Naheinstellgrenze bei nur 50cm liegt. Die 28mm f2.8 gehen herunter bis 30cm.
    Das Rokkor -SI ist allerdings bei Landschaftsphotographie zwischen f5.6 und f16 genauso gut wie die andern Minolta 28mm. Bei Offenblende und bei f4 sind die anderen 28mm aber besser, sowohl indoor als auch Outdoor.
    Meine Ergebnisse gelten nur für die analoge Fotografie.

Leave a Reply

Sroyon Mukherjee

Sroyon is an amateur photographer who likes making images with pinhole cameras, smartphones and everything in between. He also enjoys working on collaborative projects, alternative processes, and developing and printing in the darkroom.

All stories by:Sroyon Mukherjee