>I actually have another question I hope someone has an answer to. My
>husband has a very old Minolta with a Promaster Auto zoom 85~210, F 38
>Macro. Just out of curiosity I picked up his camera and aimed it at my
>computer from across the room. At 210, I could actually make out a few
>words and I could read the words that were in bold print very clearly.
>I then used my camera with the Tamron 100~300, with the lens at 300, and
>was surprised that I could not read anything. The computer appeared a
>little closer in the view finder, but the print was much less clear. How
>is it possible that a lens that should magnify more and bring the
>subject closer does not do as well as a lens with less magnification?
There are three possibilities (well, maybe 4...;-) I can think of:
- the Tamron is about 1.5 stops slower than the Promaster at their
long ends...
- the Promaster may be sharper in the center at its long end...
- older camera viewfinders are often noticeably sharper than those
in newer cameras... (I vote for this one as the most likely
answer - I'm not fond of recent Minolta [and other] viewfinders,
mostly due to lack of sharpness...)
- the greater length of the 300mm may be enough harder to hold
steady that the image looks less sharp in the finder...
It could be a combination of a few of the avove...