Peter Leyssens wrote:
> Is it really so that the image 'snaps' into focus with the 2-4 ? Like
> with the microprisms of the 1-13, but more subtle ?
Yes, under good conditions the focus real snaps in, this is much better
then any microprism spot, it´s in the same time subtle and more
efective, because you are able to use the whole screen for focusing.
Under bad, dark, low contrast, situations it´s not as good working as a
splitscreen or even an conventional matescreen in combination with an
bright lens. I tested this too with slow wideangles and I found out that
I need the splitscreen to focus under bad conditions, but I have to
admit, that the new matescreen looks better with slow lenses.
For me, the split- microprism spot of the 2-13 is less disturbing as the
one on the 1-13, because the new mattescreen has the same brigthness as
the spot.
> I like to be very
> sure about my focus, because I use it extensively to determine my DOF.
I´m not shure if the new screen gives an correct impression of the DOF
stoped down, because of his special structure. In my impression the
bokeh of the old screens is better, because of the gradual shift to
unsharpness, compared to the snapy, rapid shift with the new screens.
Even this post sounds a little bit negativ, you should try the new
screens, they are special (I love them) but not more expensive than an
ordinary OM screen and definitly much cheaper than an Beattie or
Brightscreen. My only wish to Olympus would be, that they produce an
2-10 and an 2-3 with grid.
Richard
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|