John Austin wrote:
>
> Interesting observations, Winsor. I replaced the 1-13 in my OM-2S with a new
> 2-13 about two weeks ago and have had almost the opposite experience. The
> difference in brightness was immediate, at all focal lengths and with both
> fast and slow lens. Both indoors and out, in bright and dim light, focusing
> and viewing was much easier. I also tried it with a 2X converter, which was
> definitely easier to focus. The split image and micro-prism were still
> useable even in dim light with fast lenses. The focusing aids do "disappear"
> in both dim and bright light, but to me this is an advantage as they do not
> detract from the image as with the 1-13. They're still there and easy to
> find if you need to use them. The ground glass portion is also much easier
> to focus. The image snaps in. I don't know if our different experiences are
> due to differences between the OM-4T and the OM-2S, as I don't own a 4T at
> this time to compare. All in all, I'm a very happy camper. It's the best
> $36.95 I've spent in quite some time. Definitely a recommended upgrade,
> IMHO.
>
> Winsor Crosby wrote:
>
Yes! I have exactly the same finding with my OM2n and OM4Ti, I have been
searching for bright focusing screens for a long time. I have modified
the Canon AE-1, T90 Laser Matte, Minolta Acute Matte screen (for old
7000 camera) and Beattie screen for my OMs, they are very famous for the
fine and brightness, the Minolta Acute Matte screen is also employed by
the Has. 503CX. You can see there is no Beattie screen for Minolta, I
think one of the reason is they are not brighter than Minolta screen. I
have sold the Beattie for a long time because it is not brighter than my
Minolta one and with my Zuiko fisheye it gives very uneven brightness.
(I think it was due to the Fresnel ring, they are double in spacing as
compared to others).
When the Nikon F4 came to the market, they claimed the screen is very
bright so I have also bought a F4 screen for trying, but failed, because
the thickness is different. When I examine it under a microscope, I
found the ground glass surface has the same pattern as the Minolta one
(may be it was also made by Minolta).
When the OM3Ti comes, of course, I called the offical OM distributer in
HK every month to see when will they have the new screen for sale. For
the brightness, I don't think it is poor than the Beattie or Minolta.
And it is the finest I have ever seen. Now, I use the Canon screen for
my OM-2ns because they are very fine and no observable affect to the
meter reading. For my OM4Ti, of course the 2-13 and 2-4 screens. At
last, the 2-series screen is not all perfect, with my 300/4.5, both
sides of the screen are a little bit darken even your eye is at the
center of the finder.
C.H.Ling
< 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 >
|