Moose,
I don't disagree with anything you've said. I too think the coarser Beatties
work better with long lenses, maybe even better than the 1-7. On the flip
side, my favorite and most used wide angle is the 21/2 Zuiko. Set to 6 feet
and shut down to f/8, everything from 3 feet to way the hell over yonder is in
focus, at least good enough for guv'mint work. Don't need no focusing aids
with it, sos the Beatties do okay. :-)
Two of my Beatties have the 45 degree split prism, and I like them every bit as
much as the 2-13 for general use. The other'n is a plain matte with a grid,
which looks like it was cut with a chainsaw. It serves the purpose, but it
ain't all that pretty.
Walt
--
"Anything more than 500 yards from
the car just isn't photogenic." --
Edward Weston
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Walt Wayman wrote:
>
> >In my flock, I have both Beattie and 2-13 screens. I judge them equal in
> >terms
> of brightness and utility, although I agree with John that the 2-13 certainly
> presents a more refined appearance.
> >
> >
> I have a plain Beattie and both 2-4 and 2-13 screens. I can see where
> the Beattie's coarser surface might even help with very long lenses and
> it's certainly fine with middle focal lengths. Maybe it would work
> better with low contrast subjects. However, it doesn't work as well as a
> 2 series for wide angle. I wish I had made notes (although I probably
> couldn't find them, anyway) when I sat down and compared the Beattie and
> a 2-4 in a pair of OM-4 bodies with the same lenses. I seem to recall
> that the difference became apparent by 28mm and pronounced by 24mm.
>
> Moose
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|