[jbondo]

The reason for not offering screens for the K-1 is that the various screen for previous cameras vary the by etching or markings on them. Since this is handled by the viewfinder overlay there is no need to have different screens, or so the thought goes. Since no screens are officially offered to interchange the factory screen with I suppose that makes it non-interchangealbe.

S-Type screens are a different case, and their value is not in the etchings/markings, but rather in the fact that they accurately show DOF below ~F2.8.
(Virtually all other screens do not because they are optimized for higher brightness at smaller F stops. They accomplish this at the cost of being to accurately display DOF <~ F2.8.)
I have no interest in etchings or prisms. I only want an S-type for manually focusing very fast lenses.

[victormeldrew]

The reason for not offering screens for the K-1 is that the various screen for previous cameras vary the by etching or markings on them.

Regardless of the model, Pentax does not offer alternative focusing screens at all, only alternative composition screens. Many people would like better ways of manually focusing and a split prism or similar works much better in a lot of cases than matte screens do. It would be nice to have that option without hacking CaNikon products.

[Not a Number]

Regardless of the model, Pentax does not offer alternative focusing screens at all, only alternative composition screens. Many people would like better ways of manually focusing and a split prism or similar works much better in a lot of cases than matte screens do. It would be nice to have that option without hacking CaNikon products.

Call it what you like but the viewfinder ground glass is a focusing screen regardless of the etchings or focusing aids such as microprisms and split image prisms. If you don't believe me remove the "composition screen" from your Pentax and try to focus manually through the viewfinder.

It is unfortunate that Pentax/Ricoh does not offer screens with better manual focusing capabilities. They may not perceive the need since you can use Liveview for MF. Be thankful that there are hacks.

Or you could switch to Canon or Nikon and not have to deal with hacks - except for adapters and modifying your Pentax MF lenses.

Why gripe to choir when it's the choirmaster you should be talking to?

Six of one kind, half a dozen of another.

[zapp]

Interesting how many people are not hapy with their Pentax focusing screen. Looking at the post history of this group, these are quite serious Pentax users. While other options existed for APS-C bodies and still exist for K1 on a DOY basis, no solution is readily available. I shimmed my K5 (and was ready to shim K3, but it worked without shim) for Katzeye screens. With Katzeye out of business, I am looking for someone to offer a screen for K1. I would not mind to pay for installation which is a pain.

Are we able to identify a type of manual focus screen and who wants to have it fitted to his/her camera. This would allow us to approach Pentax or a service center to ask for a price for installation. A decent screen, shims and installation time will probably put you $200 back, but the result is worth it, as we know. Apparently you cannot make money on focusing screens, but with installation in a one time action, it should be worth doing so.

WHO STARTS THE POLL?

[stevebrot]

Or you could switch to Canon or Nikon and not have to deal with hacks - except for adapters and modifying your Pentax MF lenses.

Except that Nikon does not offer any options for its current model dSLR cameras, period. Canon and Pentax are the only makers of "small format" SLRs that offers alternative focus screens and Canon is the only maker who supports them for their FF models.

Almost all those Nikon focus screens at B&H are for retired models* and I do believe that all with focus aides are for film cameras.


Steve

* The only current model Nikon camera supported is the F6.

[Tas]

Interesting how many people are not hapy with their Pentax focusing screen.

I can't speak for anyone else and what motivates them to change the standard focusing screen, but my personal preference for a different type of screen was driven by the type of MF lenses I started using regularly that were faster than f2.8. To take advantage of the wider apertures was difficult without more errors in focussing and from that I ended up researching a way of improving manual focus and wound up fitting an S type screen in my K5. So for me the type of lens was the driver for my desire to change.

Tas

[vZwicky]

I thoroughly enjoyed using the Katzeye split prism after installing it in my K-50, and would love a similar option for the K-1. I'm hesitant to try one of the focusingscreen-dot-com offerings until I've seen some user feedback. I'm subscribing to this thread hoping that such feedback is forthcoming.

[felixkh]

There should be an older thread about the focusing screen dot com as there were a lot more discussions about it.

I had installed screens from this company for my K20D, K7, K5 and K30 bodies the last time.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/184-pentax-k-s1-k-s2/330132-focusing-screen.html

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/6-pentax-dslr-discussion/311068-just-ins...-my-k-3-a.html

Whole webpage full:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/search.php?searchid=19102950&cx=partner-...gscreen.com%22

[WPRESTO]

I'm a veteran Pentax user, starting with an Asahi Pentax S purchased before either the Nikon F or the Canonflex were released in the USA. I learned on, remain comfortable with, and greatly miss the all-microprism center spot. Switched my LX to such a screen very quickly, as I could not quite get used the split image circle. But, microprisms, like the split image wedge, don't work well when the aperture gets small. The deep downside of changing the screen of a DSLR: it can impact exposure accuracy, and may shut you out of some metering options.

[GeneV]

I should be so lucky. I do still have a small stock of genuine Pentax shims for recent APS-C bodies however should anyone need a set.


Steve

Might take you up on that. One of my K3 bodies has a Katzeye that does not exactly line up with the focus confirmation. What do you want for them?

[skyer]

It's well-known that the AF points of K-1 are rather big and it's almost impossible to achieve accurate focus on distant subjects that are not very big. So now I'm choosing a focusing screen that could help me in evaluating/correcting AF when it is needed. I narrowed my search to two screens: Canon S-type and Canon Ec-B.
Usually, people buy the S-type screen. I also like that it is plain. However, some say that it is not much more comfortable to use than standard screens, there may be miss focusing. Has anyone tried both of these screens? Which one is better?

[stevebrot]

It's well-known that the AF points of K-1 are rather big and it's almost impossible to achieve accurate focus on distant subjects that are not very big. So now I'm choosing a focusing screen that could help me in evaluating/correcting AF when it is needed. I narrowed my search to two screens: Canon S-type and Canon Ec-B.
Usually, people buy the S-type screen. I also like that it is plain. However, some say that it is not much more comfortable to use than standard screens, there may be miss focusing. Has anyone tried both of these screens? Which one is better?

The official Canon guide (PDF) may be downloaded from:

https://learn.usa.canon.com/app/pdfs/quickguides/CDLC_FocusingScreens_QuickGuide.pdf

I have owned an S-type screen and currently own several cameras having split-image and microprism focus aides. All work as advertised. That being said, I would temper one's expectations of improved focus performance on distant subjects. A lot depends on what is meant by distant, whether significant improvement in performance (sharpness and contrast) will result from better focus precision, and one's performance expectations. Consider:

• A 300mm lens on the K-1 has its hyperfocal at ~530 meters at f/5.6 and ~375 meters at f/8. What that means is that at those apertures and distances there is acceptable focus to the horizon and somewhat shorter distance towards the camera. Effort expended on fine focus may not pay a dividend in normal viewing.
• Atmospheric effects due to water vapor, warm air stratification, and dust/haze may degrade performance despite one's best efforts at focus and focus system used.
• Focus throw of your lens in the range 50m --> infinity. If the throw is short, manual focus precision will be difficult. For example, most 50mm lenses have very little wiggle room in that range.
• Focus characteristics of the lens, specifically focus effort and lash.
• Maximum aperture: DOF affects optical focus screen and split image performance. In addition, the S-type screen is specifically tuned for the range f/2.8 --> f/1.8 (quickly becomes very dim and grainy at narrower than f/2.8*) and the more sensitive split image screens will have a tendency to "black" out at f/5.6 and narrower.
• It is possible that a replacement screen may require a different thickness adjustment shim than what is currently installed. Focus evaluation and shimming may be a tedious and frustrating task.
• Focus shift: Some lenses will shift focus on stop-down due to poorly corrected spherical aberrations. Normally, DOF is expected to cover up the weakness, but DOF does not help when pixel peeping.
• Pixel peeping will defeat even the best focus system

Good luck!

Edit:
I Forgot! There is one more:

• Many complaints about poor optical performance at distance are actually the result of poor camera support rather than problems with focus; assuming of course that the lens is up to the task and in good condition.

Steve

* There may be a deleterious effect on stop-down metering with vintage lenses or regular metering when using other than constant aperture f/2.8 zooms.

[skyer]

Steve, thank you for your reply!

By distant focusing I mean focusing at 3-15 meters say with the FA*85 lens. At such distances, all AF points become too big in comparison with subjects one needs to focus at. Very often a focus plane appears not where it should be. (Actually, I'm talking only about the central AF point, others are even worse.) It corresponds to all my lenses (*24, 31, 43, *55, 77, *85, *80-200). I precisely adjusted autofocus many times, it's not with the adjusting for sure. This is a long lasted problem with all Pentax cameras - AF points are just too big. So that's why I'm thinking of buying a good focusing screen. Actually, a standard screen is rather good, however precise focusing is highly dependent on a lens that is currently used. For example, with the standard screen and O-ME53, I am able to manually focus 77 @1.8, but I cannot precisely focus *85 @1.4-1.8.or *80-200 @2.8 (just as you say). So my main concern is about these two lenses and maybe *24.
I'd like to know personal experience with the screens I mentioned above. Is it possible to get very accurate focusing with the S-type screen? Or maybe for very accurate focusing, it's still better to get a screen with a split image section? Also, is it possible to find a right shim or it will be too hard? Maybe there is no need in a new screen and it's better to buy a magnifying viewfinder that is better than OM-E53? If there is such a finder, what is it?

[Transit]

......then use your current screen as a template to cut it down, you will have the same result for less cost. Doing this neatly and accurately requires some skill and care I would imagine, not to mention risk.

steady hand and 100 grit belt
no worries

[skyer]

steady hand and 100 grit belt
no worries

Transit, your method is interesting. What about the easiness of focusing using such hand-made screens? What is better to use: plastic or glass?
I would like also to ask about the adjusting a screen. Is it true that because a screen is placed in a camera with matte side upwards, there is actually no need to adjust the screen? Only when an initial adjusting with a standard screen is poor then it is necessary to use some shims.