[barondla]

Find the K-1 focus screen difficult to use with manual focus lenses f2 and faster. Seems like Pentax went for brightness and I need more contrast. Just found out the screen can be replaced. Anyone do this? What screen are you using and where did you purchase it?
Thanks!
barondla

[felixkh]

Find the K-1 focus screen difficult to use with manual focus lenses f2 and faster. Seems like Pentax went for brightness and I need more contrast. Just found out the screen can be replaced. Anyone do this? What screen are you using and where did you purchase it?
Thanks!
barondla

My friend and I have replaced the K1 screen with one from https://www.focusingscreen.com. There are split screen ones too.

[bilybianca]

My friend and I have replaced the K1 screen with one from Pentax Forums - The Ultimate Resource for Everything Pentax screen.com. There are split screen ones too.

Sorry, the link doesn't work. Can you fix it?

Kjell

Yes, and my advice is, leave well enough alone. I see you've started a new thread about this, but I can't help wondering whether you've read the posts on the previous thread. Also, my suggestion would be to search for similar topics to look at, because this issue has been discussed at length already.

[felixkh]

Sorry, the link doesn't work. Can you fix it?

Kjell

Alas, I am not the owner of the site. Even I cannot connect to it now. I believe the site is down. Will post again when I see that it is up.

The company is based in Taiwan and my friends and I have switched screens from K20D days till today. There is a split screen version but it is not at 45 degrees but rather at horizontal.

Here are some reviews that can be found in Pentaxforums.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/accessoryreviews/Focusing-Screens-Third-Party-c117.html?src=all

[Smoke665]

I also have the same problem with focus, making me long for the good old days of the split prism. I've also thought about the modification but wonder if it's more problem then it's worth. I know nothing about these, but I'm also considering this
Pentax O-ME53 Magnifying Eyecup 30150 B&H Photo Video

[Fernando Sousa]

I also have the same problem with focus, making me long for the good old days of the split prism. I've also thought about the modification but wonder if it's more problem then it's worth. I know nothing about these, but I'm also considering this
Pentax O-ME53 Magnifying Eyecup 30150 B&H Photo Video

The option Pentax O-ME53 Magnifying Eyecup looks good !!

[barondla]

Yes, and my advice is, leave well enough alone. I see you've started a new thread about this, but I can't help wondering whether you've read the posts on the previous thread. Also, my suggestion would be to search for similar topics to look at, because this issue has been discussed at length already.

I did search when the K-1 arrived 4 months ago. Found one thread, old, debating if the just announced K-1 would have interchangeable focusing screens. Pentax said no, so I dropped the idea.

Today Felixkh told me he had changed his screen. I searched 4 times today and nothing. Even though I had ads selling screens. Finally a search found a diy thread. I'd have to think long and before resorting to diy.

I'm willing to read other threads if they can be found.

I added the Pentax O-ME53. It helps, but I still find the K-1 screen hard to focus with f2 and brighter lenses. Harder than any of my other Pentax DSLR.

Thanks,
barondla

[Crooski]

Here you can order focusing screens, search for Pentax and then K1 Focusing Screen.

[Paul the Sunman]

Here you can order focusing screens, search for Pentax and then K1 Focusing Screen.

Seven options for the K1, including horizontal, 45°-inclined, and cross-type split screen! Nice to know.

There are detailed installation instructions on the web site, with many pictures. However, the instructions seem to have been translated by a robot and are barely recognisable as English.

see :

focusingscreen.com - PentaxForums.com

--and

Will a different focusing screen help? - PentaxForums.com

here's some other out-of-context quips I've posted earlier on the same subject:

=====

The problem with this kind of discussion is that people tend to assume autofocus in all situations. I had a similar problem and I found it difficult to communicate the idea of actual manual focus, i.e., focusing by peeking through the viewfinder and rotating the focusing ring on the lens without any appeal to the camera's intelligence. After more research, I discovered that this matches the assumptions of the DSLR makers. Pentax doesn't even use the phrase, "focusing screen" for that part that makes the scene visible in the viewfinder. It's called a "fresnel" because it's got a bit of magnification to make the viewfinder image bigger, but there's no suggestion anywhere that you could use the viewfinder to focus the image. I found one place where they said that the purpose of the viewfinder is to generally know what the camera's pointed at.

I've stopped trying, it's practically impossible for me, with or without glasses. My solution was to "go with the flow" and make sure all my lenses are properly "calibrated" and use AF all the time, imprecise and slow as it is.

I don't understand why people want a system that's harder to use, slower, and fuzzier than what you can do with a good split-image focusing screen and manual focus. To me the only real advantage to the DSLR lies in the elimination of film-related inconvenience and expense. I can take a couple hundred pictures without having to change rolls, I can see what I've done right quick, and I don't have to mess with chemicals.

=====

Having checked fairly recently, I'd say that FocusingScreen.com is the only option. But I don't recommend it. There are no split image focusing screens made for Pentax. What FocusingScreen sells are Canon screens that are pretty close to the correct dimensions, cut down to fit (in two of the three dimensions - the Z axis may vary wildly from what will fit in the camera). I put one in a K-50 that worked pretty well, and I got one for the K-1 which was a disaster - could not be used to focus at all because it was too thick. Even where it goes well, the installation is too much trouble, and their "shims" (needed to adjust for front/back focus) are really flimsy having been made of thin plastic. The ones I got were bent up (and could not be straightened).

I've also learned since then that Pentax cameras' light-sensing meter is directly fed by that central point in the screen which will be distorted by the use of the split-image screen. Pentax doesn't even refer to the thing as a "focusing screen", by the way, and it appears to me that they have no intention of your really being able to do manual focusing using the viewfinder. They refer to the thing as a "fresnel", because it isn't "ground glass" (they're all plastic anymore), it's actually got a graduated diffraction grating that has a magnifying effect, presumably acting as a Fresnel lens. ("Fray-nell", named for the French guy who invented it - a stepped lens with multiple sections, having the same effect as a larger conventional convex or concave lens, but with a flatter aspect.)

This is my very best favorite pet peeve about Pentax cameras - I've always been a manual focus guy, and I don't like it that they've made it so hard to do, especially now that my eyesight is beginning to go. I feel like I've been tricked, and I don't like it. But, oh, well, I'm learning to use "autofocus", which by my lights will never be as good as manual focus can be, but then it will work well enough for the average snapshot taker, and I guess that's good enough for modern marketing. (Grumble, grumble.)

=====

"In that case you could exchange the plane focus screen with a spilt screen. I havn't done it myself but I think I have read it is possible."

I have tried it. In the K-1, it was a disaster. The screen I got from "FocusingScreen.com" was a cut-down Canon screen that is smaller in width and length but thicker than the original. Just plain wrong size. Attempting to use the split-screen focusing aid was what got me to worrying about this (with concomitant testing and analysis) in the first place.

=====

"If focus is not right when manually focusing it's because the viewfinder focusing screen is not in the right place and needs to be shimmed, or the mirror is in mis-aligned. Having said that, the default focusing screens in DSLRs can't usually be relied upon to be accurate below f/4 or so, so unless you're using a very precise split-screen or similar specialised focusing screen then I wouldn't expect to be able to accurately focus with it, especially at f/1.2.
When you add shims, they go between the focusing screen and the prism - i.e. they decrease the distance between the focusing screen and the mirror, which moves the plane of focus forward. If the camera is already front-focusing, adding shims will only make it worse."

I suspect that Pentax shares your view regarding precise focusing using the viewfinder - hence, they no longer refer to "focusing screen", but call it a "fresnel" (theirs has a diffraction grating that provides a little magnification, a-la a fresnel lens). Documentation about cameras on the InterNet now all talk about viewfinders in terms of being able to see what the camera's pointing at, rather than the ability to focus the lens. In fact, there is a large number of so-called external viewfinders, which couldn't possibly help at all.

So my view is that they've done to cameras what's been done to telephones - the addition of new technology apparently designed to interfere with the effective use of the tool. I don't think that people don't talk on the 'phone much anymore not because they have suddenly developed an aversion to speech, but because using a telephone has become WAAAY too complicated and inconvenient. (Part of the "deep state" conspiracy to keep the peasants from being able to inform each other about the evils of politics, no doubt.)

Even at my advanced age and failing eyesight, I can still focus visually much better than any autofocus system I've seen - not necessarily more precisely, but faster and more accurately. With a real camera (i.e., 35mm SLR), since my left hand is already on the focusing ring and my eye to the viewfinder, focusing is done before I even have the thought to do something. With the K-1 for example, I push the button and wait for the lens to respond, and by the time it's found something, it's the wrong something or the proposed subject's already gone. Even with a manual winder, I could have taken three well-focused pictures with a Canon AE-1 in the time it takes to get one picture in focus with the K-1. (Naturally, a small prime lens can be brought into focus much faster than a long telephoto zoom lens. I'm thinking "on average", here.)

One might argue that I can still use the lenses in "manual mode", I can have my hand on the focusing ring, and so forth, but that's all wasted because the viewfinder has been designed merely to show me what the camera's pointing at. Actually attempting to focus the lens using the viewfinder (the main reason I wanted an optical viewfinder, and a big reason why I've got the K-1) is pointless (by design).

=====

[Tas]

This topic came up in another thread, and I suggested to the OP to start a thread to see who else has changed their K1 viewfinder screen as it's what I have done.

My apologies to the OP if you're wearing some flak on the topic, it's why I try and avoid gear topics and prefer to post in the photography focused threads instead. But you are getting honest feedback and that's gold.

As I also have experience in changing my viewfinder screen I thought I'd best add my experience in more detail to aid the OP in determining which way they want to go.

Around 2011 I had a thing for the Zeiss Makro Planar 2/100 and how it rendered images. I decided to pick one up around the same time I bought my K5. I loved using the lens but really struggled with getting focus right through the viewfinder. In the end I started looking for options and that was Katzeye and focusingscreen.com. The idea of changing the screen was poorly timed as before I decided to go with a change Katzeye wound up their business. That left focusingscreen.com so I chose an S type screen with framing marks.

It was easy to install as was getting unwanted dust into the viewfinder, something I learnt about whilst doing the change. I needed to swap the standard metal shim for the provided soft shims but they worked and are still in my K5. The S type was a huge improvement when shooting wide open so it did what was after. The framing marks were I think a mistake as I would have problems with exposure in portrait orientation where the exposure would differ to that when shooting in landscape. As I regularly shoot in manual it wasn't an issue that couldn't be easily rectified so I just learnt to deal with it.

So when I picked up the K1 I was hoping I wouldn't need to change the screen but decided to because I struggled with wide aperture focus again. I asked Pentax, they said no it can't be changed. I looked at how the screen is secured in the K1 and could see it was similar to the K5 but different. In the end I decided to give it a go but went with an S screen without the framing marks.

Again I had to swap out the shims and wondered whether the metal shims from Katzeye might still be held by one of the forum members as I thought that would be the best approach. Alas I couldn't remember who that was or find them with a search so I just used the issued soft shims again. As this is all easy to do I was able to install the screen, test focus, install the correct shims and confirm focus. It's simple and yes it's a modified Canon S type screen but it fits and it works.

My experience is that for my needs (which now consists of seven Zeiss manual lenses) the S type screen is an improvement on the standard screen. I haven't tested whether there has been any change to exposure or some other functionality as unlike film I can chimp and correct the settings to get what I need. The change of viewfinder screen has made it easier to see when I have focus and it makes the experience of shooting with manual lenses all the more enjoyable.

I don't have the experience and knowledge of many of the people who post around the forum including in this thread, so I will leave the technical commentary to those who know more than me.

Good luck with finding your answer, I hope the input from the forum assists in helping you decide which way to go.

Tas

[felixkh]

Doug,

When I changed my screen, there were instructions on how to do it safely. I had to add some sticker shims to the sides of the screen so that it stays in the centre. I had to adjust about 4 times and then I got it correct. You will not regret the change.

Well, ok; among those who've gotten good results with the K-1, did you test for front/back focusing? And if so, what relationship was there between the "point of aim" and the "point of impact" (if I may use an analogy to pistol-shooting)? Was the subject in focus when you went to look at the picture you've taken?

[barondla]

see :

focusingscreen.com - PentaxForums.com

--and

Will a different focusing screen help? - PentaxForums.com

here's some other out-of-context quips I've posted earlier on the same subject:

=====

The problem with this kind of discussion is that people tend to assume autofocus in all situations. I had a similar problem and I found it difficult to communicate the idea of actual manual focus, i.e., focusing by peeking through the viewfinder and rotating the focusing ring on the lens without any appeal to the camera's intelligence. After more research, I discovered that this matches the assumptions of the DSLR makers. Pentax doesn't even use the phrase, "focusing screen" for that part that makes the scene visible in the viewfinder. It's called a "fresnel" because it's got a bit of magnification to make the viewfinder image bigger, but there's no suggestion anywhere that you could use the viewfinder to focus the image. I found one place where they said that the purpose of the viewfinder is to generally know what the camera's pointed at.

I've stopped trying, it's practically impossible for me, with or without glasses. My solution was to "go with the flow" and make sure all my lenses are properly "calibrated" and use AF all the time, imprecise and slow as it is.

I don't understand why people want a system that's harder to use, slower, and fuzzier than what you can do with a good split-image focusing screen and manual focus. To me the only real advantage to the DSLR lies in the elimination of film-related inconvenience and expense. I can take a couple hundred pictures without having to change rolls, I can see what I've done right quick, and I don't have to mess with chemicals.

=====

Having checked fairly recently, I'd say that FocusingScreen.com is the only option. But I don't recommend it. There are no split image focusing screens made for Pentax. What FocusingScreen sells are Canon screens that are pretty close to the correct dimensions, cut down to fit (in two of the three dimensions - the Z axis may vary wildly from what will fit in the camera). I put one in a K-50 that worked pretty well, and I got one for the K-1 which was a disaster - could not be used to focus at all because it was too thick. Even where it goes well, the installation is too much trouble, and their "shims" (needed to adjust for front/back focus) are really flimsy having been made of thin plastic. The ones I got were bent up (and could not be straightened).

I've also learned since then that Pentax cameras' light-sensing meter is directly fed by that central point in the screen which will be distorted by the use of the split-image screen. Pentax doesn't even refer to the thing as a "focusing screen", by the way, and it appears to me that they have no intention of your really being able to do manual focusing using the viewfinder. They refer to the thing as a "fresnel", because it isn't "ground glass" (they're all plastic anymore), it's actually got a graduated diffraction grating that has a magnifying effect, presumably acting as a Fresnel lens. ("Fray-nell", named for the French guy who invented it - a stepped lens with multiple sections, having the same effect as a larger conventional convex or concave lens, but with a flatter aspect.)

This is my very best favorite pet peeve about Pentax cameras - I've always been a manual focus guy, and I don't like it that they've made it so hard to do, especially now that my eyesight is beginning to go. I feel like I've been tricked, and I don't like it. But, oh, well, I'm learning to use "autofocus", which by my lights will never be as good as manual focus can be, but then it will work well enough for the average snapshot taker, and I guess that's good enough for modern marketing. (Grumble, grumble.)

=====

"In that case you could exchange the plane focus screen with a spilt screen. I havn't done it myself but I think I have read it is possible."

I have tried it. In the K-1, it was a disaster. The screen I got from "FocusingScreen.com" was a cut-down Canon screen that is smaller in width and length but thicker than the original. Just plain wrong size. Attempting to use the split-screen focusing aid was what got me to worrying about this (with concomitant testing and analysis) in the first place.

=====

"If focus is not right when manually focusing it's because the viewfinder focusing screen is not in the right place and needs to be shimmed, or the mirror is in mis-aligned. Having said that, the default focusing screens in DSLRs can't usually be relied upon to be accurate below f/4 or so, so unless you're using a very precise split-screen or similar specialised focusing screen then I wouldn't expect to be able to accurately focus with it, especially at f/1.2.
When you add shims, they go between the focusing screen and the prism - i.e. they decrease the distance between the focusing screen and the mirror, which moves the plane of focus forward. If the camera is already front-focusing, adding shims will only make it worse."

I suspect that Pentax shares your view regarding precise focusing using the viewfinder - hence, they no longer refer to "focusing screen", but call it a "fresnel" (theirs has a diffraction grating that provides a little magnification, a-la a fresnel lens). Documentation about cameras on the InterNet now all talk about viewfinders in terms of being able to see what the camera's pointing at, rather than the ability to focus the lens. In fact, there is a large number of so-called external viewfinders, which couldn't possibly help at all.

So my view is that they've done to cameras what's been done to telephones - the addition of new technology apparently designed to interfere with the effective use of the tool. I don't think that people don't talk on the 'phone much anymore not because they have suddenly developed an aversion to speech, but because using a telephone has become WAAAY too complicated and inconvenient. (Part of the "deep state" conspiracy to keep the peasants from being able to inform each other about the evils of politics, no doubt.)

Even at my advanced age and failing eyesight, I can still focus visually much better than any autofocus system I've seen - not necessarily more precisely, but faster and more accurately. With a real camera (i.e., 35mm SLR), since my left hand is already on the focusing ring and my eye to the viewfinder, focusing is done before I even have the thought to do something. With the K-1 for example, I push the button and wait for the lens to respond, and by the time it's found something, it's the wrong something or the proposed subject's already gone. Even with a manual winder, I could have taken three well-focused pictures with a Canon AE-1 in the time it takes to get one picture in focus with the K-1. (Naturally, a small prime lens can be brought into focus much faster than a long telephoto zoom lens. I'm thinking "on average", here.)

One might argue that I can still use the lenses in "manual mode", I can have my hand on the focusing ring, and so forth, but that's all wasted because the viewfinder has been designed merely to show me what the camera's pointing at. Actually attempting to focus the lens using the viewfinder (the main reason I wanted an optical viewfinder, and a big reason why I've got the K-1) is pointless (by design).

=====

Thanks for all this info dlh. It puts screen changing on hold. I don't use spot meter as much as in the film days with the Olympus OM4T. Truthfully, all DSLR's spotmeters suck vs that system. Luckily digital gives instant feedback and it is often quicker to chimp than spotmeter a scene properly. Not always as rewarding though.

Thanks,
barondla