Quote: Virgil: A previous post on this thread complained about the packaging and tooling that was included with the Katzeye screen when shipped. Here's a shot of how I received the screen- that little tool is a godsend, and the screen is in a sealed plastic bag, yet it was very simple to extract the screen for installation with the tool
My problem with the Katzeye tooling:
it was not as good as the Chinese screen tooling. This really got me thinking, because my Katzeye cost me $160 and the Chinese screen < $30 shipped. Also, the blue foam shown in your pic, which houses the Katzeye screen, had completely faded to a brownish color in all areas. except directly under the screen. This troubled me since it apeared the screen had been sitting a long time. I had gotten the Chinese screen first and thought by spending a whole lot more money I was upgrading--boy was I surprised!
I installed the Katzeye and it worked well. though it did not resist blacking out on my MF lenses to f11, as it was advertised to do. Also, though I did not have two K20 bodies to accurately assess screen brightness, I did my best switching the two screens in and out and could not say, for sure, one was brighter than the other. This really troubled me, specially since I went for the extra cost of the "Optibrite" treatment.
I am not saying the Katzeye is a bad product,
not by any means. I am saying I was shocked to discover, upon comparison in same K20 body, the Chinese screen at least equaled the Katzeye in performance. Also, I prefer the diagonal split prism of the Chinese screen over the K3, horizontal split prism Rachael Katz has selected.