Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-17-2011, 11:36 PM   #16
Veteran Member
Mike Cash's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Japan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,952
QuoteOriginally posted by Quicksand Quote
Others upthread have pointed out that it's hard to see the entire viewfinder, including the info readout, without moving your eye around when a magnifier is in use. That's true.

I had good success with a magnifier on my K20D. But on my K-5, I find that while concentrating to focus, I'd often lose track of the straight edges of the viewfinder frame, and many of my shots would come out tilted. So I took the magnifier off, and I'm happier without it.
That's why when I bought my Katz-Eye screen (which I ordered three days before I bought the camera) for my K-5, I spent a few bucks more and had the rifle-scope style crosshairs etched on it. Worth every penny.





12-18-2011, 03:44 AM   #17
Senior Member
eigelb's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Italy
Posts: 174
I have a KPS 1,3x magnifier + F6-A spllit image Focusing Screen, it really improves manual focus a lot. With the kps the screen size comes near a digital FF but it is still smaller then an analog.
Did you calibrate your focus screen with the right shim?
12-18-2011, 07:20 AM   #18
Loyal Site Supporter
drougge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Malmö
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 787
QuoteOriginally posted by ptrenh Quote
I've actually never heard of CIF until you mentioned it. Neat trick, but I'd think you need the A pin shorted, correct? Is there a semi-permanent method that people prefer? I've never been able to get the foil trick to work consistently. Maybe I can finally use a flash too.....
No, why would you need that? You need the protruding pins shorted, or the camera thinks there's no lens (at least some models do), but that happens automatically with any K mount lens from Pentax and most from third parties.

If you want flash (and open aperture metering in general) you need not only the A contact shorted, but an aperture lever with the correct calibration. (Which almost no non-A lenses have.) (Or a lens with permanent stopdown, and telling the camera you use the widest aperture, probably also with aperture-dependant exposure compensation.)
12-18-2011, 07:48 AM   #19
Veteran Member
jolepp's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Finland
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,196
One reason for OVFs not being as bright as they used to be is that the AF sensor also needs its share of the available light. My understanding is that the semi-transparent mirror splits the light 50/50 (and loses a bit in the process), in other words this means losing one stop, it would seem that one more stop stop is lost from the mirror being APS-C size (~ half the area) as well (?).

12-18-2011, 12:06 PM   #20
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by TomB_tx Quote
After headaches with manual focus on my K-5, my setup has been to go back to film cameras. So much easier on an MX or LX. Then went back further to an H1a and found focus even easier on that.
Changed screen on my LX to plain groundglass, and found it helped a lot. I find a simple plain view easier to evaluate than one cluttered by "focus aids." So... plan to get a plain groundglass for my K-5, and give it a try again.
It's extremely unlikely that would turn out to be very helpful. The real reason you can focus better with the film cameras is the *size* of the viewfinder. The fact hat it happens to be made of ground glass is beside the point, and in fact, it's probably darker than most modern DSLR screens. But sure, a modern screen that had no additional etchings might be to some people's liking. I think Pentax may even sell one of those.
12-19-2011, 05:30 AM   #21
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,116
Marc,
Actually, groundglass can be much better than a modern screen depending on the lens. The microprism angles on the modern screens are designed for an average lens opening of f2.8 or so. With faster lenses they just don't show the focus point as well. The LX used to offer a special microprism screen with prism angles designed for fast lenses, which did help. My Leica R4 screen was designed for the f2.0 normal lens. When I switched to a 1.4 I was dismayed to find I couldn't see the focus lock-in as well as with the f2.0, yet the shallower depth of field should make the focus more distinct, as it always did on older cameras. When I switched the R4 to plain groundglass the 1.4 became very easy to focus. Yes, groundglass is dimmer than the modern screens, but it shows the exact focus point more distinctly with fast lenses and telephotos. Brightness in a viewfinder isn't everything.
But then I learned originally on groundglass screens, and judging sharpness with them does take practice.
12-19-2011, 01:35 PM   #22
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
True, if you shoot exclusively with fast lenses, the improvement in DOF rendering may be worth the price you pay in brightness. Although, hard to say for sure since your imoression that brightness is overrated is based on a large viewfinder; you might find it less true with a smaller one. Still, my main point is that any improvement you get there will pale compared to the improvement you get by the increasing in the *size* of the viewfinder image you see on moving to 135/FF, so it's a bit misleading to imply it's the ground glass that is the main reason your H1a is easier to focus than your K-5. Not that you actually said that, but someone who didn't already understand the significance of the diffeence in viewfinder size might have gotten the wrong impression.
12-19-2011, 02:30 PM   #23
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,116
Marc,

Agreed. When I first picked up a dSLR and looked through the tiny viewfinder, I was aghast. Didn't consider one again until I went digital with my Leica M9, and wanted to see how my old Pentax lenses would do on Digital. (Since Leica dropped their R line of SLRs and has no digital solution for those lenses.)

I found image quality of the K-5 compared very well, but the shooting experience left much to be desired. Good feel in the hands, poor fit with the viewfinder, worse fit with my old mind and habits.

12-20-2011, 12:14 AM   #24
Veteran Member
magkelly's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,905
I have a split screen on the K-x which helps me some. I'm seriously thinking about getting me one of those magnifying eye pieces now though because my eyes are just not as great as they were. I have a rather severe case of presbyopia going on right now and on top of that I've had a problem with allergies and having very dry eyes for a long time. I'm extremely allergic to ragweed and a few types of trees and unfortunately they're unavoidable here. I take allergy meds every day, twice a day but I always have a good case of red, itchy dry eyes no matter how many drops I use. I think I might be ready to use one. I'm straining a lot with my manual lenses now and I really do hate the idea of not being able to use my Takumars at all...
12-23-2011, 11:59 PM   #25
Moderator PEG Judges
Kerrowdown's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Highlands of Scotland.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 30,697
For me, yes to both O-ME53 & KatzEye with OptiBrite on all bodies.
12-29-2011, 01:51 PM   #26
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 63
Mike Cash,

Where did you order the customized Katz-eye?

FYI..Enjoy your photos on the tak site.

JB
12-29-2011, 05:22 PM   #27
Veteran Member
Mike Cash's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Japan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,952
QuoteOriginally posted by Take-5-JB Quote
Mike Cash,

Where did you order the customized Katz-eye?

FYI..Enjoy your photos on the tak site.

JB
Ordered from Katz-Eye Optics. See this page for examples of custom grid lines.

Be aware that there are cheaper alternatives to the Katz-Eye. Do a little searching and reading on "focus screen" before making up your mind what to go with. I wouldn't want you to lay out the bucks for a Katz-Eye on my say-so and then later find out you could have gotten a bargain screen from China off of eBay for about $30 or so. There are plenty of threads right here on Pentax Forums in which people have discussed the issue of focus screens every which way you can think of: to replace or not to replace; they love the split-prism or they hated it and went back to the original; the Katz-Eye is better than the cheap stuff; the cheap stuff is just as good as the Katz-Eye; the best screen out there is one from Canon; etc etc etc. Plenty of opinions and information out there to help you make an informed choice.
12-30-2011, 12:14 AM   #28
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,780
I am using a O-ME53 and focusing screen from focusingscreen.com.
The focusing screen will need shimming to get it to be accurate on the K5.

Currently I'm experimenting using LV and a Hoodman Hoodloupe (ie. China copy). This is by far the most accurate and effective method since its WYSIWYG.
Its also very stable since the Hoodloupe forms the stability 'triangle' just like a viewfinder would.
The downsides have been the following so far :
1. Switching between LV and other stuff is clunky
2. LV 'drinks' batteries.
3. Refresh rates in LV can be better.
12-30-2011, 01:15 AM   #29
Veteran Member
Mike Cash's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Japan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,952
I've read enough about the O-ME53 now that I decided to go ahead and order one myself.
12-30-2011, 12:35 PM   #30
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 63
Mike Cash,

Thanks for the reply. I have been doing a little looking over the last 6 months and you are correct that the opinions are across the board concerning focus screens and view magnifiers.

I started with film in the '70s (Fujica AZ-1, Pentax ES, and I used a Minolta STS 201 for a while) and loved the split screen focus. My eyes are older now and focusing without it is a challenge. I still like to use manual focusing alot with my older Pentax lenses. I go with auto-focusing lenses for fast shots because the no line bifocal glasses I wear can mess up a quick focus.

This is a great forum with a lot of talented folks, of which you are one. Thanks to everyone for sharing their skills, talent, and experiences.

JB
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, collar, dslr, film, focus, lenses, microfocus, minolta, o-me53, photography, split
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-5 Manual Lens Front Focus & Focus Beep woes fixed kneonx Pentax K-5 14 04-12-2014 03:47 PM
10 Reasons why manual focus primes are better than those new auto focus zoom lenses JoepLX3 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 188 07-25-2012 03:28 PM
Focus Ring on DA 35 macro makes a clicking noise; manual focus ... this normal? eadrian75 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 04-12-2011 12:51 AM
K100D Super - Focus point locked to center in Manual Focus ? JGabr Pentax DSLR Discussion 2 01-25-2010 09:41 PM
K10 Help Needed - Manual Focus Problem izzyinstl Pentax DSLR Discussion 2 04-03-2007 04:55 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:17 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top