manual focus screen

I am considering purchasing a manual focus screen for my K-S1.
With the Pentax screen being my preferred choice.
I was wondering if any forum members have any experience with this type of set up, which they could share.
I assume this type of screen improves , accuracy when focussing with a manual lens.

Regards

I find live view with focus peaking, and digital punch in zoom, far better for this, but am interested in what you find.

From memory some focussing screens impact on metering functions, but I'm sure someone more knowledgable in this area can comment further on this.

I do miss the huge bright viewfinder of the film era, and the focussing screens they had.

I had a split image focussing screen from focusingscreen.com (similar to the Katzeye screens but a bit cheaper) fitted to my Pentax K200D. It was not more accurate than focussing by eye and using using focus confirmation, just a bit quicker. A big downside is that it totally screws up in camera spot metering - often a couple of stops out, so totally unusable. Centre weighted and matrix metering seemed to work OK. If I had kept the K200D, I would have removed the split image screen and replaced the original.

I now use a Pentax K30 and tend to use spot metering very frequently. I also find that live view with focus peaking (or even without it) works very well. For both of those reasons, I would NOT consider replacing the focussing screen in the K30.

Andrew

It doesn't help any Pentax owner presently, but a quality EVF is the best option for using manual focus lenses in my opinion. You get all the benefits of focus peaking and digital zoom right in the viewfinder, and the ability to gain up at night time when you can't see much through an optical viewfinder anyway.

I have considered a camera with an EVf. , it may not be old school , but suits. My skill level

Most mirrorless cameras have a sensor/mount depth that allows for adapters to use a multitude of legacy lenses.
I've heard nothing but good things from users with regards to MF lenses on these; with the focussing aids mentioned above offering a much better experience over the optical viewfinder alone.

I bought a Pentax mount for my Olympus EPL1 and it woks just fine but, to be honest, this makes the whole set-up unwieldy and in a way makes a small camera pointless. There's also the annoying extra crop factor if the camera's sensor is micro 4/3. Even a 28mm becomes, in effect, a standard lens. So I never use it.

My Canon EOS M came with two small specially designed lenses and a converter for their usual DSLR lenses but I don't own any of these and am unlikely to. I suppose long-time Canon owners might find the facility useful but small camera and large lens doesn't work for me.

I find manual focussing difficult, regardless of which camera body I use k30 or K-S1. My M50(1.7 sees little use. Seems a pity as legacy lens would have more appeal , would quite like a Takumar 50-1.4 or something from the A series.
Curious thought., I wonder how many of all people who defected have taken their Pentax lens with them.

Pentax legacy lens would have more appeal , if manual focussing was easier.

[quote:3496ace15f="andrewk"]I had a split image focussing screen from focusingscreen.com (similar to the Katzeye screens but a bit cheaper) fitted to my Pentax K200D. It was not more accurate than focussing by eye and using using focus confirmation, just a bit quicker. A big downside is that it totally screws up in camera spot metering - often a couple of stops out, so totally unusable. Centre weighted and matrix metering seemed to work OK. If I had kept the K200D, I would have removed the split image screen and replaced the original.

I now use a Pentax K30 and tend to use spot metering very frequently. I also find that live view with focus peaking (or even without it) works very well. For both of those reasons, I would NOT consider replacing the focussing screen in the K30.


Nadeem wrote

Pentax make a focus screen specifically for the k-s1 as they do for the k30 and other bodies , which i am interested in and Assume to some degree that improved results are obtained for manual focussing ,when using manual lens and when compared to "third party screens".

I wasn't aware that Pentax made a split image replacement screen. Can you provide a link to that?

The "third party" screens from focussingscreen.com and the like are cut down Nikon or Canon originals - so I do not think there is a quality issue.

Andrew

Should be a site familiar to you
RICOH-IMAGING.CO.UK /viewfinders/accessories....... no less.

I think you might have meant this page: http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.uk/en/viewfinder-focusing-screen.html

Although those are all replacement focussing screens, none of them look like split image screens to me.

Katzeye optics ( http://www.katzeyeoptics.com/cat--Pentax-DSLRs--cat_pentax.html ) and focussingscreen.com ( http://www.focusingscreen.com/index.php?cPath=25_149 ) have them if you do want a split image or microprism screen.

Best of luck with this
Andrew

Ive used a split image screen exactly like Andrew describes above and had the same experience. I think it's the actual split part that affects the metering so any make split screen would have the same effect. I would not bother with one of these screens again either.
I use my M50 1.7 (and several other manual lens) using either the zoom in live view or the confirmation bleep and get nice sharp results.

cheers Andrewk ...i misunderstood I could have made an expensive mistake.