The screen is apparently on it's way now and should take about a week to arrive. I'll report back once I've had a chance to test it. Installation looks very similar to changing screens on the MX and LX, which I have done in the past and hopefully means it should be pretty straightforward.

From other comments I've read, the new screen should have no effect on AF and minimal effect on exposure, but I'm going to check it over thoroughly. Particularly as I recall people saying that the Tekade screen screwed up spot metering!

I know what you mean about other DSLR viewfinders. I was going to buy a D70 until I looked through the eyepiece and all I could see was the image at the end of a long tunnel surrounded by hundreds of flashing numbers!

Cheers,
Mike

Katz Eye Optics have just released a split prism screen for the Pentax *istD Series:

http://www.katzeyeoptics.com

It's a bit expensive at $100 + postage, but I ordered one of these and am waiting for it to arrive. I'll post a report when I've had a decent play with it!

A cheaper alternative might be to get one from the Chinese seller on eBay who's making them from Minolta screens (searching for "Split Image Focus Screen Pentax *IST D" should find the item).

There was also a German company making them from Pentax MX screens, but last I heard they were only supplying them if you bought the camera as well:

http://www.tekade.de/

Cheers,
Mike

I have the 1.4xS, 2xS and 1.7xAF converters. I used to use them a lot on film, but I can't say I've been impressed by the results of using them on the *istD.

The 1.7x is probably the best of the bunch and also has terrific "gadget value", as it allows autofocus using manual lenses. This is great fun to play with, but so far I've been disappointed with the sharpness of the results...

Cheers,
Mike

Thanks - I'm going to keep my eyes open for a good used one

Cheers,
Mike

I bought one when I bought my D in an attempt to recapture the glory days of MX + M40/2.8

It is a superb optic with great sharpness and "3d" quality but as John mentioned above, 60mm is not a particularly useful length and I don't find I use it as much as I used the old 40.

Paradoxically, it seems to work fine on film with full coverage (as long as the camera can work in the A setting, as there is no aperture ring on the lens) and is *much* better than the old 40.

Cheers,
Mike

For my sins, I have the A/2.0, A/2.8, M/2.8 and the K/3.5, but I don't find there's a huge difference beween them, particlarly on the *ist D.

The K/3.5 is the best of the bunch but I find it a bit too slow and it seldom goes on the camera these days. I usually use the A/2.0, but these are difficult to find and I would be inclined to recommend getting an A or M 2.8, as they are "as cheap as chips" and despite being reviled by the PDML crowd I don't think you're loosing much over the 2.0 or 3.5.

Mike

In the days of film, I mostly used just an MX + M 40/2.8. This was great for travel as it was so small, yet robust.

These days I tend to use the *ist D + FA* 24/2 for the same purpose. Unfortunately, this combo is quite a lot bigger and heaver than the MX & pancake (and a lot more expensive)!

I took this bare-bones kit on a recent trip to Egypt where it performed very well, but was probably a little too bare, as I was wishing I had brought a telephoto and/or the kit zoom as well.

Cheers,
Reuben0

I use the Katz-eye screen on my *istD:

http://www.katzeyeoptics.com/item--Katz-Eye-Focusing-Screen-for-the-Pentax-*istD-Series--prod_istD.html

It works very well, if a little expensive

To answer the question about why this is better than using the focus-confirmation light; I find that in low-light situations or when using a lens at a wide aperture [faster the f2.8] the built in focus-confirmation is not accurate enough. Using the Katz-eye screen and manual focussing, all my focus problems have been solved

Cheers,
reuben0