I have an issue trying to focus the 2-13 with lenses at the 35mm focal
length. This seems to be the worst point for me. The 24/2.8 is also a bit
challenging in a rush, but fortunately, in both cases, DoF works in my
favor and exact focus is usually not that big of an issue. At 50mm and
longer, the 2-13 smokes everything else out there.
My OM-2S has the 2-4 screen installed, The "ground glass" portion in the
middle seems to work a little better for focusing than the rest of the
screen. Unfortunately, my eyes aren't as good as they used to be and I'm
finding it to be much more difficult to use without a finely adjusted
diopter. That camera, though, is pretty much in semi-retirement and doesn't
see professional action anymore since the common user-interface of the two
OM-4T and OM-3Ti bodies wins out.
For landscape photography, my all-time favorite screen is the 2-4. For
macro, it's the 1-4. The 1-4 is the closest to accurately rendering the
bokeh as I've ever seen in an OM body. For everything else, the 2-13. I
really disliked the 1-13 because the brightness difference between the
center and surround was so great that it affected my compositons. The 1-4
and 2-4 screens totally addressed that and the 2-13 is so close that it
doesn't get in the way, either. I'm mostly using the 2-13, but when I know
I'm going to shoot a lot of landscapes, I'll swap the 2-4 into the camera
of choice. People or event photography? I need the focus aids. I'll never
use a 1-13 again.
When used with the wider lenses, the 2-series screens just don't blur
enough to be much help. This is a problem if we are focusing by contrast or
trying to use defocus as a compositional element as Dawid does. In this
regard, the 2-series screen acts more like a rangefinder viewfinder. As
such, we need to go into previsualization mode instead of relying on the
screen to suggest ideas.
The old Nikon screens always had excellent contrast and focusability. My
dad's old Nikkormats still run circles around my OMs in this regard. But
there is no way that I'd switch systems or even add a parallel system to
gain this feature. It would have to be a whole package of features and
frankly, it would take a pretty incredible system to better what I have.
I have used several different OM focus screens through the years which each
have had distinct advantages and disadvantages. The above is what I have
used the most, but the following are of note:
1-1, 1-2. I think mine was the 1-2. This is a matte screen with just a
microprism spot in the middle. The 1-2 is identical tot he 1-1, but it has
different angling for slower lenses and doesn't black out. This was the
screen which lived in my OM-1. I really did like it but was superceded by
the 2-13.
1-5, 1-6, 1-7. I had the 1-7. These have no matte surface--they're totally
clear, but have the central microprism spot. This is a purely clear screen.
I really didn't care for it and was impossible to use with a cat lens.
Nikon had a focus screen when was entirely made up of a microprism surface.
It was fantastic for sports photography, but took a lot of getting used to.
The Olympus version is essentially worthless because the microprism area is
far too small to be useful. From a brightness perspective, the 2-series
screens are about the same.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|