In a message dated 3/12/99 12:49:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
bphuber@xxxxxxxxxx writes:
<< William,
I disagree somewhat with you on the diagonal split image. The advantage is
that you can use the screen for both
horizontal and vertical as you state. However, there aren't nearly as many
diagonal lines as horizontal and vertical.
In addition, the only time the diagonal split image wouldn't work is when the
diagonal of the split image and the object
to be focused on are both in the same plane. How often would that happen?
Or, am I missing something? If I am, please help me out. >>
I think this is just one of those things that is a matter of personal
preference. I keep a 1-14 in my OM-1 all the time (unless I'm doing
astrophotography). I find the diagonal split image very convenient. I wish Oly
had a 2-14. I use a 2-13 in my OM-2S and OM-4 - I find the brighter image more
than offsets the convenience of the diagonal split. I know that Beattie has a
diagonal split screen, but they seem awfully expensive even compared to the
Olympus screens, and I think I would miss the microprism collar. Recently I
find myself using the matte surface more and more for focusing, which is why I
just ordered a 1-10 and a 2-4 from John H. It's kinda nice to have so many
screens to choose from (although my wife might disagree)!
Paul Schings
Coventry, RI
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|