From: Marc Lawrence <mlawrence@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [OM] Alternate focussing screen (was: Beattie Out of Business?)
Firstly, thanks for those that replied to my questions
regarding focussing screens. This newbie really appreciates
the non-condescending nor impatient help that you've
offered (I genuinely mean that - I *do* have experience
with the different atmospheres of other lists to which
I sub*scribe on several varied topics).
I don't know if he'll be embarrassed or annoyed, but
I'd particularly like to thank Wayne Harridge who's
generosity was overwhelming. I have a 1-13 screen in
my OM1 now courtesty of Wayne, and I definitely prefer
it *much* more over the original, and my partner who
is less interested in photography but occasionally
uses my equipment prefers it too (did I mention that
my partner has *always* preferred the OM1, or similar,
over my new wonder-camera the Canon EOS 50E? The hide! <g>)
Thanks Wayne, you're a deadset leg', mate. Changing
the screen was dead easy too.
Further thanks and responses below.
andrew fildes [mailto:afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] wrote:
The split image is supposed to be the most accurate form of
focussing that there is - if everything is in adjustment.
Even so, fast lenses wide open have a very shallow depth of
field indeed......
Thanks Andrew, that has been exactly my experience. I have
been finding it difficuilt to detect when the microprism
is clear, not helped no doubt by my tendency to squint (I'm
a short-sighted person who never where's his glasses/contacts).
I've not used a lens quite so fast before, especially on
manual focus. I've discovered that there is no point in
focus and recompose on something a different distance from
your subject when wide open (actually, I'm not that bad -
it was an accident, but it showed me how shallow it can
be!). My focussing skills have been shown by my early results
(but the only way is up, huh? :-) ). Thanks again for your
advice.
Jeffrey R. Keller [mailto:jeff@xxxxxxxxxxx] wrote:
When other objects are also in the microprism that are beyond
the desired depth of field it can be distracting. The split-image
can be helpful in this instance but it requires aligning two halves
of an image - not easy with some subjects.
I understand what you're saying. Split-image is not going to
be much help on something I can't find an edge to align on,
hey? Thanks Jeffrey for your opinion. As you can see at the
top, I've now got a combo-solution from a generous co-lister.
So, cheers, and thanks again all,
Marc
Sydney, Oz
< 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 >
|