Enter the EVF. I was just playing with my OM bellows and slide copier.
I was using the OM-1 as a control to try and assure that I could get
the same image in focus on the E-M5. I had no special lighting, just
sitting at the kitchen table with a light above and a white reflector
behind the slide copier to help illuminate the slide.
Truth be told I could see the image on the OM-1 but there was no way it
was bright enough to actually focus. The E-M5 has no such problem. I
just turned the exposure compensation dial up by 3 stops and had plenty
of light to focus. Then I accidentally touched the screen and fired the
shutter. The +3 stop exposure was horridly blown out. So, you don't
want to take an exposure that way but I could certainly see to focus (as
well as see the superimposed grid on the screen). :-)
Chuck Norcutt
On 5/14/2013 5:49 PM, usher99@xxxxxxx wrote:
> Fire ant pursued AG writes.
>
> I believe the 6D is able to take a Kats-Eye screen? Is that true?
>
> Takes same screens as OM5DII. Rachael at Katz eye in a previous
> communication implied they don't think it is worth trying to make FF
> Canyon FS's. There are 3rd party treatments to brighten a screen and
> probably some prism ones but that fouls up the exposure readings.
> Microadjusted chipped adpater on 5DIII is about as good as precison
> screen on OM5DII as best I can tell by paying attention to a month of
> posts with FM alt lensers and my experience with the latter cam. No
> idea on how microadjusted chipped adapters do on the 6D. Canyon could
> offer a few more choices of screens, IMO. Don't forget about the shims
> if necessary--ugh, ugh.
>
> Don't hold your breath for a Katzeye 6D screen
> Quote from RK communication about 4 years ago:
>
>
>
> "The Eg-S screen gains it’s better manual focusing by having a better
> diffusion profile on the matte surface, what some would call ‘focus
> contrast’. Basically, in a nutshell, things that are out of focus
> appear more out of focus in the viewfinder when the screen has higher
> focus contrast. All methods of increasing brightness, ours included,
> result in a loss of some of that focus contrast. Different methods lose
> different amounts of contrast for a given increase in brightness, and I
> do happen to think that the OptiBrite process is among the best in that
> regard. But no matter what the method, the gist of what you’re doing is
> making the Eg-S more like the Eg-A. You can hit some point in-between
> the Eg-A and Eg-S in terms of both brightness and contrast, but you’re
> not going to get the brightness of the Eg-A with the contrast of the
> Eg-S… physics just won’t allow it. To answer your question directly, we
> could theoretically apply the OptiBrite process to the Eg-S (or A)
> screens, but we don’t have an established set of parameters and many
> screens would have to be sacrificed to determine the optimum run
> conditions. Given the relatively low likelihood of coming up with
> something better than either of the two Canon offerings, I really don’t
> think it would be worth it. "
>
>
> 2-13 screen is still better, Mike
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|