Beattie Intenscreen

[pstake]

I have been contemplating putting one on my RTS II. I'm wondering if anyone has experience before and after installing one. The RTS has a fairly bright screen to begin with, and pretty good snap. That said, I still sometimes have trouble finding the focal point when using wide-angle lenses with already-large depths of field (namely my Distagon 28mm 2.8).

I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who has installed an Intenscreen on any camera (preferably 35mm but not necessarily a Contax).

 

[Les Sarile]

If the viewfinder of the RTS II is the same as the RTS which only has a magnification of 0.87X then perhaps you need a different camera with a larger viewfinder instead of just a screen?

 

[pstake]

I don't understand how that would affect anything, Les. Are you saying that magnification nearer to 1 would make focusing easier than having a brighter image inside the viewfinder at .87?

 

[cjbecker]

trust yourself.

 

[Les Sarile]

I don't understand how that would affect anything, Les. Are you saying that magnification nearer to 1 would make focusing easier than having a brighter image inside the viewfinder at .87?

To be sure, you have to try it yourself but the larger the magnification the better the ability to manual focus. An obvious example is by using a magnifier as shown below.

 

[pstake]

Thanks!

trust yourself.

Thank you, CJ!

 

[pstake]

To be sure, you have to try it yourself but the larger the magnification the better the ability to manual focus. An obvious example is by using a magnifier as shown below.

Well ... the magnifier for my RTS is a bit cheaper than a new focus screen but it's more conspicuous than I'd like. I've looked into it before, used to use a magnifier on my Pentax 6x7 ... but i quickly learned that its only practical value is in controlled situations such as studio portraits, long-exposure tri-pod work and the like. I shoot predominantly street and documentary work. I also have no intention of abandoning my RTS system.

Still would like to hear from folks who have installed Beatties in their 35mm ... come on ... i know you're out there!

If/when I end up installing one, I will post my impressions here (for future folks like moi)

Analog power!

 

[benjiboy]

Well ... the magnifier for my RTS is a bit cheaper than a new focus screen but it's more conspicuous than I'd like. I've looked into it before, used to use a magnifier on my Pentax 6x7 ... but i quickly learned that its only practical value is in controlled situations such as studio portraits, long-exposure tri-pod work and the like. I shoot predominantly street and documentary work. I also have no intention of abandoning my RTS system.

Still would like to hear from folks who have installed Beatties in their 35mm ... come on ... i know you're out there!

If/when I end up installing one, I will post my impressions here (for future folks like moi)

Analog power!

I don't have a 35mm SLR with a Beattie screen, but I have one for my Mamiya C330F TLR. and it's two stops brighter than the standard one, the only disadvantage is for what it cost me when I bought it new I could buy another Mamiya TLR.

 

[pstake]

Yes ... they are pricey, Ben ... did the increased brightness make it easier to focus? Does your TLR use a waist-level finder? (forgive me if that's a stupid question; i've never used one)

 

[benjiboy]

Yes ... they are pricey, Ben ... did the increased brightness make it easier to focus? Does your TLR use a waist-level finder? (forgive me if that's a stupid question; i've never used one)

I have the waist-level finder, and the prism finder and it works equally well with either, but since I have used the camera successfully for about twenty five years with the three Mamiya screens I already own, and have become used to focusing with them, in retrospect although the Beattie is two stops brighter and easier to focus with in low light and it's great to use I could have put the £200 ($380 US D) to a better use.

 

[brucemuir]

Wonder why they are so expensive?
Seems exorbitant to me.

 

[benjiboy]

Wonder why they are so expensive?
Seems exorbitant to me.

Without knowing what the production cost and how hi-tech they are are it's impossible to tell what the profit margin is, but they are excellent see here http://www.morco.uk.com/latest/beattie.htm, but if you want one you have to pay the price.

 

[pstake]

Well ... I ordered one. Will post my impressions in a few weeks.

I'm sure I could find other places to spend the $135 USD but being able to focus quickly in any light is the prime mover for me. Contax viewfinders are reputedly very bright to begin with but I've almost never used anything else for comparison. I used a Pentax 6x7, seven or eight years ago, on which I missed focus frequently, except when I had a lot of time for set up (ie. architecture / trip-pod work) ... and I had a Pentax Spotmatic SP II just for fun, which had a dismal, dark viewfinder. In low light I always seemed to be guessing.

But my primary camera has always been a Contax and I've always had fairly good luck with focusing but for most of that time I lived in larger cities / urban areas where a guy can get away with street photographing mostly unnoticed, even if he fiddles with the focus a few extra seconds.

Now I'm living in rural midwestern America and I find that when I'm taking street photos, I need to be quicker in order not to make people uncomfortable, even if they consent to having their photos taken beforehand. Being able to slide it into sharp focus, quickly, release the shutter, and move along, is my end goal ...

 

[benjiboy]

Well ... I ordered one. Will post my impressions in a few weeks.

I'm sure I could find other places to spend the $135 USD but being able to focus quickly in any light is the prime mover for me. Contax viewfinders are reputedly very bright to begin with but I've almost never used anything else for comparison. I used a Pentax 6x7, seven or eight years ago, on which I missed focus frequently, except when I had a lot of time for set up (ie. architecture / trip-pod work) ... and I had a Pentax Spotmatic SP II just for fun, which had a dismal, dark viewfinder. In low light I always seemed to be guessing.

But my primary camera has always been a Contax and I've always had fairly good luck with focusing but for most of that time I lived in larger cities / urban areas where a guy can get away with street photographing mostly unnoticed, even if he fiddles with the focus a few extra seconds.

Now I'm living in rural midwestern America and I find that when I'm taking street photos, I need to be quicker in order not to make people uncomfortable, even if they consent to having their photos taken beforehand. Being able to slide it into sharp focus, quickly, release the shutter, and move along, is my end goal ...

For street shooting I use hyper focal distance shooting with a moderate wide angle lens then you don't need to focus or even with practice put the camera up to your eye and still get a very high proportion of in focus shots.

 

[thuggins]

I have one for an OM, and believe the original Olympus screens are just as good. If anything, the split screen focus is easier to use on the OEM screens.

 

[ooze]

I had one installed in my medium format Rolleiflex. It's very bright, much brighter than the original Rollei screen, and the picture nicely snaps into focus. Overall I'm happy with it. The only downside, if there is one, is that if the sun falls directly onto it - which does happen with the waistlevel finder - there is considerable flare, so I have to manouver my head the block direct light.

 

[sandermarijn]

I received a (free) Beattie w/ grid & split image for my F801s a while ago. While I have no trouble focusing with the standard Nikon screen (type B), I was hoping for more accuracy with the split image when using large aperture lenses.

The Beattie left me a bit disappointed. While it is bright, it has less 'snap' than the Nikon screen, and the split image darkens easily (also with large aperture lenses). The split image in my Canon EOS cameras (OEM Canon) is much much easier to use and looks better made as well.

The Beattie screen is probably quite old (90's?) and may not be representative of current Beatties, I don't know.

 

[pstake]

Well ... I actually took the plunge and put one on my RTS II. My impression so far is the same as your, Sandermarijn. It's VERY bright and VERY clear, but less snap than the original. Will be using RTS II as my main camera for a while, and will report back here about my impressions as I get more used to it.

 

[sandermarijn]

I forget to mention that my Beattie screen (w/ grid & split image) threw off the F801s' meter by about -2.7 stops (!) on average. That's alright, sort of, but the deviation wasn't constant over a range of scenes (I checked against an F801 with the standard Nikon screen), which *is* bad. The split image must have been doing some non-linear messing with the meter (that I suppose is in the prism somewhere).

Fortunately it didn't cost me, otherwise I would have been pretty pissed (with myself, mostly ).

ps. Sorry about your disappointment pstake. Those original screens might not be that bad after all. Pity that you found out the hard way.

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

I forget to mention that my Beattie screen (w/ grid & split image) threw off the F801s' meter by about -2.7 stops (!) on average. That's alright, sort of, but the deviation wasn't constant over a range of scenes (I checked against an F801 with the standard Nikon screen), which *is* bad. The split image must have been doing some non-linear messing with the meter (that I suppose is in the prism somewhere).

Fortunately it didn't cost me, otherwise I would have been pretty pissed (with myself, mostly ).

ps. Sorry about your disappointment pstake. Those original screens might not be that bad after all. Pity that you found out the hard way.

Sounds a bit similar to how Nikon H and G screens require different exposures for different lenses (and/or different types of H & G screens).
How the Leicaflex SL manged to avoid such problems is a real wonder and one I'd love to hear an informed explanation for....

 

[SafetyBob]

So would it be correct to say that a Beattie would be more appropriate for a TLR/medium format type camera than say a 35mm SLR? I recall some posts way back about the possible improvement on a Mamiya 645 Pro with a Beattie screen but it's been so long ago. I do recall the discussion where an F4 user preferred some of the specific Nikon screens over the Beattie despite the slight and noticable increase in light......I recall the person saying the split screen worked better in the Nikon screens.

Let me be specific. I have noticed my 124G is much harder to focus now a days than the one I used in 1975 (yes when it was a year or two old), the example I have (from the original owner) seems much darker and yes, I do need a CLA on it, and no I really haven't looked at the mirror hard....but does a Beattie on a 124G really make that big of a difference?

Bob E.

 

[sandermarijn]

How the Leicaflex SL manged to avoid such problems is a real wonder and one I'd love to hear an informed explanation for....

I never even handled an SL but a quick search suggests that its light meter is located under the mirror, as opposed to in the prism, which would explain a lot.

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

I never even handled an SL but a quick search suggests that its light meter is located under the mirror, as opposed to in the prism, which would explain a lot.

Indeed!

Keep forgetting details like that...

 

[M. Lointain]

So would it be correct to say that a Beattie would be more appropriate for a TLR/medium format type camera than say a 35mm SLR? I recall some posts way back about the possible improvement on a Mamiya 645 Pro with a Beattie screen but it's been so long ago. I do recall the discussion where an F4 user preferred some of the specific Nikon screens over the Beattie despite the slight and noticable increase in light......I recall the person saying the split screen worked better in the Nikon screens.

Let me be specific. I have noticed my 124G is much harder to focus now a days than the one I used in 1975 (yes when it was a year or two old), the example I have (from the original owner) seems much darker and yes, I do need a CLA on it, and no I really haven't looked at the mirror hard....but does a Beattie on a 124G really make that big of a difference?

Bob E.

You may want to try waxing the screen. I have an Ikoflex that was difficult to focus with even though it has a fresnel. I waxed the screen and now it is incredibly bright, even indoors by lamplight. I did it to my Speed Graphic as well and it dramatically improved the brightness of it.

I don't know how well this would work on a 35mm camera but maybe I will give it a try on a crappy Yashica I have.

 

[pstake]

So would it be correct to say that a Beattie would be more appropriate for a TLR/medium format type camera than say a 35mm SLR? I recall some posts way back about the possible improvement on a Mamiya 645 Pro with a Beattie screen but it's been so long ago. I do recall the discussion where an F4 user preferred some of the specific Nikon screens over the Beattie despite the slight and noticable increase in light......I recall the person saying the split screen worked better in the Nikon screens.

Let me be specific. I have noticed my 124G is much harder to focus now a days than the one I used in 1975 (yes when it was a year or two old), the example I have (from the original owner) seems much darker and yes, I do need a CLA on it, and no I really haven't looked at the mirror hard....but does a Beattie on a 124G really make that big of a difference?

Bob E.

I think that's a fair assumption. I bet it would benefit your 124G. Even on 35mm the Beattie will help when you're using lenses with small apertures F4, etc.

I did some reading after I ordered the Beattie, about how the brighter the screen, the less snap it has. This has something to do with the roughness of the surface of the screen. Smoother = brighter. Rougher = more snap. The brighter it gets, the less snap it gives. The relationship is converse so one necessarily affects the other, unfortunately. The original Contax screen had great snap and was pretty bright as well ... but the Beattie is VERY bright and VERY clear. Mine is a split image, and the split image also is more difficult to decipher than on the original screen. All said and done, the time it takes me to focus with either, is about the same (I still have an RTS, with the original screen, for comparison). For microscopic focusing, I would probably want brighter.