Hasselblad focus screen alternatives

[Cybertrash]

Hello Analog friends!

I've been using my Hasselblad 500CM for quite some time and generally I'm very happy with the camera. That said I have the original crosshair focusing screen and I think it is oftentimes a little too dark, which can make focusing tricky (especially in a dark studio). I'm curious as to what my options are focusing screen-wise when it comes to the Hasselblad, I know about the accute matte screens, but they appear to be incredibly expensive. Are there other options that would improve on the original screen? I've seen screens from East Europe available here and there, anyone with experience of those?

 

[FujiLove]

I had a similar screen in my 503 which I struggled to focus. I replaced it with an original older Hasselblad screen with a centre spot of prisms which I find easier to focus (sorry can't remember the product number). It's fairly obvious to see when the prisms are in focus whereas I was always back and forth with the plain screen to check whether it was spot on.

Unfortunately it seems you have to pay a fortune for Hasselblad screens that are easy to focus. The stock screen on my old Bronica SQ was a joy to focus compared to the Hassy. And thinking about it...my Rolleiflex is easier to focus than my 503 original screen and that camera is thirty years older! Damn Swedes

 

[Cybertrash]

Damn Swedes

I know right!?

 

[FujiLove]

I know right!?

That's brilliant...I've only just noticed your location!

Haha!

 

[Chris Livsey]

There are as you say "other screens available" but beware of what you wish for. Increase brightness does indeed make composition easier in particular with longer lenses with more vignetting on the screen and in dull light however the brighter the screen the less well the focus "pops". Indeed the very first series of Acute Matte were very quickly replaced by a second series that had slightly less brightness but improved contrast and made focussing easier as so many professional users complained about the new screens. They also has a more even illumination across the screen.To buy a screen specifically for those dark times is probably not worth it especially given the prices which you have noted, they were never inexpensive from new.
I have posted previously, at probably too great a length, on the screens here. I have no experience directly of the screens available from the likes of China and Eastern Europe but I doubt they meet the standard of Minolta.
You may be better looking for a standard screen with a focussing aid such as the split image, I wish I could point you to a site that is comprehensive in this but alas I am not aware of one.
Another note of caution, Hasselblad never coded (other than the "D" on the second AM series) their screens so you may pay for Hasselblad and receive a "knock off" and be careful buying a screen in a box, most often a user buys a new screen, replaces it in the camera, and the old screen goes in the box. Years later the box with that screen is sold as if the box description is accurate.
Standard screen with crosshairs is 42162
Standard screen with micro prism and split-image rangefinder 42218
First generation AM screens are 42165 with cross hairs, engraved not painted, and 42170 with grid and split.
Second "D" generation were 42204 for the one with cross hairs, 42215 split with a circle of microprisms and 42217 for the AM with grid and split.
Both Beattie and Maxwell also made "bright" screens that are still around, i had a Beattie for a while and did not like it.

Finally you should be aware that the AM screens are more critical of viewing angle, you need to be quite accurately vertical for the best result, unless using a prism finder that does that for you!!. Some users also report the viewing image tends to appear to float in space and is not as easy to focus on because of that, this seems to be very personal and others scoff at these reports.

 

[HiHoSilver]

Dang Swede (that's a gaff I'd make)

My 'blad experience started out with two bodies - both out of square & lots of focus error. Trying not to err in the usual ways, rather than blame the gear, I tied myself in knots, trying to get technique constistent, etc. While doing this, I spoke at length w/ Bill Maxwell about screens, blads, mono processing. One thing he mentioned - having to do w/ aging eyes is that if I use a prism, which one mattered alot to screeen brightness. The various prism finders lose light as they bounce from mirror to mirror to eyepiece. He recommended the magnifying finder - which has no mirror & views the entire film area. They don't eliminate the left/right reversal, but are very bright. When the bodies came back from service, most of the errors were gone - before I got the painfully expensive focusing screen. The Maxwell screen seems to deliver really well, though fragile is an understatement - I've been told they're an optical wax, though I can't be sure that's correct. The cost hurt the wallet pretty bad ($380), but it *is* a joy to use. If I recall, Maxwell claimed, and the service tech agreed - that the screen gives another 2 stops of brightness in the finder. My second body has the simple matt glass. I use it now & its fine - delivers well. But I'll always prefer the brightness of the Maxwell screen.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hello Analog friends!

I've been using my Hasselblad 500CM for quite some time and generally I'm very happy with the camera. That said I have the original crosshair focusing screen and I think it is oftentimes a little too dark, which can make focusing tricky (especially in a dark studio). I'm curious as to what my options are focusing screen-wise when it comes to the Hasselblad, I know about the accute matte screens, but they appear to be incredibly expensive. Are there other options that would improve on the original screen? I've seen screens from East Europe available here and there, anyone with experience of those?

I have used Chinese screens.They are inexpensive but dark.However the split screen is easier to focus with for me.

 

[obviouslygene]

I have used Chinese screens.They are inexpensive but dark.However the split screen is easier to focus with for me.

May I know where do you purchase chinese screens? If I'm allowed to ask, also which have you tried?

 

[RalphLambrecht]

May I know where do you purchase chinese screens? If I'm allowed to ask, also which have you tried?

somewhere on eBay;I forgot exactly where

 

[Alan Gales]

I had a 500/cm with both the original screen and a Beattie Intenscreen. The Beattie was a huge improvement! You might be able to find a used Beattie on Ebay. You do have to be careful because someone on the forum said that a lot of them are original Hasselblad screens in Beattie boxes.

Your two best choices may be to pony up for a Maxwell screen or to just sell your camera and buy a later version with the much improved Acute Matte screen. Expensive? Yes, but as we age so do our eyes. Consider it an investment in your future film photography or at least tell your wife that.

 

[Chris Livsey]

just sell your camera and buy a later version with the much improved Acute Matte screen.

Why sell the camera when the screens are interchangeable?

Note also my caution over re-boxed screens does extend to cameras, a common practice is to sell say a 501CM, that came with an Acute Matte screen, with a "plain" screen replacing it, read the description or ask otherwise it's going to be a sorry from the seller.
I do wonder where the OP is looking as they are available in the UK for only a little over £100 and I would have thought they would be more plentiful in Sweden but I'm sure he knows his market and that may represent too much.

 

[Alan Gales]

Why sell the camera when the screens are interchangeable?

Note also my caution over re-boxed screens does extend to cameras, a common practice is to sell say a 501CM, that came with an Acute Matte screen, with a "plain" screen replacing it, read the description or ask otherwise it's going to be a sorry from the seller.
I do wonder where the OP is looking as they are available in the UK for only a little over £100 and I would have thought they would be more plentiful in Sweden but I'm sure he knows his market and that may represent too much.

Instead of just paying for a new screen the OP may prefer to pay a bit more and upgrade the camera too. Not necessary of course but If the OP has been lusting after a newer model then now may be the time to upgrade.

 

[Chris Livsey]

Instead of just paying for a new screen the OP may prefer to pay a bit more and upgrade the camera too. Not necessary of course but If the OP has been lusting after a newer model then now may be the time to upgrade.

Indeed, any excuse will do

 

[JDW22]

Because of a recent user (me) error, I have a question for the OP. Are you making sure your lens is set to the maximum aperture when composing/focusing?

Last week I was out shooting and accidentally moved my DoF Preview Tab into the "stopped down" working aperture position I had set (f/11). I have always enjoyed the brightness and ease of focus with my Acute-Matte 42170 viewing screen and could not figure out why the viewfinder was suddenly so dark and the split-image focus was nearly impossible to use. I spent the better part of an hour frustrated over this "problem". Gratefully, I eventually realized it was operator error and I returned the DoF Preview Tab to the maximum aperture position and all was right with the world once again. To say I felt like a dolt would be a gross understatement.

The Acute-Matte screens are definitely pricey; however, I felt the 42170 was an unquestioned improvement over the screen that came with my 500C/M. I've been looking for a mint second generation Acute-Matte 42217 (upgrade of my 42170) for the better part of a year with no joy. It is even more pricey than my 42170; however, as I venture deeper into my 60's, I'm very open to investing in accessories that help improve my sight picture in the viewfinder. I've never tried some of the "other" screens available, so I can't opine on those. Best of luck finding what works best for you.

 

[Chris Livsey]

I've been looking for a mint second generation Acute-Matte 42217 (upgrade of my 42170) for the better part of a year with no joy. It is even more pricey than my 42170; however, as I venture deeper into my 60's, I'm very open to investing in accessories that help improve my sight picture in the viewfinder.

Luckily I bought my 42217 when they came out, it has been an investment!!
There is a 42165 for £135 from a reputable dealer UK which is low, the 42217 seem to command £300 ish!!

 

[rayonline_nz]

Rather than starting a new thread. Generally speaking what type of focus screen do you think are easier to focus?
Are split screen ones easier because if you can find some perpendicular lines it's nearly foolproof right? Without the split, you still have to look at it and see for yourself and decide when it is sharpest right?

Also I think I know what is micoprisms - what benefit do they bring?

How much does it matter in term of focussing? Some people use them handheld, do they always use the magnifying loupe. Does the manual focus ring give enough throw or does it still require micro adjustments?

 

[Alan Gales]

Rather than starting a new thread. Generally speaking what type of focus screen do you think are easier to focus?
Are split screen ones easier because if you can find some perpendicular lines it's nearly foolproof right? Without the split, you still have to look at it and see for yourself and decide when it is sharpest right?

Also I think I know what is micoprisms - what benefit do they bring?

How much does it matter in term of focussing? Some people use them handheld, do they always use the magnifying loupe. Does the manual focus ring give enough throw or does it still require micro adjustments?

Good questions but unfortunately the answers are going to be varied. I think a split screen with micro prism collar is the easiest to focus but some hate them because they clutter up your screen for composing your image.

The micro prism collar is visible until the subject is in focus.

The magnifying loupe is for critical focus or for when you have trouble seeing. I didn't use them much for hand held shots but now with my Mamiya C220f I do because I am past due for a new glasses prescription. Of course others will probably have different opinions.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

There are a few on Ebay. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Hasselblad-...456820?hash=item237701b874:g:DicAAOSwiDFYLKF4

 

[Chris Livsey]

There are a few on Ebay. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Hasselblad-...456820?hash=item237701b874:g:DicAAOSwiDFYLKF4

IMHO that is not a Beattie Screen it is a Hasselblad standard screen.
Compare:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Hasselblad-standard-focusing-screen-in-pouch-1/252688382127?_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851&_trkparms=aid=222007&algo=SIC.MBE&ao=2&asc=40760&meid=0921965ee5954b2aa0b660904d411c58&pid=100005&rk=2&rkt=4&sd=152320456820

All the Beattie screens I have seen have a gold edge rather crudely made, and I have owned one.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/INTENSCREEN...534030?hash=item2cb7b32d0e:g:UCkAAOSw-0xYXUlL

I think a classic case of buy a Beattie and install it save the "old"screen in the case. Looking at e-bay most of the "Beattie" are not. As I said above this is not helped by Hasselblad not marking their screens in any way.
Buyer beware.

 

[Chris Livsey]

Rather than starting a new thread. Generally speaking what type of focus screen do you think are easier to focus?
Are split screen ones easier because if you can find some perpendicular lines it's nearly foolproof right? Without the split, you still have to look at it and see for yourself and decide when it is sharpest right?

Also I think I know what is micoprisms - what benefit do they bring?

How much does it matter in term of focussing? Some people use them handheld, do they always use the magnifying loupe. Does the manual focus ring give enough throw or does it still require micro adjustments?

I prefer the Acute Matte with grid and split screen for:
a) brightness
b) composition grid
c) focus with split screen

I was brought up on split screen and never took to microprism they draw my eye away from the subject.
The split screen does need to be lined up to view without blacking out and does that more easily with some lenses, nothing is perfect.
On lines: mine is rotated so I focus on horizontal lines, personal preference. ( works better on eyes for example, for me)

How much does it matter? Depends on the subject, with narrow DOF and a definite focus plane required, a lot. With stopped well down and a general scene DOF will cover and zone focus may be best anyway. And see below.

do they always use the magnifying loupe: No, not if Zone and yes if critical but I will often focus then remove the loupe to compose more exactly.

Does the manual focus ring give enough throw: Usually too much, hence the rapid focus handles. Hard to find lenses with more throw, they can be very precise. As an aside: if you use one on a H series you get the autofocus dot, it is interesting to see the "in focus" dot remain lit while you edge the lens ring back and forward to get it spot on, by eye, with native H lenses it is better but they focus very differently, the V rack the lens helical in and out the H focus internally moving a lens group.

How much does it matter in term of focussing? Some people use them handheld: I am combining these because it is tied up with shake. If you shoot hand held at a slow speed no matter how precise the focus it isn't going to be sharp. If digital has taught us one thing it is how critical stability is for a sharp shot. Even at 1/250th the mirror slap is an issue handheld. I will often raise the mirror and crop later. Note the H series introduced a programmable shutter delay from mirror up to release. I don't know if the gliding mirror in the late V series made this better or worse.