 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / June 2006Katz Eye focusing screen
Several weeks ago, Katz Eye announced availability of focusing screens for the D2X. I placed my order immediately, and they said it would take 2-3 weeks. It arrived today, exactly three weeks later. I haven't used a proper focusing screen in quite a while, so naturally, the first question was whether my expectations were clouded by nostalgia for the "good old days". They weren't. The thing is wonderful! I can focus with precision very quickly. It's like having a whole new viewfinder. Aside from the focusing aids (split prism with microprism collar), there is the matter of the rendition of the image on the ground glass. The regular "extra bright" screens the DSLRs ship with sucks for this; it looks like you're getting a lot more depth of field than you really are, and things don't snap into focus because of it. I got the Katz Eye screen *without* their extra brightness treatment, as I wanted the best possible "snap" and depth of field preview. What a huge difference! Stuff that's out of focus actually looks out of focus, and as you turn the focus ring it snaps right in. Even without any of the focusing aids it would be many times easier to focus just with the coarser ground glass in this thing. Accurate depth of field preview! I didn't think omitting the brightness treatment would be an issue since I almost always use fast lenses, and I was right. The brightness difference with f/2.8 or faster lenses is negligible. I do have one slow lens, a 300mm f/4.5, and with that, it starts to show; I can tell it's a bit darker, and it's slightly bothersome, but it's still far easier to focus with that. But if you were wondering whether to get the brightness treatment -- if you're into the super-slow super-zooms that are all the rage these days, definitely get it. The performance at f/4.5 is borderline, and using DOF preview to see f/5.6 shows that it pretty much falls down at that point. It's still usable, it just gets a little dark to be comfortable for constant use. I tried it in some situations where autofocus is problematic. Target smaller than the AF sensor? No problem. Target behind reflections in glass? No problem! Absurdly low light? NO PROBLEM! Target smaller than the AF sensor behind reflections in glass in absurdly low light? BRING IT ON! If you have a DSLR, there's just one thing to say: order one of these things RIGHT THE HELL NOW! What are you waiting for? If you don't have one, you're experiencing photography with a blindfold on! I keep picking up my camera and looking through it just because it's so very nice. And I can whirl around in my chair and focus on something almost instantly! And just scoff at the blinking green "AF no workie" arrows. http://www.katzeyeoptics.com <-- run, don't walk  SignatureJeremy | jeremy@exit109.com > If you have a DSLR, there's just one thing to say: order one of these things > RIGHT THE HELL NOW! What are you waiting for? If you don't have one, you're [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > http://www.katzeyeoptics.com <-- run, don't walk Wow, I wonder if they'd be interested in hiring you as their director of marketing/communications/publicity. I've been thinking about their focusing screens for awhile and that's one helluva testimonial. Are there any drawbacks? The installation isn't too tough, is it? Greg Signature"All my time I spent in heaven Revelries of dance and wine Waking to the sound of laughter Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons > Wow, I wonder if they'd be interested in hiring you as their director of > marketing/communications/publicity. Heh. I guess I am pretty happy with it. :) > I've been thinking about their focusing screens for awhile and that's > one helluva testimonial. Are there any drawbacks? The installation > isn't too tough, is it? That'll depend on your camera. The focusing screen in the D2X is made to be user-changeable, so it's simple to swap out. A "tweezer" tool came with the camera, and Katz Eye thoughtfully provided one with their screen as well, in case you've misplaced yours. The tool isn't strictly necessary but makes it so you don't have to touch anything with your greasy fingers. If your camera doesn't have changeable screens, I understand that more work is necessary. I don't see any drawbacks at all. I can't imagine why I'd want to put the original screen back in. Except that, since I got the non-brightened version, if I had to regularly use lenses slower than f/4, it might start to get annoying -- but then I'd have gotten the brighter one. SignatureJeremy | jeremy@exit109.com Jeremy Nixon wrote (in article <128n9skphnt4r99@corp.supernews.com>): >> Wow, I wonder if they'd be interested in hiring you as their director of >> marketing/communications/publicity. > > Heh. I guess I am pretty happy with it. :) Strange how the website of a company in the photography industry has so little visual content on their website. >> I've been thinking about their focusing screens for awhile and that's >> one helluva testimonial. Are there any drawbacks? The installation [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > necessary but makes it so you don't have to touch anything with your > greasy fingers. They claim installation on a D70 is fairly easy, and will make the tendency to underexpose go away. I've certainly seen that in a lot of situations the D70 will underexpose at 0.0 compensation and matrix metering and I typically dial in a bit of overexposure. What happens to the AF sensor positioning normally available, does it still work, or do you use the center only? > If your camera doesn't have changeable screens, I understand that more > work is necessary. I would imagine so, yes. :-) SignatureRandy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR) "The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw > What happens to the AF sensor positioning normally available, > does it still work, or do you use the center only? It works normally. The screen doesn't interfere with autofocus operation at all. SignatureJeremy | jeremy@exit109.com Jeremy Nixon wrote (in article <128ndhjb391hp80@corp.supernews.com>): >> What happens to the AF sensor positioning normally available, >> does it still work, or do you use the center only? > > It works normally. The screen doesn't interfere with autofocus operation > at all. Can you tell through the viewfinder which focus area is selected, or do you have to use the LCD on top to know what it is when this is installed? SignatureRandy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR) "The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw >> It works normally. The screen doesn't interfere with autofocus operation >> at all. > > Can you tell through the viewfinder which focus area is > selected, or do you have to use the LCD on top to know what it > is when this is installed? It all works normally. The focus area indicators are probably camera- specific; on mine, they are not on the focusing screen itself, so they remain visible. The lights that indicate which one is selected also function normally. I don't know if all this is true for all cameras, though. SignatureJeremy | jeremy@exit109.com >>>It works normally. The screen doesn't interfere with autofocus operation >>>at all. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > function normally. I don't know if all this is true for all cameras, > though. "The Katz Eye™ focusing screen for the D70/D70s has NO effect on existing viewfinder information. All viewfinder markings, including focusing points and on-demand gridlines will still function normally." With my Rebel XT I lose those viewfinder markings. Greg Signature"All my time I spent in heaven Revelries of dance and wine Waking to the sound of laughter Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons >>Wow, I wonder if they'd be interested in hiring you as their director of >>marketing/communications/publicity. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > If your camera doesn't have changeable screens, I understand that more > work is necessary. Yeah, it appears to be a little more work with the Rebel XT. > I don't see any drawbacks at all. I can't imagine why I'd want to put > the original screen back in. Except that, since I got the non-brightened > version, if I had to regularly use lenses slower than f/4, it might start > to get annoying -- but then I'd have gotten the brighter one. I may get the brightened one since I have an effective f/5.6 with my 1.4x converter on my 70-200 f/4. So the only real drawbacks on the Rebel XT is darkness at smaller apertures, losing the autofocus points, and slight overexposure in partial metering mode. Rock on, they take Paypal! As much as I hate Paypal it's by far the preferred payment method for my vinyl LP buyers so I have a bit of a slush fund built up in my Paypal account. The 68 records I've sold so far this year have allowed me to buy my Kenko 1.4x teleconverter along with the Benro carbon-fiber tripod items I've mentioned and I still have enough to buy a focusing screen. And I still have 200 more sought after records along with 100 $3 to $5 records to sell. I'll probably let the Paypal account grow until I can get a 30D, or at least a 24-105mm f/4 L IS lens. Greg Signature"All my time I spent in heaven Revelries of dance and wine Waking to the sound of laughter Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons >> If your camera doesn't have changeable screens, I understand that >> more work is necessary. > > Yeah, it appears to be a little more work with the Rebel XT. Officially the Rebel XT (350D) focusing screen is not replaceable. It is nevertheless trivial to do so. SignatureMåns Rullgård mru@inprovide.com >> If you have a DSLR, there's just one thing to say: order one of these things >> RIGHT THE HELL NOW! What are you waiting for? If you don't have one, you're [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> >> http://www.katzeyeoptics.com <-- run, don't walk >Wow, I wonder if they'd be interested in hiring you as their director of >marketing/communications/publicity. >I've been thinking about their focusing screens for awhile and that's >one helluva testimonial. Are there any drawbacks? The installation >isn't too tough, is it? And don't you lose the information normally available in the viewfinder? ---- Paul J. Gans If microprism and split-prism focusing aids are still useful on current DSLRs, why are the manufacturers no longer providing them? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Nikon does not even offer them as optional parts for their current models. Perhaps the marketing studies show that almost all their customers use AF, and rarely use MF. My main concern about a switch to the Katz Eye screens is the effect on the exposure system. Is the EV change constant, or does it vary with lens, focal length, aperture, etc.? SignatureJulian Vrieslander > If microprism and split-prism focusing aids are still useful on current > DSLRs, why are the manufacturers no longer providing them? Then they would have to admit that their autofocus systems aren't 100% effective in all situations. :) > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Nikon does not even offer them as > optional parts for their current models. That is correct. That's the niche Katz Eye is filling. > Perhaps the marketing studies show that almost all their customers use > AF, and rarely use MF. I'm sure they do. But I would think that Nikon at least would recognize that their manual focus lenses are still in wide use, and that a lot of us prefer some of them to the autofocus versions, if autofocus versions even exist (for some of the more exotic models). You can't get *any* autofocus version of the 50/1.2, for example, and Nikon doesn't seem to be very interested in making one. Ditto for the 35/1.4. And since any new model would be a plastic, "G" lens, I can't say it really bothers me all that much, especially now that I have the good focusing screen. Though if they would make me a 50/1.2 AF-S ED N VR, well, I'd go for that and live with the plastic and the lack of an aperture ring. :) (No, no, I'm not a follower of our friend RichA in his vendetta against plastic; but just hold one of the old manual Nikon lenses in your hand and you'll see what I mean. They don't make 'em like they used to.) > My main concern about a switch to the Katz Eye screens is the effect on > the exposure system. Is the EV change constant, or does it vary with > lens, focal length, aperture, etc.? I believe the pages at Katz Eye for each camera go over any effect it may have on metering. The main thing seems to be spot metering using the center focus point with slow lenses. Apart from that, the additional effects seem limited to the extra bright version, which makes sense since the meter will not be calibrated with that in mind. And they seem to be minor, 1/3 stop at most, variances with most cameras. SignatureJeremy | jeremy@exit109.com According to Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com>: [ ... ] > Though if they would make me a 50/1.2 AF-S ED N VR, well, I'd go for that > and live with the plastic and the lack of an aperture ring. :) > > (No, no, I'm not a follower of our friend RichA in his vendetta against > plastic; but just hold one of the old manual Nikon lenses in your hand > and you'll see what I mean. They don't make 'em like they used to.) I must agree -- but I view this with mixed emotions. I am not what I used to be either, and the more plastic, the longer I can carry it before I wear out. This is one of the things which makes the 18-70mm "kit" lens so attractive as a walking-around lens -- though at the moment I seem to be using the 35-135mm f3.5-4.5 more often, as I like the range for what I do, and I particularly like the push-pull zoom, plus the built-in macro mode which I find even more convenient than the built-in macro mode in my 28-105mm f3.4-4.5 > > My main concern about a switch to the Katz Eye screens is the effect on > > the exposure system. Is the EV change constant, or does it vary with [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > not be calibrated with that in mind. And they seem to be minor, 1/3 stop > at most, variances with most cameras. That sounds quite tolerable. Though I like using the spot metering -- but if it is only 1/3 stop, that I can live with. Enjoy, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- > I must agree -- but I view this with mixed emotions. I am not > what I used to be either, and the more plastic, the longer I can carry > it before I wear out. Good point. I'll take plastic for the big ones. :) > That sounds quite tolerable. Though I like using the spot > metering -- but if it is only 1/3 stop, that I can live with. No, the 1/3 stop was the "apart from that" thing. Evidently the effect on spot metering with slow lenses is significant when using the center focus point. The workaround would be to select another focus point for the spot meter. SignatureJeremy | jeremy@exit109.com > If microprism and split-prism focusing aids are still useful on current > DSLRs, why are the manufacturers no longer providing them? Correct me [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Perhaps the marketing studies show that almost all their customers use > AF, and rarely use MF. my guess is it would show a lack of confidence in their autofocus systems >> If microprism and split-prism focusing aids are still useful on current >> DSLRs, why are the manufacturers no longer providing them? Correct me [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> Perhaps the marketing studies show that almost all their customers use >> AF, and rarely use MF. >my guess is it would show a lack of confidence in their autofocus systems Sure, but in fact it isn't always easy to have the autofocus hit what you want in a crowded shot. I'd think that it would enhance "pro" models. Or, since the screen is so easy to replace, I wonder why Canon, Nikon, et al don't make it an option. ----- Paul J. Gans >>> If microprism and split-prism focusing aids are still useful on current >>> DSLRs, why are the manufacturers no longer providing them? Correct me [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >enhance "pro" models. Or, since the screen is so easy to replace, >I wonder why Canon, Nikon, et al don't make it an option. Since I'm still using cameras that are either manual focus only or autofocus with a decent focus screen for manual focus, I can't imagine using autofocus only. It would be, to me, like trying to take photographs with your eyes closed. Yes, most of the time, I let the autofocus system take control, but I find that the system can get confused at times and focus on the wrong target. Or I deliberately want to throw the main subject out of focus. Father Kodak > And don't you lose the information normally available in > the viewfinder? The focusing screen is completely independent of the autofocus and lcd info screen. When the focusing screen is out you can see the autofocus screen beneath it (as the camera is upside down for this.) >>And don't you lose the information normally available in >>the viewfinder? > > The focusing screen is completely independent of the autofocus and lcd > info screen. When the focusing screen is out you can see the autofocus > screen beneath it (as the camera is upside down for this.) We've lost context here and I don't feel like going back to check references but with a Rebel or Rebel XT, and I think the 20d and 30d, you lose the autofocus information, i.e. confirmation using the focus points. Greg Signature"All my time I spent in heaven Revelries of dance and wine Waking to the sound of laughter Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons > We've lost context here and I don't feel like going back to check > references even though that takes less time than writing what you did. > but with a Rebel or Rebel XT, and I think the 20d and 30d, > you lose the autofocus information, i.e. confirmation using the focus > points. Yes, yes, no, n/a. -Wolfgang > > We've lost context here and I don't feel like going back to check > > references > > even though that takes less time than writing what you did. No, I type very fast. I just tested and switching back to threaded view, switching to show read messages, and looking at some of the previous messages took much longer. > > but with a Rebel or Rebel XT, and I think the 20d and 30d, > > you lose the autofocus information, i.e. confirmation using the focus > > points. > > Yes, yes, no, n/a. Greg > "Wolfgang Weisselberg" <ozcvgtt02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message >> > We've lost context here and I don't feel like going back to check >> > references >> even though that takes less time than writing what you did. > No, I type very fast. I just tested and switching back to threaded view, > switching to show read messages, and looking at some of the previous > messages took much longer. Ah, yes the lomography way of posting ... -Wolfgang >>"Wolfgang Weisselberg" <ozcvgtt02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Ah, yes the lomography way of posting ... Thanks for teaching me a new word today. I definitely like some of the lomography I saw during a quick Google trip. I'm not getting the connection to my newsreading style, though. Greg Signature"All my time I spent in heaven Revelries of dance and wine Waking to the sound of laughter Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons >>>"Wolfgang Weisselberg" <ozcvgtt02@sneakemail.com> wrote in message >>>>>We've lost context here and I don't feel like going back to check >>>>>references >>>>even though that takes less time than writing what you did. >>>No, I type very fast. I just tested and switching back to threaded view, >>>switching to show read messages, and looking at some of the previous >>>messages took much longer. >> Ah, yes the lomography way of posting ... > Thanks for teaching me a new word today. I definitely like some of the > lomography I saw during a quick Google trip. I'm not getting the > connection to my newsreading style, though. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lomography Look for the "10 Rules of Lomography", especially the rules 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. (BTW: posting =! reading, posting => writing) F'up to poster, since it is OT. -Wolfgang >> And don't you lose the information normally available in >> the viewfinder? >The focusing screen is completely independent of the autofocus and lcd >info screen. When the focusing screen is out you can see the autofocus >screen beneath it (as the camera is upside down for this.) Thanks! ---- Paul J. Gans > I didn't think omitting the brightness treatment would be an issue > since I almost always use fast lenses, and I was right. The [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > point. It's still usable, it just gets a little dark to be > comfortable for constant use. My only concern with using this screen would be how well the AF would work when using a 2x TC with my 70-200mm VR on theD2x? I see the Katz-Eye site mentions that spot metering will be problematic with slower lenses, but I see no mention of AF issues. I'm wondering if the "brightness" enhancement will address or eliminate these concerns? You wouldn't happen to have a TC-20E II that you can try this combination on? I would like to get comments from actual users of this combination before buying the new screen. Thanks. Rita >> I didn't think omitting the brightness treatment would be an issue >> since I almost always use fast lenses, and I was right. The [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > can try this combination on? I would like to get comments from > actual users of this combination before buying the new screen. The focusing screen doesn't affect AF at all. Metering might be affected a little, but should be within the exposure compensation range. SignatureMåns Rullgård mru@inprovide.com > The focusing screen doesn't affect AF at all. Metering might be > affected a little, but should be within the exposure compensation > range. Thanks! That's good news. Rita > My only concern with using this screen would be how well the AF would work > when using a 2x TC with my 70-200mm VR on theD2x? I see the Katz-Eye site [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > TC-20E II that you can try this combination on? I would like to get > comments from actual users of this combination before buying the new screen. I use the "brighter screen" on a D50. The main issue with the brighter screen seems to be throwing the internal meter off 1/3 stop or so. On my body the meter was off 1/3 of a stop originally (within Nikon's stated tolerances for that camera) so the use of the bright screen actually counterbalanced the 1/3 stop I had dialed in before switching screens and I am back to "0" compensation. Autofocus seems to be completely unaffected. FWIW it's the best money I've spent. Installation on a "non-changable" body was quick and simple with about 5 minutes prep of the workspace, mostly for cleanliness. Rita Ä Berkowitz wrote: > My only concern with using this screen would be how well the AF would work > when using a 2x TC with my 70-200mm VR on theD2x? I see the Katz-Eye site [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > comments from actual users of this combination before buying the new > screen. I use the "brighter screen" on a D50. The main issue with the brighter screen seems to be throwing the internal meter off 1/3 stop or so. On my body the meter was off 1/3 of a stop originally (within Nikon's stated tolerances for that camera) so the use of the bright screen actually counterbalanced the 1/3 stop I had dialed in before switching screens and I am back to "0" compensation. Autofocus seems to be completely unaffected. FWIW it's the best money I've spent. Installation on a "non-changable" body was quick and simple with about 5 minutes prep of the workspace, mostly for cleanliness. I emailed them, asking for more detail on the instructions. They provided a link to a pdf file detailing the instruction. They asked that I not distribute the link or the file. I have decided the installation is well within my capabilities. Nikon D-50 > I use the "brighter screen" on a D50. The main issue with the > brighter screen seems to be throwing the internal meter off 1/3 stop [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Installation on a "non-changable" body was quick and simple with about > 5 minutes prep of the workspace, mostly for cleanliness. Thanks for the detailed answer. I'll be ordering the brighter screen as well. From what I remember there should be a setting in the menu that allows you to set metering compensation independently so that the external exposure setting will be at "0". The only bad thing right now is the 4-6 week lead-time. Out of curiosity, how well would this screen work when using extension tubes (Kenko) or bellows for macro work? The Katz-Eye site claims "The "Plus" version has a unique prism design which delays the prism 'blackout' phenomenon until well after f11." Oh well, I guess it's time to get the ball rolling. Thanks again. Rita >> I use the "brighter screen" on a D50. The main issue with the >> brighter screen seems to be throwing the internal meter off 1/3 stop [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Rita I could not find any mention of the independent metering compensation, other than using the button right next to the shutter release and the dial. I have a set of extension tubes coming but unfortunately the Katz Eye will not be here for more than a month. I also have a right angle viewer coming. I used to like using a twin reflex camera, old habits .... > I could not find any mention of the independent metering > compensation, other than using the button right next to the shutter > release and the dial. On the D2x it is b7 in the menu and is called "Fine Tune Optimal Exposure". I haven't looked, but I think it's the same for the D200. > I have a set of extension tubes coming but unfortunately the Katz Eye > will not be here for more than a month. I love macro so much that I wouldn't want to have a big black circle in the middle of the viewfinder. I want to be 100% sure this won't ruin my macro efforts. > I also have a right angle viewer coming. I used to like using a twin > reflex camera, old habits .... I was thinking about one of those as well, but I'm not sure that I would get a lot of use from it. Rita >On the D2x it is b7 in the menu and is called "Fine Tune Optimal Exposure". >I haven't looked, but I think it's the same for the D200. Yes, seems to be the same according to P. 156 of the "fine manual." -- Ed Ruf (Usenet2@EdwardG.Ruf.com) http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html > I love macro so much that I wouldn't want to have a big black circle in the > middle of the viewfinder. I want to be 100% sure this won't ruin my macro > efforts. What's the effective aperture when using the extension? Using DOF preview, the split prism doesn't turn into a black circle even all the way down to f/22 -- starting at f/16, one half or the other will black out depending on your eye position, but you can still get both halves good with your eye in the right place. Starting at f/8, there is some dimming, but not total blackout, in one half or the other with your eye off-axis -- again, when your eye is in the right place, it doesn't happen. The microprism collar stops being effective at f/5.6 (that is, the smallest stop where it works is f/4, at least from my observations), but the split image rangefinder appears to be useful to about f/11, and as I said, it never completely blacks out with your eye in the right position even to f/22 (where it is not useful for focusing). I made all of the above observations through a 50mm f/1.8. SignatureJeremy | jeremy@exit109.com > What's the effective aperture when using the extension? Using DOF > preview, the split prism doesn't turn into a black circle even all [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > I made all of the above observations through a 50mm f/1.8. I really wouldn't know what the effective aperture of the extension tubes or bellows would be after insertion between the lens and camera. Thanks for taking the time to test this for me. This is great news and I feel more confident in purchasing this screen. Rita > My only concern with using this screen would be how well the AF would work > when using a 2x TC with my 70-200mm VR on theD2x? I see the Katz-Eye site > mentions that spot metering will be problematic with slower lenses, but I > see no mention of AF issues. I'm wondering if the "brightness" enhancement > will address or eliminate these concerns? You wouldn't happen to have a > TC-20E II that you can try this combination on? I have the lens, but no teleconverter, sorry. However, the screen does not affect the autofocus system *at all*, so it should work exactly the same as without the screen. Since the effective aperture of that combination will be f/5.6, if you use it often, you might want to consider getting the brightness treatment. It's a bit dark at f/5.6 without it. If you don't use it that often it probably won't be an issue. SignatureJeremy | jeremy@exit109.com > I have the lens, but no teleconverter, sorry. However, the screen > does not affect the autofocus system *at all*, so it should work > exactly the same as without the screen. Great! > Since the effective aperture of that combination will be f/5.6, if > you use it often, you might want to consider getting the brightness > treatment. It's a bit dark at f/5.6 without it. If you don't use it > that often it probably won't be an issue. Thanks! I do use my 2x TC a bit, but not as often as I would like to. I guess for as much as I use it, as you say, "it won't be an issue" so I'll just order the screen tomorrow and take my chances. Rita >> I have the lens, but no teleconverter, sorry. However, the screen >> does not affect the autofocus system *at all*, so it should work [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > just order the screen tomorrow and take my chances. > Rita Toadally off topic, but in looking at the documentation for the Katz Eye, I notice that the images were for a D-70, not a D-50. What twigged my attention was a couple of devices not seen on my camera. I had a look at my camera and discovered that only one of the devices was 'missing'. Tried to find reference to what the other one was but found nothing. http://www.rudybenner.com/ross/D70_4_LG.jpg The item I am trying to identify is circled in YELLOW, not Green. I assume the green item is DOF preview. Can someone tell me what this is? R. >>> I have the lens, but no teleconverter, sorry. However, the screen >>> does not affect the autofocus system *at all*, so it should work [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > R. http://www.rudybenner.com/album/D70_4_LG.jpg No idea why the other link did not work. According to Rudy Benner <bit_bucket@rudybenner.com>: [ ... ] > > Toadally off topic, but in looking at the documentation for the Katz Eye, > > I notice that the images were for a D-70, not a D-50. What twigged my > > attention was a couple of devices not seen on my camera. I had a look at > > my camera and discovered that only one of the devices was 'missing'. Tried > > to find reference to what the other one was but found nothing. [ ... ] > > The item I am trying to identify is circled in YELLOW, not Green. I assume > > the green item is DOF preview. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > http://www.rudybenner.com/album/D70_4_LG.jpg O.K. Now that I can see it, it is the sensor which tells the camera body that older autofocus lenses with an aperture ring still present are stopped down to minimum aperture, to allow the camera body to be sure that it can set the lens to the proper aperture. A lens which has the ring *must* slide that towards the button circled in green before the metering will function. When it is not properly set, the aperture readout in the viewfinder will show "EE" ("Exposure Error" I guess). Most lenses with the autofocus capability will also have a sliding lock on the lens body to keep the aperture ring properly set. Of course, with the "kit" lenses supplied with either the D50 or the D70 there is no aperture ring, so there is no such lock, and the lens assures the body of this through the electronic communication from the "chip" in the lens. I hope that this helps. Enjoy, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- > According to Rudy Benner <bit_bucket@rudybenner.com>: > [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > Enjoy, > DoN. Yes, that is excellent. I will file that for later reference. Where did you find this information please. R. According to Rudy Benner <bit_bucket@rudybenner.com>: > "DoN. Nichols" <dnichols@d-and-d.com> wrote in message [ ... ] > >> > The item I am trying to identify is circled in YELLOW, not Green. I > >> > assume [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > lens assures the body of this through the electronic communication from > > the "chip" in the lens. [ ... ] > > I hope that this helps. [ ... ] > Yes, that is excellent. I will file that for later reference. > > Where did you find this information please. Mostly by analyzing my D70 and my older N90s (film camera which had been converted to digital) and seeing what the tabs on the lenses did. The D70 has the sensor which you identified, and the N90s has one up around 1:00 o'clock (while this is around 7:00 o'clock) which is moved as you stop the lens down below the maximum aperture -- so it can tell what the current aperture setting is. These are both part of the "AI" (Aperture Indexed) change which appeared on Nikkor lenses after the Nikon-F was replaced with other models. It came into use long before the chips in lenses. The manual for the D70 simply mentions that lenses with aperture rings and chips *must* be set to minimum aperture to work with the metering, and it was fairly easy to determine what the sensor was. I have a long collection of Nikon lenses and bodies (very few of which were purchased new), so I had a lot to study. I got quite a few AI lenses originally to use on Nikon F bodies (and those needed to have the half-moon clip as well to work with the Nikon-F "Photomic" metering system). After all, once I got the D70 (and even the N90s before that), I wanted to figure out how to use the older lenses with it. Note that the D200 can meter with *any* AI lens which can be mounted, because it uses the same sensor as the N90s. Both of these sensors make it impractical to mount an older (Nikon-F era) lens on the newer body -- unless the aperture ring is modified to make these tabs. I have been studying it in part because I want to set up to machine existing aperture rings on some of my older lenses to allow me to use them on the newer cameras. I also simply like to know how equipment works, so I study it when I get access to it. Enjoy, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- > According to Rudy Benner <bit_bucket@rudybenner.com>: >> [quoted text clipped - 73 lines] > Enjoy, > DoN. Good serious fun eh? > Mostly by analyzing my D70 and my older N90s (film camera which >had been converted to digital) and seeing what the tabs on the lenses How did you do that conversion? I thought that Nikon didn't make such kits. > Both of these sensors make it impractical to mount an older >(Nikon-F era) lens on the newer body -- unless the aperture ring is >modified to make these tabs. Are you talking about the AI modification? It is my understanding that if you try to mount a non-AI lens on some of the newer digital cameras, you will damage something. > I have been studying it in part because I want to set up to >machine existing aperture rings on some of my older lenses to allow me >to use them on the newer cameras. I also simply like to know how Have you actually done this? There is a guy named John White who does this sort of modification for a very reasonable price: www.aiconversions.com Father Kodak According to Father Kodak <dont_bother@IDontCare.COM>: > > Mostly by analyzing my D70 and my older N90s (film camera which > >had been converted to digital) and seeing what the tabs on the lenses > > How did you do that conversion? I thought that Nikon didn't make such > kits. *I* did not do the conversion. *Kodak* did, for the Associated Press, and they called the resulting camera the NC2000e/c. The normal back was removed from the camera, and an alternative one, rigidly mounted to a base which contained most of the electronics, a PCMCIA socket for a hard disk drive, and the batteries. The normal battery pack was removed from the N90s and modified to serve as a connector, with wires joining it to the base unit. (The batteries in the base unit were NiMH cells, but permanently installed, so you can't swap batteries in the field.) It was only a 1.3 MP camera back, so the D70 is a major upgrade. And -- it used a weird RAW format *only* (no in-camera JPEG), for which you had to use a plug-in for Photoshop (either on the Mac or Windows). The plug-in was available for free from their web site, but was pretty useless on a unix box, which I tend to use. Luckily, now there is a freely-distributable package in source code form (dcraw) which handles the conversion nicely on my unix boxen. I saw the camera when it was new, and wanted to get it to allow me to use my older Nikon lenses on a digital -- until I asked the price. $14,400.00. :-( Some years ago, I discovered that the AP had upgraded to newer cameras, and I got mine at a hamfest for $750.00 -- which when compared to the $14.4K was not too bad. :-) > > Both of these sensors make it impractical to mount an older > >(Nikon-F era) lens on the newer body -- unless the aperture ring is > >modified to make these tabs. > > Are you talking about the AI modification? That is correct. > It is my understanding > that if you try to mount a non-AI lens on some of the newer digital > cameras, you will damage something. That, also, is correct. An unmodified lens has an aperture ring which is pretty much a cylinder, with a bit of a ridge running around the camera end. The AI modification involves removing metal from the aperture ring, leaving two tabs. A fairly small one, which engages the "fully stopped down" sensor at about 7:00 (as viewed from in front of the camera), and a wider one, which tells the camera body how far the lens is stopped down from wide open (located at about 1:00 -- again from the front of the camera). And -- if you try to mount an unmodified lens on the camera, there is no notch in the aperture ring to allow the sensor(s) to project from the front of the camera. This pushes the sensor arms into the body of the camera, and is quite likely to break the arm somewhere inside the body -- or break something else in the camera. Of *course* it would not break the older lens instead. :-) Note that the cameras in the early days of AI rings had the sensor designed to fold out of the way when mounting an older lens on the body -- so there would be no damage. But Nikon seems to be of the opinion that nobody is currently using any lenses that old. :-) > > I have been studying it in part because I want to set up to > >machine existing aperture rings on some of my older lenses to allow me > >to use them on the newer cameras. I also simply like to know how > > Have you actually done this? Not yet. I need to make the fixture to allow marking the rings prior to removing them from the lens body for machining. I know *what* to do -- but I have not yet gotten around to doing it. (It helps to have a machine shop in my garage. :-) > There is a guy named John White who > does this sort of modification for a very reasonable price: > > www.aiconversions.com Very reasonable -- for one or two lenses. I have about ten lenses which I wish to convert, so the conversion adds up rather quickly. And I want both conversions -- one to enable them to work without metering with the D70 (which I already have), and the other to enable them to work (with metering) with my old converted N90s/NC2000e/c, and with the to-be-purchased D200. I happen to like doing the work myself. There is a site which offers AI rings for the later lenses, but based on the serial numbers, none of the ones which I wish to convert match, so I will have to modify them all -- or pay someone else to do so. Actually -- I can skip the 50mm f1.4, as I acquired an autofocus one used at a reasonable price, but most of the others do not match precisely any which I already have. Enjoy, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- >> Mostly by analyzing my D70 and my older N90s (film camera which had >> been converted to digital) ... > How did you do that conversion? I thought that Nikon didn't make such > kits. No,+ but Kodak did. Here is a picture of the result: http://hannemyr.com/photo/dcs460.html Signature- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://hannemyr.com/photo/ ] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sigma SD10, Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z ------------------------------------------------------------------------ According to Gisle Hannemyr <gisle+news@ifi.uio.no>: > >> Mostly by analyzing my D70 and my older N90s (film camera which had > >> been converted to digital) ... [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > No,+ but Kodak did. Here is a picture of the result: > http://hannemyr.com/photo/dcs460.html One of several models which they produced. Mine (the NC2000e/c) was made for the AP (Associated Press), and has some differences from the one described above -- although it *looks* very similar. The differences which come to mind are the ISO values (the one above is fixed at 80, while my NC2000e/c can be varied from 200 to 1600 ISO), and the above camera has 6.3 MP, while mine had only 1.3 MP. The SCSI interface and the ability to use any Nikkor AI lens and later are the same (and are mostly a function of the N90s body on which both were built). The two times when you do need the SCSI interface are: 1) When you want to reset the in-camera clock/calendar so the timestamps on your images are reaonable. 2) If you get an older one, and need to upgrade the firmware. For those functions, you need not only the SCSI interface, but the Kodak plugin, and a copy of at least "PhotoShop Elements" to accept the plugin. Yes, the "dcraw" software does an excellent job of converting the images from the in-camera RAW format (the only format which the camera will use), and whatever generic format you need -- with a set of accessory programs to convert the output format of the dcraw program (the unix PPM format) to the format which you really want. :-) Enjoy, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- > I haven't used a proper focusing screen in quite a while, so naturally, the > first question was whether my expectations were clouded by nostalgia for the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > you're getting a lot more depth of field than you really are, and things > don't snap into focus because of it. What about judging the bokeh OOF circles and shapes? My D70 had a gritty texture on the screen that made it very difficult to evaluate the character off OOF highlights and the D200 is much better in this regard. My vague memory of microprism focusing aids sounds more like the gritty D70 look than the clear D200 look. > I got the Katz Eye screen *without* their extra brightness treatment, as I > wanted the best possible "snap" and depth of field preview. What a huge [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > http://www.katzeyeoptics.com <-- run, don't walk |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.