Beattie focusing screen

I bought a beattBe focusing screen with gridlines in a Split Image in the middle for my Bronica gs1..

 

Very beautiful screen in his vertical and horizontal grid lines in a Split Image in the middle but there's a problem.

 

There are no scratches or nothing it's in wonderful shape for how old it is but I noticed the horizontal Split Image line seems very faint like I can hardly see it then there's a prism around it a circle that seemed it's not well-defined where the horizontal and vertical lines are black.

 

One I'm wondering are these lines attached into the glass or plastic whatever it's made out of or are they marked with some kind of ink.

 

Like I said the vertical and horizontal grid lines are very strong you can see them but when you get into the center where the split images it's very faint line like it's almost like it's been cleaned and it's over the years it's kind of washed away but that couldn't be the case if it was etched because it would be in the glass permanently and when you look through the camera that's what makes the lines look black so I don't know what to think I'm wondering if anybody else out there has a screen from beattie can tell me.

 

Michael

I don't have a Beattie screen, I've tried a few, and they did not work for me.

 

The split/micro-prism circle is purely prisms, no etch or marked lines. if everything within the circle is in focus, all the prismatic effects should dissapear, and you should see nothing but a sharp image.

I'm rather surprised you would buy a second-hand Beattie screen so soon after picking up a very expensive new Maxwell screen for your GS1? Of the three premium custom screen brands, you really can't get anything better than Maxwell: aside from being the only brand still in business, Maxwell is generally considered the best if you have difficulty focusing. The other two, Beattie Intenscreen and Brightscreen, were OK if all you needed was high brightness but they sacrificed some focusing ease and contrast for their higher light transmission.

 

All three typically start with an original camera mfr screen, which they then refinish/polish/coat with their proprietary technology to increase brightness. In Beattie's case especially, this tended to make any engraved additions like split image, microprism, or gridlines fade into the background and become barely visible. Customers who needed the checker grid to be visible would request the lines be re-etched, which results in the effect you describe: the grid is distinct and appears "black" while the central split image and microprism collar are near-invisible (aside from vertical lines spltting/aligning thru the split circle, and out-of-focus subjects looking grainy in the microprism collar, but clear when in focus).

 

In practical use, as long as out-of-focus lines do split in the circle, and align when you have perfect focus, the screen is working properly and the split will guide you to good focus even if you're having difficulty seeing the borders of the split circle or find it difficult to focus anywhere else on the screen. I tried both Beattie and Brightscreen for my Hasselblads, and was not happy with either: their metal frames both seemed a hair off spec leading to slight focus errors. I resold them and standardized on Hasselblad's own Acute Matte screens. The Acute Matte is also a compromise of brightness vs contrast, but its the best you can do for Hasselblad. For other "frameless" cameras I'd probably opt for Rick Oleson's newly-resurrected Brightscreen variation, or Maxwell if you can afford it.

Edited June 4, 2018 by orsetto

I gave Bill Maxwell my stock matte bronica screen he did some Hilux process to it that he told me would make it about 5 times brighter I paid him $150.

 

When I received it it did seem better then I was in my local camera store showing a guy I know my camera and he has a bronica gs-1 in the glass case for sale so we compared the screens which his camera had a stock screen might have the enhanced Maxwell scream and he could barely tell the difference and I could barely tell the difference there's definitely a difference but not a whole lot not a $150 worth. I mean his process definitely makes a difference it's a better screen and it was.

 

I bought the Beattie screen because my other screen is just a plain matte screen I been looking for a Split Image Screen because when I spoke with Bill Maxwell he says one screen is not going to do everything it's not going to be great for landscape great good for portraits you need a couple different screens depending on what you're doing.

 

Trying to find a stock bronica screen with a split image it's easier to win the lottery then to find one of those I did find one but it had a lot of scratches on it and the seller refunded my.

 

Then I ran into a guy in the UK that have a Beattie Split Image with the gridlines not a mark on it basically brand spanking new I thought okay I did a little research on it some people like the Beattie most people prefer the Maxwell.

 

For Bill Maxwell to give me a brilliant matte screen that he's well-known for and that I read nothing but very good reviews on its $400 I'm not dropping $400 on a screen.

 

Bill Maxwell told me that my stock bronica screen enhanced with his Hilux process is probably better for my particular camera then His Brilliant matte.

 

So I took a shot ordered the Beattie from the guy in the UK I absolutely love it it's two to three times brighter than my enhanced bronica screen by Bill Maxwell it's got to Split Image in the middle which I wanted I'm I'm happy with both screens if I have to choose one I would take the Beattie hands down.

 

Now I can do landscape portraits whatever I want to do between the two screens like Bill Maxwell told me one screen is not good for everything different particular screens do something better than the other screen so I agree with him on that point.

 

So then there is nothing wrong with my Beattie screen the grid lines are all black the Split Image in the middle is not black around it so it's perfectly fine I can mail focus with it I'm happy as can be.

 

I've mentioned to Bill Maxwell we had several conversations on the phone very good guy help me tremendously I had mentioned to him in an email that I looked through the other bronica camera and I don't think his screen is 5 times brighter like he claims it's maybe twice as bright definitely not five times.

 

He did not take kindly to that I thought he was a great guy we got along great we had a lot of great conversation but soon as I gave a little constructive criticism about what he did to my screen we basically we don't talk anymore any more and he refunded my $150 that I paid him to enhance my screen and I never even asked him to all I said to him was I just didn't think the process was as good as he told me it was going to be now if I had never look through that other screen I probably never would have thought anything different but once I looked through that other screen and I have them side-by-side it's not worth $150.

 

So he obviously took offense to me stating my opinion on his screen I told him that I liked it I'm happy with it I just don't think it's as good as he claimed so we've on.

 

I much prefer the Beattie screen over the enhanced bronica screen all day long the Beattie is much better.

Edited June 5, 2018 by michael_radika

Ah, now I understand: in your other thread I somehow got the idea the screen you sent to Maxwell already had a split image. If that one was plain, I can see why you would also want an additional split image screen. Glad to hear you found a nice deal on the Beattie and that you're very happy with it! The ratings from most medium format screen buyers usually favored Maxwell first, then Brightscreen, then Beattie. But of course different cameras and photographers might flip that ranking: larger 6x7 cameras might need the extra raw brightness of the Beattie more than the subtle refinements of the other two brands. Even with Hasselblad users, there's disagreement as to whether the pricey Acute Mattes are as overall accurate or easy to focus as the older ground glass screens re-finished: so many factors can influence performance.

 

You raise an important point that can be confusing with Maxwell: he offers more than one "grade" of screen. Without knowing the specific screen being discussed (HiLuxe, Brilliant Matte, etc), opinions may not synchronize. The same applies with some other third-party screens: they sometimes change their process which then alters the performance (making comparison threads like this one tricky). In your case, it seemed as it you ordered the Brilliant Matte screen a few weeks ago: it would have been unusual to reject that in favor of an old Beattie. The HiLux is more in line with other brand screens: some people (like you) find its performance good but not spectacular.

 

Don't be too upset that Bill Maxwell seemed defensive when you expressed your concerns. All these technicians who still repair medium format cameras or make screens for them will be a little sensitive to criticism of their work sometimes. The bigger the name, the nicer they usually are, but anybody can have a bad day. As more of them retire, the few who are left get more business than they can handle, which can be stressful. Maxwell issued you a refund, and you found your perfect screen at last, so all's well that ends well. Enjoy your brighter Bronica!

screens are a bit fussy and not all replacement are alike. claims of increased brightness comes with some side effects.

 

an interesting screen swap in a yashicamat from the standard ground glass to a fresnell proved you dont have to spend a fortune.

 

a guy bought a cheap no name camera split image frsnell off ebay for $6 new. it was over size so i cut it to fit, carefully centering it. it was bright and it did improve the viewing experiance... but you had to be sure your eye was dead center with it or it would black out.

 

so expect a compromise regardless of which screens you chose.

 

edit: some screens require the vf and film plane be refocused.

I've also encountered situations where the center brightness dramatically improved, but the edges darkened so it was like looking down a tunnel.

I have a beattie with split image in my Pentax 67 as well as a Maxwell with split image in two Rolleiflexes. I actually llike the Beattie better because it doesn't seem so clear. I also notice that the split image of the Maxwell screens is more distinct in one Rollei than the other. With one it is very easy to see and focus with, in the other the split image is pretty faint and I can lose it in whatever image I am looking at. Just anecdotal info that probably doesn't help.

Yeah my Beattie is good like I said the grid lines are very defined but the Split Image in the center is not as the fine but it's still very easy to focus on something with.

 

And make it all just comes down to Personal Taste what works for one may not work for the other.

Thanks for the discussion, it's very nice guys!)

I'm looking for a bright screen for rb67 for mamiya, because the native screen with the grid is very, very dark and muddy, I don’t see the focus at all, even with a large magnifying glass. Beattie - its best of the best?

All screens for medium format cameras involve a compromise: significantly more brightness comes at a cost, both in money and usability. The Beattie screens, depending on vintage, can be a mixed bag with some of the same annoyances that come with the legendary Acute Matte for Hasselblad (intrusive vignetting with wide angle lenses, ultra critical eye position requirements, perverse difficulty in nailing focus despite the brighter image, etc).

 

The RB67 compounds these variables with its slow-aperture lenses and bellows focus system: theres only so much improvement you can realistically obtain. I'd strongly recommend not spending a large amount of money on a replacement screen: if you do, be sure to buy from a source that will accept a return for refund if you're disappointed. The later optional Mamiya-brand RB screens (which came in silver-color packaging with diagonal Mamiya logo) are actually pretty good: versions with a split image center focus aid tend to be brighter than the standard plain or grid screen. Bright enough that many Rolleiflex TLR owners trim them to fit, instead of buying Beattie type screens.

 

So you might try a more recent genuine-Mamiya screen first, before looking at expensive third-party alternatives. Japanese sellers on eBay occasionally have the latest version RB screens in their listings, often brand new old stock.

One I'm wondering are these lines attached into the glass or plastic whatever it's made out of or are they marked with some kind of ink.

 

Laser-etched. Nothing drawn on (nor should it be!) or cut on. Beattie screens were extremely troublesome in a few cameras years ago, particularly the EOS 1N. Metering errors in the over- range were very common and tended to blunt the benefits the screens provided in extra brightness.

 

If there is poor accuity in the central area of the screen, you should carefully check the seating of the screen. Just a very tiny amount of misalignment can give BIG problems with precision focusing.

Re.: Beattie Screens:

 

I've been looking to buy a Beattie focusing screen for my Bronica ETRS, but they seem to no longer exist. Do you know where I can obtain one?