Broncia SQ-A - bright screen or not?

I recently bought a SQ-A camera from ebay. It is my first medium format camera

and I find focusing with it a little slow and difficult. I saw a Rollei TLR with

a new Beattie screen and was amazed by how bright and contrasty it is. I want to

use the WLF a lot for my SQ-A.

I called Maxwell and asked about the options for SQ-A and Bill said he can

either make me a new screen or do a "high lux" process on my original screen for

$100.

I wonder how much a bright screen is going to help me. Has anyone tried

Maxwell's "high lux" process? How much an improvement is it over the original

Bronica screen, and how does it compare with a brand new Maxwell screen?

Last question. I heard that an older version of Beattie screen is low in

contrast and one should buy their new version. How big a deal is it? How can one

tell which is which?

thanks

I've never used a Maxwell but they get consistently high praise here.

Having said that, the Bronica screens are very bright, IMHO. It;s one of the few cameras I never really wanted to upgrade in some way.

I don't know that there's a difference between old and new. If you want to get one used, you can often get them for a good price at KEH.

Both the Beattie and Maxwell screens ar noticeably brighter than the Beonica screens. I have used both and in my opinion the Maxwell provides a better looking image and much easier focus.

I have two Maxwell screens here and both are new rather than conversions. I didn't go down that route because I didn't want to be without the use of a camera for an unknown period and because I wanted a specific combination of focus aids. Why don't you ask Bill what the difference is- getting him to talk isn't generally a problem.

Whichever way you go, if you use a prism meter you'll need to reflect the brighter image hitting the meter sensors through the screen. If you don't do this you will tend to underexpose.

Last year I had Bill Maxwell process my original Bronica SQ-Ai screen and I was very impressed with his work. The image on the screen is substantially brighter, so I had to adjust my metering finder by 1 stop to get proper exposures with the processed screen.

<br>Bill added, that he'd make a new Hi-Lux screen and wouldn't charge the processing of the original screen, if I wasn't satisfied with the result.

The stock screen in my SQ-A was significantly darker than the screen in my RZ or late-series Rolleiflex. It wasn't just difficult to focus, in indoor lighting it was hard to see stuff, period.

The replacement SQ screen I ended up ordering from Bill Maxwell - matte with grid and without any sort of center focus aid - is significantly brighter than the original. It's also noticeably - but not significantly - brighter than my RZ screen, which had previously been my reference point for great WL focusing screens. The RZ screen in turn is brighter than the stock Rolleiflex screen in the 3.5F - which itself isn't half bad.

I plan to upgrade the screen in my Rolleiflex, but won't for the RZ. I'd definitely do so for the SQ-A.

Thanks A.R. for your great info.

I saw a used Beattie screen for Bronica SQ for sale. Price is much lower than a Maxwell screen (less than half). I know most opinion out there prefer Maxwell screens. What do I miss by going with a used Beattie screen? Is it big enough of a difference to justify the 50%+ extra in price?

A 2nd-hand camera shop owner told me that I should avoid older Beattie screens because their older design suffer from lower contrast and is difficult to focus with. Can someone verify this? I can't find any related info here.

How can I tell an old Beattie screen from a new one?