Is acute matte so much better

<p>Hello!<br>

I have searched long time new focusing screen for my 500 c/m. Only available new is normal acute-matte.<br>

I would like to have one with microprism and that line (don't remember english word) These seems only be available in ebay.<br />Now I have very good one old normal focusing screen. Is it noticable difference if I change to acute-matte version?<br>

Sincerely, Jukka</p>

<p>Yes they are a lot brighter, so much so a metered finder has to be recalibrate I think by about 2-3 stops.</p>

<p>Jukka,<br>

I have used them all and the acute-matt are well worth investing in. Much brighter. As a previous response stated - watch out for metering prisms.<br>

Paul</p>

<p>There is one more possibility - try one of the focusing screens for Kiev 88CM. They are at least one stop brighter than the old Hasselblad and they have microprism and "that line" - split field. And they are dirt cheap. </p>

The Acute Matte screens are 1 stop brighter (and then they are as bright as a screen can be), but a bit more difficult to focus.<br />The ideal compromise - one Hasselblad also ended up with - is using an Acute Matte with a split image rangefinder (Hasselblad changed the plain Acute Matte screen for such one as the standard, off-factory screen).

<p>There are some very good screens made by Beattie. They have different styles available, including the split-image rangefinder in the center, with or without grid lines.</p>

<p>I have a Beattie in one of my 500 bodies, and a latest Acute Matte in another body. I can't tell any difference in brightness between the two. They've both much brighter than the earlier Hasselblad screens.</p>

<p>- Leigh</p>

<p>Gosh Leigh, I find that the "Beattie screens just don't have an <strong>even</strong> illumination across the viewing area.<br>

The Acute Matte units, simply put, are exquisite.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I find that the "Beattie screens just don't have an <strong>even</strong> illumination across the viewing area.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>As they say, opinions are worth every cent you paid for them.</p>

<p>I always use a magnifier, which centers the eye and limits the angle of view. That may account for different results.</p>

<p>- Leigh</p>

 

<p>About the Kiev screens: I have two, one with microprism and split which is made of plastic, the other one with just a grid and which is glass. The plastic one is much brighter than even the acute matte (non-D, I don't have a D so I can't compare). The glass screen is similar to OEM acute-matte and in fact easier to focus.</p>

<p>However, before buying a Kiev screen, please understand that it does not come with any metal frame, so you have to "cannibalise" that from somewhere. Even so, the biggest issue is that Kiev screens are thinner than OEM screens so they can be moved up or down in the metal frame. You MUST get it in the right position (height), or you will never be able to focus correctly. The OEM screens are calibrated for this using a (very expensive) test rig. I've managed to find the right position for the glass screen after wasting one roll for focus testing, but never got the plastic one right and can't be bothered. Once you have a screen you like, why change?</p>

<p>Bottom line in my view: If you can afford it, get an acute-matte D. If you don't mind tinkering or putting "inferior" parts on a precision instrument, by all means get one or even several Kiev screens. I know I didn't mind. They really are that cheap. Total cost for me was $13, including the test roll of film.</p>

<p>"before buying a Kiev screen, please understand that it does not come with any metal frame"<br />Some of them actually do!<br>

<a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/FRESNEL-BRIGHT-FOCUSING-SCREEN-Kiev-88-Metal-Frame-/390282166494?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5adea140de">http://cgi.ebay.com/FRESNEL-BRIGHT-FOCUSING-SCREEN-Kiev-88-Metal-Frame-/390282166494?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5adea140de</a></p>

<p>The description says "fits Kiev88" but no mention if it fits Hasselblad. Even assuming it did, how can you be sure it has been adjusted/calibrated to the correct position?</p>

<p>"Buyers beware..." as always. Then again $17 is not the end of the world.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Even assuming it did, how can you be sure it has been adjusted/calibrated to the correct position?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The 500C/M body and later variants have an adjustment to set the screen support height. Remove the screen and you'll see four tiny slotted-head screws near the corners. It's intended to set that dimension to a standard, but could be used to adjust for improper screen height.</p>

<p>Those screws provide a very limited range of adjustment.</p>

<p>However, the jig to set those screws cost about $8,000. I don't loan mine out.</p>

<p>I've seen very few Kiev screens, none of which had metal frames. Perhaps an enterprising vendor adds them.</p>

<p>- Leigh</p>

<p>Another "buyer beware": On the topic, I was just browsing the current offers on the big auction site. One creative seller is holding up a screen using fluffy gloves and manages to cover one of the corners of the screen in each shot. So you can not see if it has the "double D" cutouts - as far as I know only the acute-matte D have the cutouts. No others, regardless what people may say. He states "it is the same as acute-matte D".</p>

<p>Not really...</p>

<p>Thank you for your information!<br />I ordered new acute-matte d with microprism and split image from Finnish seller.<br />Cost a lot, but <br />so what?<br />I am really convinced that it is worth every penny.<br />Now looking for 180/4....<br />Sincerely, Jukka</p>

<i>The 500C/M body and later variants have an adjustment to set the screen support height. Remove the screen and you'll see four tiny slotted-head screws near the corners. It's intended to set that dimension to a standard, but could be used to adjust for improper screen height.</i><br><br>If you want to mess up your perfectly fine camera, by all means do that...<br><br>(And a translation for those who need it: leave those things alone!!!)<br>Noone in his right mind would go mess up the screen position, hoping to find a fix for a cheap crappy screen, rendering the camera virtually useless without sending it to a qualified (!) repair person with the right tools to put that in order again.

<p><em>Noone in his right mind would go mess up the screen position, hoping to find a fix for a cheap crappy screen, rendering the camera virtually useless without sending it to a qualified (!) repair person with the right tools to put that in order again.</em><br>

I couldn't agree more. This adjustment needs expensive and special measurement unit and much skill to do right adjustment. It should only be done, if new focusing screen is thinner or thicker than old one.<br />I have experience from this from rolleiflexes.<br />Sincerely, Jukka</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>If you want to mess up your perfectly fine camera, by all means do that...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>In retrospect, I probably should not have mentioned the adjustments at all.</p>

<p>My intent was to point out that those are precision adjustments which should not be attempted by unskilled and untrained individuals. That's why I mentioned the cost of the adjustment jig, which I have.</p>

<p>The emphasis did not come across the way I intended.</p>

<p>- Leigh</p>

 

Yes, Leigh. That wasn't the smartest thing one could have done...<br><br><br>Jukka,<br><br><i>It should only be done, if new focusing screen is thinner or thicker than old one.</i><br><br>No!<br><br>Or rather: <b>NO!</b><br><br>It should <b><i>only</i></b> be done if your camera is out of whack, and then <b><i>only</i></b> by someone who knows what he is doing and has the means to do it right and to check that he is doing it right.<br><br>If your <b><i>screen</i></b> is not o.k., fix the <b><i>screen</i></b>. Keep your hands and tools away from the camera!

<p>Agreed. For those "not in the know" reading this and wondering how I did the adjustment of the Kiev screens, I was using "shims" inside the OEM metal frame itself. That is OK. Messing with the adjustment screws without the calibration jig is not.</p>

<p>Actually, the screen height adjustments should be done whenever the body is serviced in any manner that might affect its geometry. That includes most activities that involve removing the body from the shell.</p>

<p>It's usually not done because of the extremely high cost of the setting jig, which is also used to set the back parallel to the lens flange.</p>

<p>I do have the jig and associated tools, and know how to use them.</p>

<p>Ingemar's suggestion about using shims is certainly the preferred method of adjusting the Kiev screen.</p>

<p>- Leigh</p>

<p> </p>

<p>In reply to Ingemar's response above:</p>

<p>I would also add that you need to be careful not to buy an old used standard screen being sold as the used Acute Matte screen whether the "D" version or the non-D version.</p>

<p>As previously stated the "D" version ( which is the newest Acute Matte's made for Hasselblad ) will always have the two notches in the metal frame that look like half moon shapes.</p>

<p>If you do not see those cutouts in the screen it is NOT a D screen no matter what they tell you. I mean....unless someone removed the frame and put the glass into some other holder, etc.</p>

<p>The older acute matte screens will have faint white crosshairs or they will be a split image with grid lines. That's it. They only made two types of original acute matte screens and those are it. I see on eBay daily where sellers ( who do not know the gear ) sell the old screens and call them "acute matte" screens simply because they have a box that says acute matte on it. The acute matte got put into the camera and the old screen got put into the box and now they are selling it as an acute matte because they have no idea what the difference is.</p>

<p>So it is definitely "buyer beware" when buying a Hasselblad screen on the used market.</p>

<p>If you see a screen that has dark black crosshairs then you can know it is the old original standard screen. A good enough screen for sure...but the acute mattes sell for significantly more money usually.</p>

 

"Actually", Leigh, if having the innards separated from the shell doesn't count as "out of whack", i wouldn't know what does. ;-)

<blockquote>

<p>if having the innards separated from the shell doesn't count as "out of whack", i wouldn't know what does. ;-)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Huh?</p>

<p>Almost any repair work on the camera involves removing the body from the shell.</p>

<p>It's hardly an unusual procedure.</p>

<p>- Leigh</p>

 

I can't explain everything to you Leigh. So think, man! Think!<br>

;-)

<p>Jukka, the newer Acute Matt screens are much brighter and easier to focus, and I wouldn't even consider the Beattie screens which have a very "liney" look to them if you know what I mean. They also do not work very well if you use the waist level finder - unless you use it with the magnifier all the time, which I do.</p>