Maxwell aftermarket focusing screens - An improvement on the AcuteMatte-D for 501CM?

[martin_wouterlood]

Before I outlay on one of these screens for my 501CM, I would be

grateful if anyone who has experience with them could please provide

some feedback.

1. Is it easier to focus with?

2. Is focusing more accurate?

3. For lenses from 50mm to 250mm (f/4 - f/5.6) and general use, is

there one type more suitable (accurate) than another?

Thank you.

[steve_brantley2]

I have the factory focusing screen in my new 501CM, as you mentioned, and I can see no need to improve upon it with another brand. I once ordered a Maxwell screen for my ROlleiflex TLR, and when I learned that Mr. Maxwell hadn't even started on it after 2 1/2 weeks, I cancelled the order.

[jeffrey_krenzel5]

I replaced the AcuteMatt screeen that came with my 501CM with a matt screen with grid lines from Bill Maxwell and use it with my 50mm, 80mm and 180mm lenses. Although it is not any brighter than the AcuteMatte, I find that it has more contrast and focuses more easily. Objects snap into focus in a way that they do not with the factory supplied screen.

 

The only problem that I have had with Bill is one of timing. He is a one-man shop and sometimes overcommits to customers. I have had to wait as long as three months for each of the two screens that I have purchased from him over the years. But they were worth the wait.

[andrewlamb]

I just purchased three screens from Bill Maxwell. Two were for Rollei 6000

series cameras and one was for the Contax 645. He delivered the screens to

me, in the UK, in very quick time and I am extremely pleased with the quality

of them.

 

I also have a Maxwell screen in my Mamiya RZ and love it. I would agree with

earlier comments that the screens are not necessarily brighter but they have

more snap to them. I also think that they are reasinably priced.

 

Andrew

[gary_ferguson1]

The Acu Matte D is the best focusing screen I've ever used, and that includes Maxwell screens. I'd save the not inconsiderable cost of a Maxwell screen and invest it elsewhere.

[john_layton]

The Maxwell screen on my Rollei 3.5f is stunning. Its as bright

as the Acute-Matte on my Hassy 501CM (no small feat,

considering the Rollei's smaller mirror), has a more generous

viewing angle for convenient viewing with both eyes, and is

sharp enough to focus at waist-level without the magnifier if I'm

in a hurry and want to be discreet.

 

When I found my "holy grail" of TLR's: the Rollieflex 3.5f, series 3

with six element Planar, NEW in the box, I knew that to be perfect

it needed two things: a CLA (to replace hardened lubes, etc) by

non other than Harry Fleenor, and a Maxwell screen - as the

factory screens installed by Rollei in the '60's leave much to be

desired by today's standards.

 

Bill Maxwell has a PHD in optical physics, and he knows his

stuff! Make sure that when you connect with him by phone,

you've got time to talk (and listen!) I cannot reflect on the

previous comments about delays, etc. as I didn't have these

problems, but if I did have to wait for one of his amazing screens,

this wouldn't bother me in the least, now that I've "seen the light."

 

Yes, the Acute Matte is a great screen - but the Maxwell is even

better - and worth whatever it takes to get it into your 'Blad!

[jay_.]

I had a Maxwell screen installed on a Rolleiflex TLR, it was brighter than the old 1950's screen but very hard to focus. I sent it back, replaced it with a Beattie Intenscreen Plus, which is so much better there's no point in comparing. And the Acute-Matte in my Hassy's is better than the Beattie. How Maxwell keeps selling them is beyond me.

[david_henderson]

Jay. He keeps selling them because the majority of people don't

agree with you. Have a look at the posts on Photo.net. and look

at the opinions of those who have experience of both Beattie and

Maxwell. It's pretty one-sided. Frankly I think that if Maxwell

screens were available off the shelf from national sources, and

advertised , Beattie wouldn't have a business.

[jay_.]

Maybe then the problem with the Maxwell screens is consistency, because the one he put in my Rollei was a piece of sh*t.

[tim_stephens]

The Maxwell screen on my 500cm is very bright and a snap to focus.

[jay_.]

THe question was about comparing the Maxwell to the Acute-Matte-D on the 501CM on which it comes standard. Nobody in his right mind would toss the Acute-Matte for a Maxwell.

[derek_stanton2]

My Maxwell screen beats my AcuteMatte in a Hasselblad, although by a smaller

margin than my Maxwell beat my stock Rolleiflex 2.8F screen. Perhaps Jay just has a

problem. With HIS screen.

 

[Nice to know dentists are also qualified to provide psych analysis, as well.]

[cg]

I have a 501CM that has a grid/split rangefinder Maxwell screen. I still have a

plain Acute Matte D screen that's now a backup. When I wanted a new screen I

went with the Maxwell because I find the Acute Matte bright but not very easy to

focus with. With the Maxwell screen there is a small but noticeable increase in

contrast making it easier to focus. The only negative thing I can say about the

Maxwell screen is it is not protected by a piece of "glass" like the Acute Matte

making it very fragile and difficult to clean as the fresnel surface is exposed (at

least on a Hasselblad with a dust prone WLF) I now keep the chimney finder

permanently on to avoid excessive dust build up. Other than that the Maxwell

screen is very nice and the split rangefinder is very sensitive and accurate.