Chinese-made split focussing screens for Hasselblad

[robert_deas3]

<p>Hi, I am finding my original cross-hair focussing screen hard to use in critical situations but I haven't been able to find a genuine Hasselblad split screen in good condition that I can afford, and so I'm considering the Chinese-made copies on eBay at around £20.<br /> Obviously it's critical for focussing that the screen is mounted at exactly the right distance from the mirror, so the thing needs to be accurately made, and naturally this is something I am concerned about<br /> There are a couple of previous threads in which people have bought one and promised to report back (in 2010) but never did. Has anyone genuine experience of using them who can vouch for their accuracy of construction? They all appear to be from the same source, the photographs from all the sellers show the same box when it is included.</p>

[theodoros_d]

<p>I think you refer to the screens originally made for the Harblei & Arax 88CM camera that was a much improved Kiev (all made by Arsenal) 88CM version... The 88cm is using a mirrorbox that is an exact copy of the Hasselblad 1000F (which is the same mirrorbox dimensions as with the 5xx series), I can ensure from personal experience that the screens are accurate (and very bright) when used on an Arax 88cm, therefore I don't find any reason that it would be different on a Hasselblad body... At least (that I've checked) all WL, chimney and prism finder, work very well indeed on a Hasselblad 5xx body... that is a hint that the screens should be compatible too....</p>

[henry_finley1]

<p>Using them would be a mistake.</p>

[raczoliver]

<p>I bought one from taobao (the Chinese version of ebay) for my Bronica SQ-A, which was converted from a focusing screen that was originally made for a Seagull TLR. The screen was so dim that i could barely see anything through it, so I quickly switched back to my old scratched Bronica screen that originally came with the camera 30 years ago.</p>

[david_henderson]

<p>There probably still are other sources of 3rd party brighter screens for Hasselblad and others- Think Beattie or Brightscreen or IMO the best, Maxwell. More expensive, but then you must have had some doubts about a $20 solution to make this post, and indeed its hard to believe that something that requires to be made with considerable precision for a moderate and declining market can logically only cost $20. If true, then the whole of the aftermarket screen market would surely have gone that way. I always fitted a brighter split-image screen to my Bronicas with good results. If you're metering ttl via a prism using a brighter screen is likely to throw the exposures off somewhat requiring an adjustment there too. </p>

[david_smith35]

<p><em>Using them would be a mistake.</em><br>

Why? If you're going to post a comment, at least give an explanation.</p>

[robert_deas3]

<p>I'm not concerned about brightness, I just want a split-prism. I can easily imagine that they could be made cheaply, it's just ground glass, none of the technical sophistication of the Acute-Matte and other bright screens.<br>

I would buy a Haselblad original, I just can't find one at a sensible price in good condition.<br>

I am aware of the Kiev stuff and use a couple of their prisms, as one poster mentions these seem perfectly matched to Hasselblad bodies. I can only see one Kiev split focussing screen for sale at present and it is the screen itself alone, without the metal frame with its four little feet that hold the screen at the right position. I'm perfectly happy to trust Soviet engineering, just not so sure about Chinese!</p>

[tom_chow]

<p>I have used the split/micro-prism Ukrainian Keiv-88 screens and a no-name Chinese version. Both worked fine, although I don't' use either anymore.<br /> <br />The Kiev-88 screens are made for the 500c bodies, which require a screw driver to replace the screen, and calibration on the installation. The Calibration requirement means any variation in the screen is... well, ... calibrated. The Keiv-88 split/micro-prism remained on my 500c until I sold it, it was nicer and brighter than the original screens, but had a coarser grain.</p>

<p>The Chinese split image screen (no micro-prism collar) was used only for a short while, but it worked fine (as far as I could tell). It was cheap, grainier than Hasselblad ones, but brighter than the old screens. I bought it while testing out different screens to improve ergonomics. I ended up using a 42250 (older microprism only) screen for a long time as I prefered it over the no-name, and I found focus to be more accurate and quick than the 42165 (original Acute-Matte) or the 42170 (split with grids acute matte), even though it was dimmer. My preference would have been a 42215 (Acute Matte D with split and micro prisms) - but holy $!!!. Later, I obtained a Bright Screen split/micro prism that I've been using since - it's not quite a bright as the acute mattes (but close) and slightly grainier, but works well for me.</p>

[richard_lane3]

What are the ball park costs for the various screens mentioned here? Everyone is jumping around with different options.

 

I don't have any idea - everyone has a different and personal view of prices and price differentials, so I don't want to

assume anything based on the tenor of the comment. Thank-you.

 

:-) ... MomentsForZen (Richard)

[robert_deas3]

<p>@Richard re prices, I am seeing genuine Hasselblad split prism screens really scratched and looking as though they were dragged behind a truck at $30, brand new Chinese ones $20-$50, and the Acute-Matte screens for ten times as much.</p>

[david_smith35]

<p>Robert, at around £20 I think I would take a chance and try one. After all it's a fraction of the cost of a Hasselblad screen and worth taking a chance.</p>

[richard_lane3]

Hi there @RobertDeas

 

Thanks for those prices - they add great clarity in what was a price vacuum.

 

:-) ... MomentsForZen (Richard)

[dave_gesell]

<p>I recently ordered one of the eBay split screens and I might have it in hand next week. I figured I'd try one out and see if it helps my aging eyes. I'll report back after I've had a chance to use it for a bit.</p>

[bruce_e]

<p>I have installed/used inexpensive screens with central split image and microprism collar focusing aids in several cameras. The screens look similar to the ARAX part and were purchased from a Russian seller (about $USD 16 per screen) on e bay. On an old Salyut (earlier version of Kiev) and Pentacon Six camera the replacement was easier to view and focus than the original screen - not just the focusing aids, but is brighter and has more contrast. On a Hasselblad 500 C/M it has similar brightness to the original standard screen, but easier to focus (central aids and contrast), though perhaps 'grainier' in the matt section. For all 3 installations I needed to take the original glass screen/condenser stack out of its frame and replace with the thin plastic screen. Need to take into account change in location of the focusing plain - needed to add thin shims to the Hasselblad and possibly the Salyut (not the P6 though). All 3 screens were precut for the width of the camera frame (Salyut and Hasselblad are same, P6 is smaller - different part)<br>

I found this thread because i have noticed a different vendor - this one in China - selling larger screens with diagonal splits. These are interesting because of the diagonal, and they could be trimmed to fit a variety of cameras. I am curious on how these compare to the ARAX style screen.<br>

As and aside - In other responses and on some on-line discussions I have read about people replacing Bronica screens with parts to improve brightness or ease of focus. This surprised me because at least on the S2 and older D (Z?) models which I have tried, the existing screen performance was really good - comparable to modern screens and better than those in other camera models of the period(s). I realize this is subjective, but I found those Bronica srceens to be quite outstanding</p>

[david_henderson]

<p>Bruce E . You might be right on the S2 and older Bronicas. I do though have considerable experience on the SQ and subsequent 6x6 Bronicas. It is perfectly possible to increase brightness and ease of focus by replacing the standard Bronica screens with 3rd party equivalents from Beattie but more particularly Maxwell. Brightness improved to the point where I needed the metering prisms to be recalibrated or the apparent extra light would result in underexposure noticeable on slide film. Some of the focus improvement was brought about by the nature of the focus aids incorporated on the replacement screens; and some was a result of increased brightness. Beattie seemed to rely on increased contrast to a greater degree than Maxwell and I didn't find that helpful. The replacement screens I was using cost well over $100 new even 15-20 years ago. </p>

[dave_gesell]

<p>The screen I ordered arrived last week, but due to a back injury and work, I haven't been able to do any shooting with it. First impressions are it's as bright, or slightly brighter than the standard Hassy screen, and the split image helps as expected. So, not a revelation in any way, but for $40 I think most people would find it an adequate replacement if you have a damaged screen.</p>