Since the image is formed on the _top_ surface of the screen, thickness is not critical. The microprism and matte screens I purchased for the ist-D are a bit thicker than the 'stock' screen. I can easily tell this because the spring arms that hold the screen in position are loaded quite a bit more with the new screens. As long as the screen is thick enough to be held firmly, and not so thick that the retainer has to be forced to get it to lock, it should be OK.
I'll try cutting down an MG screen one of these days. The MG is a likely donor because: A.) It's dirt cheap. B.) The screen is easily removed from the camera with no disassembly required, just 2 screws that are reached through the lens mount opening. MX and LX screens would be logical choices too since the are quite cheap sometimes on eekBay. I have several that were $15.00 or less, they are reserved for my LX and MXen however. ;-) As far as screens from other autofocus cameras, I don't see the point, none of those will have focus aids anyway. Don > -----Original Message----- > From: Tomasz Machnik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 5:12 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: focusing screens - thickness? > > > > I am sure it isn't a new idea, but I could not find any specific data in > the archive. > > It is time to upgrade my DS with split-image/raster focussing screen > ripped from an older (Pentax) body. > > There are some places on the Net offering s/i screens, but: > 1. the cost is more than 10 donor manual bodies > 2. they do not have stock (if ever had) > > Apart from necessary cutting/filing to the smaller size (25x17.5mm) the > only problem is thickness - does anyone have some info on thickness of > the screens in some cheap (Pentax or not) bodies? I read in the archive > that all screens in Pentax AF bodies are the same size - does "AF" > include digital? > > The original screen in DS is about 1.3mm thick (1/200" would be a > standard size?) - yes, I know I need a better measurement tool :) > > > thanks > tomasz > >
