Hello > > I just signed up to the list and I find something useful right > away. > > Hi L! (what's your name, BTW?)
It's Levente (or Levi) I just like to initial my e-mails regardless of the preset signature that actually had my name (or it should have) I am from Hungary, I study in the states now. (at least for a few more days, until the semester is over) > I'm sorry for my late reply, but I took the time to make some > side by side comparison between bodies and screens. I feel I > made a hurried statement, so I have to clear myself... :-) No hurry. > Let's make a step back. I wrote I wouldn't mount a SG-60 or one > of the new LX screen due to a bad vignetting in the finder. This > is true, but it's effective with a normal or short lens and, I > admit I had no time to explain better, if you wear glasses (so I don't actually. > do I...). The problem is due to the kind of eyepiece and > magnification of the MX too: the LX has a longer eyepoint, so I > can see the entire frame. I can't do that with the MX. I have to > move slightly the eye to have a complete view. With one of the > new screens (as I said, I tried first with the SG-60) and the > 50/1.7 I could barely see the center of the frame... Hmmm. I never had any problems like that. Well, I got my self an eyepiece not long ago and with that I noticed the same thing I guess. I just avoid using it unless I know it will be too bright for me to see the lightmeter. > I can confirm for sure about the vignetting, but I had no > intention to state something as a rule. OK. So viewing screen gets darker around the edges with the SG-60. > Well... > Few hours ago I started to try every possible screen/lens > coupling. > I mounted in the MX the following screens: SE-25, SC-26, SE-60. > Since you want to do astrophotography I used the 300/4, alone > and with a 2x converter (I could have used a true 600/8 and > attach to it different converters - maybe I'll do in the > following days), and tried some shorter lens anyway, just to > have a reference. Well. I might have confused you a bit too. I experiment with astro and I do have one of the astro LX screens, though I did not get to try it out yet because a few weeks ago I killed my MX while taking pictures of the meteor shower. I was stupid enough to fire it locked with a defective cord that takes some extra phisical effort to push. (Actually the cord died the same night just a little earlier) So I could not get it fixed yet and it seems I will only be able to after christmas in Hungary. But there I will not have access to the Astronomy department's telescope. So that screen will not really serve me too well unless I find a telescope in Hungary that I can use. (not likely but possible) So I already have the Clear-glass with center cross (SD-11) screen. Someone here was explaining how to focus with it. That I did not really understand so I would appreciate some claification on that too. (remember I am just an enthusiastic beginner who immediately wants to do all the fun stuff, astro, infrared :)) I know I am ahead of the game) I can tell you this. When I was taking pictures of Saturn with a telescope I did not see jack but the split prism in the wa of focusing. Focusing is NOT EASY. Positioning the subject in the middle isn't either. So I had the planet off the one side or the other. (well the other reason for that was the split prism) Also somebody mentioned that subjet has to be steady. Well with astronomy we just wish that it is steady. (but of course if it is not, it's gonan be crap anyway) So I have a hard time seeing how I should condentrate on the center cross or hair or whatever... I was glad to be alive and in focus last time I did this. So after christmas I will be taking pictures of more landscapes, architecture, etc. (Budapest) More street photography. In fact birds and people unaware of my taking pictures is the reason why I want to get a mirror lens. (looking at 600mm Sigma) The only other screen I have is the default MX split prism with microprisim collar and it is quite scratched up. So I figured go LX. Get the SE-60 totaly unmarked matte one and the new SC-69 that is just like the default screen just supposedly brighter. My other lenses are 24mm f2.8, 50mm f1.4, 135mm f2.5, 50-250mm f4. So the SC-69 and the SE-60 will be used with these. Not with a telescope or a mirror lens. When I will get the mirror lens I figured I will need to get a screen that was designed for such lenses. SA-26, SC-26, SE-25. As I said earlier birds and people is what I will mainly be shooting with the mirror lens. I was just about to order the SC-69 and SE-60 when I read the mail on the list. (the super tele screen I will wait with until I get the lens) So I hope this really clarifies the situation. > The SE-25 is not a great screen, I don't like it even with the > LX... The vignetting is visible, but significantly less than > with a normal lens mounted (to be precise: the SE-25 vignettes > with lenses shorter than 80mm even with the LX). Well I figured I will only use it with a 600mm. Does it Vignette with that too? (in MX of coirse, though I am interested in LX results too) > If you do not wear glasses, maybe the vignetting won't bother > you too much. I don't but that maybe is what I am worried about. (did you ever consider contact lenses? Doing photography now I tahnk god several times I do not have to wear glasses, though the day will come I am certain) > The SC-26 is one of my favorite screens. It allows you to focus > a 300/4 almost like a 50/1.4 used with the standard SC-21. Used > on the MX the vignetting is not that bad (I think it is mostly > due to the glasses in this case). At 600/8 you can still use the > focusing aids, although the microprisms start to be hard to > focus. See I was looking at the SE-25 because that does not have a microprism. The SC-26 and the SA-26 both does. > When I mounted the SE-60 I must admit I couldn't believe to my > eyes. This is the less vignetting-prone screen of these three > (I'm still talking of tele lenses, of course - I had no time to > try a macro set-up). Well I would use it with 50, 135, maybe the 24. > Used at 600/8 you can easily focus objects at infinity and > closer, but, most important, I couldn't see any kind of > vignetting in the finder (things are different if you use this > screen with, say, a 20/4: you will hardly see the subject even > at the center of the frame; with the LX this shouldn't happen - > I didn't try, though). 24mm f2.8 maybe I would use. > I think these are good news for you. > If you are able to buy a SE-60 screen you should go for it in a > hurry. I will look. > Unfortunately, I cannot comment on the screens > specifically designed for astrophotography like the SD-11. > What f stop is the lens you use for your astrophotography? This I use a big hunkin' telescope :)) No clue. I also used the 24mm to shoot the meteor shower. > should be the parameter to consider. > > Hope this is clear enough... Little bit. At least now I know I am safe to get the SE-60. I will need another screen with split prism and microprism collar like the SC-21 or SC-69. (just for regular lenses for up to 250 max) If I will go with the SE-60 I probbaly recalibrate my lightmeter (the MX needs to go to a shop anyway) so if I go with the SE-60 I will need either the SC-21 or SC-69. The alternative is to stick to strictly MX screens. I would probbaly get what I have but not scratched and maybe the one with the circle. (I really would prefer an unmarked but it was never made for the MX) Also MX screens are harder to find. The Astroscreen being specifically for the LX would not matter. The MX lighmeter is unusable in astro so I always had to use bulb where I am guessing anyway. (no sunny 16 with stars :) I guess my questions are to sum everything up. I would ike to have 2 screens. One with microprism and one with no microprism. (along with the Astro I already have) I will also need a screen for a 500 or 600mm mirror lens in the hopfully not too distant future. If I get the SE-60 should I get the SC-69 or the SC-21 to accompany that (lenses are 24mm f2.8, 50mm f1.4, 135mm f2.5 50-250mm f4) Or alternatively I should just stick to MX screens in which case I will probably need to find a SC-1 and a SE. Also if LX screens are the way to go should I get the SA-26, the SC-26 or the SE-25 when I get my mirror lens? I guess we already rulled the SE-25 out so SC-26 or SA-26. It feels like I would prefer the SE-25 design with SA-26 being second preference, but it is the SC-26 you said good things about (at least with a 300mm, not with a 600mm :)) Finally please clarify the focusing method with the clear astroscreen (SD11). That did not make sence to me. Boy, I should just quit photography, or get a rangefinder so I don't have to deal with this stuff. :))) (Just kidding I hope everyone realizes) This is what a scratched up screen did to me, I would have never considered changing screens if my MX screen would not be scratched up :)) Thanks for the info. Let's go from here now. L Levente -Levi- Littvay <--- See, I know it looks weird but that is my name! :)) University of Nebraska-Lincoln -------------- PGP public key: http://www.kign.org/levilpub.asc Key fingerprint: 8BD8 3CE7 FB1D 625F F268 BFCE 417A C20C 92BF 6225 -------------- Download free PGP e-mail security software: http://www.pgpi.org/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
