Reason Canon DSLRs lack manual focusing aids?

John A. Stovall writes:

On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 01:49:32 +0000, Tony Polson
wrote:

Måns Rullgård wrote:

Paul Furman writes:

So focus screens would end up dimming the view, I guess that
makes sense.

But do they? There are third-party focus screens available,
claiming both split prism and brighter image.

But they are generally coarse grained.

I've not found this to be the case with the Katz Eye Plus or the 20D.

I've been thinking of getting one of those screens. Are they any good?

As for the dimming effect, I can't see how the presence of a split
prism in the center could possibly affect the brightness on the rest
of the screen.

--
Måns Rullgård

John A. Stovall writes:

I've not found this to be the case with the Katz Eye Plus or the 20D.

I've been thinking of getting one of those screens. Are they any good?

As for the dimming effect, I can't see how the presence of a split
prism in the center could possibly affect the brightness on the rest
of the screen.

I like mine and am waiting for Rachel to do one for the 5D.

The only dimming was on the old ones and if you were over f/5.6 the
split prism would get dark but the Plus model fixed that. Oh, if you
get one do get the brightness treatment, it's worth it.

I was wondering about the brightness treatment as well. Is it really
worth the extra $55? The web page mentions that the effect increases
with the f number, and none of my lenses have a maximum aperture
smaller than f/5.6. And what about metering?

--
Måns Rullgård

Måns Rullgård wrote:

John A. Stovall writes:


On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 01:49:32 +0000, Tony Polson
wrote:


Måns Rullgård wrote:


Paul Furman writes:


So focus screens would end up dimming the view, I guess that
makes sense.

But do they? There are third-party focus screens available,
claiming both split prism and brighter image.

But they are generally coarse grained.

I've not found this to be the case with the Katz Eye Plus or the 20D.


I've been thinking of getting one of those screens. Are they any good?

As for the dimming effect, I can't see how the presence of a split
prism in the center could possibly affect the brightness on the rest
of the screen.

You are right, if it's just a dot in the middle that's no loss. I was
thinking of the other type where most of the screen darkens in a
pattern, I only vaguely recall looking through other folks cameras and
seeing that, not sure.

Paul Furman writes:

As for the dimming effect, I can't see how the presence of a split
prism in the center could possibly affect the brightness on the rest
of the screen.

You are right, if it's just a dot in the middle that's no loss. I was
thinking of the other type where most of the screen darkens in a
pattern, I only vaguely recall looking through other folks cameras and
seeing that, not sure.

That sounds like it would have been a screen with microprisms over the
entire area. I've never seen one of those, but maybe they exist.

--
Måns Rullgård

In article , Tony Polson
wrote:

Probably 90% of 20D owners use AF 90% of the time, so making manual
focus easier does not make a lot of commercial sense for Canon.
Making the viewfinder brighter and clearer for easier composition
takes a higher priority, even though this inevitably makes manual
focusing more difficult.

If they put a split-image in there, then people like me would bitch
because we like microprisms - and vice versa. With autofocus, there's
really no need for these things anymore.

Randall Ainsworth writes:

In article , Tony Polson
wrote:

Probably 90% of 20D owners use AF 90% of the time, so making manual
focus easier does not make a lot of commercial sense for Canon.
Making the viewfinder brighter and clearer for easier composition
takes a higher priority, even though this inevitably makes manual
focusing more difficult.

If they put a split-image in there, then people like me would bitch
because we like microprisms - and vice versa.

What about split prism with a microprism collar, as is often seen?

With autofocus, there's really no need for these things anymore.

There are still situations where manual focus is needed.

--
Måns Rullgård

In article , Måns Rullgård
wrote:

What about split prism with a microprism collar, as is often seen?

Ick...never cared for those either.

There are still situations where manual focus is needed.

Maybe I've spent enough time with groundglass that I don't see it as a
big deal. The few times I've had to manually focus with m 10D for
whatever reason, it hasn't been a problem.

Måns Rullgård wrote:

What about split prism with a microprism collar, as is often seen?


Many AF users would complain that it got in their way.

In article , Tony Polson
wrote:

Måns Rullgård wrote:

What about split prism with a microprism collar, as is often seen?


Many AF users would complain that it got in their way.

And, unfortunately, most people would just use it to put people's
heads, the sun, etc.

Tony Polson writes:

Måns Rullgård wrote:

What about split prism with a microprism collar, as is often seen?

Many AF users would complain that it got in their way.

I never trust AF 100%. Being able to verify that it got it right
would be nice, which is why I'm looking into the katzeye screens.

--
Måns Rullgård