Dan Daniel
Well-known
EDIT: June 2020: I redid the original tests in 2016. I think I started a new thread with the new tests. Butr I nver came back and cleaned up this post, and this is the one that was made a sticky. So, here is a more complete sample.
My original discussion based on 4 or 5 screens::
>>>>The Maxwell Hi-Lux screen is my favorite screen, and this test didn't change my mind. The Mamiya screen, bought new on Ebay for $35, gives the Maxwell Split/Micro a decent run for its money. The Jinfinance screen is a great upgrade from the stock ground glass but nowhere near as nice as the Maxwells or Mamiya (you can't see it here, but the Jinfinance screen has a much rougher fresnel and ground glass pattern, and focusing away from the split has none of the crispness of the better screens). And the original ground glass? Well, I used them without a hitch when I was in my 20s, and I understand people liking their snap and feel, but they are not for me.<<<<<<
Method: I set up a Sony RX100 digital camera on a table. The Sony was put in MANUAL mode so that it wouldn't be adjusting away differences in brightness. I had the camera somewhat high up because putting it close to the screen caused serious vignetting of the screen image.Focus was set manually on the first Rollei's screen image.
I set each camera in place based on the Sony's LCD grid. Did a rough manual focus of the Rollei. Took image.
Image below is a compilation of the shots. NO adjustments to the files. Cropped and combined in Photoshop.
My original discussion based on 4 or 5 screens::
>>>>The Maxwell Hi-Lux screen is my favorite screen, and this test didn't change my mind. The Mamiya screen, bought new on Ebay for $35, gives the Maxwell Split/Micro a decent run for its money. The Jinfinance screen is a great upgrade from the stock ground glass but nowhere near as nice as the Maxwells or Mamiya (you can't see it here, but the Jinfinance screen has a much rougher fresnel and ground glass pattern, and focusing away from the split has none of the crispness of the better screens). And the original ground glass? Well, I used them without a hitch when I was in my 20s, and I understand people liking their snap and feel, but they are not for me.<<<<<<
Method: I set up a Sony RX100 digital camera on a table. The Sony was put in MANUAL mode so that it wouldn't be adjusting away differences in brightness. I had the camera somewhat high up because putting it close to the screen caused serious vignetting of the screen image.Focus was set manually on the first Rollei's screen image.
I set each camera in place based on the Sony's LCD grid. Did a rough manual focus of the Rollei. Took image.
Image below is a compilation of the shots. NO adjustments to the files. Cropped and combined in Photoshop.
CK Dexter Haven
Well-known
Maxwells are excellent. I had one in my Rolleiflex TLR and another in the various Hasselblad 203FEs i had. The Maxwell was even better than the acclaimed Hassy Acute Matte(?).
Jaime M
Established
Very interesting comparison. I haven't see a screen comparison before, and it will help people like me. Thanks.
shortstop
Well-known
I have Maxwell split/microprism. The image is surely clearer with Hi-Lux. Is focusing with Hi-Lux as easy as with Maxwell split/microprism?
twopointeight
Well-known
This is interesting and timely for me as I get a Rolleiflex MX Tessar ready to ship to Harry Fleenor for an overhaul. It hadn't been used for a least 20 years and the shutter is frozen, otherwise in very nice shape. The Maxwell would raise the cost of the bill significantly so wondering if its worth it? Who does your maintenance work, if I may ask?
froyd
Mentor
Thanks for taking the time to post this useful comparison. Do you find that the ease of focusing goes hand in hand with brightness? i.e., is the Hi-Lux not only the brightest but the easiest to focus?
sjauch
Established
I have an Oleson screen in my MX-EVS and find it impossible to accurately focus without using the split prism. The surface of the screen is just too course. I sometimes even have a hard time confirming if the split image is lined up. I'm wondering if the screen is just not manufactured that well. I've been tempted to go back to the original Rollei screen but then that's a bit too dark for indoor/low light use. Looks like I'll have to shop around for a Mamiya screen or just shell out for the Maxwell.
Thanks for taking the time to do this!
Thanks for taking the time to do this!
J. Borger
Well-known
I tried about every screen in several Rolleiflex cameras.
When it comes to consistent accurate focus for portraits i can only state that the older darker Rolleiflex ground glasses give best results.
No rollei Hi-D like in the GX or FX, no Maxwell or Beatie for me anymore.
I use my 2,8F with confidence with the original darker groundglass.
When it comes to consistent accurate focus for portraits i can only state that the older darker Rolleiflex ground glasses give best results.
No rollei Hi-D like in the GX or FX, no Maxwell or Beatie for me anymore.
I use my 2,8F with confidence with the original darker groundglass.
Darshan
Well-known
I am interested in this too.
Dan Daniel
Well-known
The image is brighter with the Hi-lux, but I wouldn't say clearer. My issue with the split is that I find it distracting for composing. I am often shooting in the street so what I want to focus on is often away from the center. But for some silly reason I end up using the split to focus all time. My limit, not a limitation of the split.
Dan Daniel
Well-known
Aactually, I am finding the Mamiya screen to be the best for focusing. It has a more definite 'snap' in and out of focus. I think this goes along with the oft-stated opinion that the old groundglass has the cleanest snap for focusing, as J. Borger says.
I put the Mamiya in less than a week ago, so I am still getting used to it. My opinion of its focusing function may change. It is a bit darker than the Maxwells. I am not certain how it will work for how I shoot. And that is key- what I find useful might be very wrong for someone else.
Dan Daniel
Well-known
I do my own maintenance. And overhauls for people and to cameras I then sell. I don't want to do anything against the rules here so I will PM you.
If you have the time and the money, Fleenor is the best. And you won't regret getting a Maxwell. Then again, from what I am seeing with the Mamiya screen, I wonder...
Iestrada
Well-known
In terms of brightness the Oleson is good enough for my money. Without actually playing with all the other with focusing it is hard to say witch is best.
Iestrada
Well-known
I have the Oleson in my in Rolliflex 2.8C. It is an improvement over what it had and I do not want to know what I am missing. (Gas control)
f16sunshine
Moderator
Hey thanks Dan.
I'm using the Maxwell micro collar split prism... works great.
I had the Mamiya screen in a camera I have since sold. Highly recommend it.
Maybe not over the Maxwell although it did seem finer and gave a more clear image.
It's hard to remember exactly now. I had a Beattie screen in a 3.5f as well. Another excellent choice.
Cheers!
I'm using the Maxwell micro collar split prism... works great.
I had the Mamiya screen in a camera I have since sold. Highly recommend it.
Maybe not over the Maxwell although it did seem finer and gave a more clear image.
It's hard to remember exactly now. I had a Beattie screen in a 3.5f as well. Another excellent choice.
Cheers!
Darshan
Well-known
these screens fit the 3.5f perfectly or they have to be modified?
can i swap them myself or need a professional?
f16sunshine
Moderator
Hi Dan
The Maxwell and Beattie screens are made for specific models and are ready to instal.
The Mamiya screen must be modified although, I don't have experience doing so. Maybe someone else can reply.
Beattie screens are available at B+H and other places.
Bill Maxwell has his own un-official website. There is contact info there to reach him.
He is a very personably man and will spend time on the phone making sure you get the correct order.
I've ordered from him 3 times.
Cheers!
froyd
Mentor
Yes, those in the know, please post more info on where to source and how to modify a Mamya screen for a 3,5 Rolleiflex.
Dan Daniel
Well-known
I bought my Mamiya screen on Ebay. There are various models with rangefinder splits, microprisms, etc. You'll need to search for what the codes mean. Mamiya has explanations.
Ignore the information on the mirror adjustment!!
https://web.archive.org/web/20130319213240/http://www.panum.de/rolleiflex_screen.htm
The stock Rolleiflex ground glass is about .051 inch thick. The Mamiya screen is about .065 inch thick (as I remember- measure your own). On older Rolleiflexes without removable screens, you will need to either shim the focus hood up, or reset the viewing lens focus.
Ignore the information on the mirror adjustment!!
https://web.archive.org/web/20130319213240/http://www.panum.de/rolleiflex_screen.htm
The stock Rolleiflex ground glass is about .051 inch thick. The Mamiya screen is about .065 inch thick (as I remember- measure your own). On older Rolleiflexes without removable screens, you will need to either shim the focus hood up, or reset the viewing lens focus.
axiom
Non-Registered User
Do you mean the original fresnel screen or a real piece of ground glass?
I don't think 2,8F comes with a real piece of glass. Did you later swap it?
I wonder how do the original fresnel screen and the original ground glass compare.