[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/8/04, Henri Toivonen, discombobulated, offered:
While you guys were talking about the MX I thought of something.
I know a place that has replacement screens for the LX, and they fit in the MX too, right?
They aren't very expensive, but it is it worth the effort?
I probably have the SC-1 inside it now, and I got get a SA-32 for some $30.
Would I get problems with exposure, how big is the change?
Cotty replied:
Henri, someone will fill in the details as I am sketchy on this, but I
believe there is a difference in exposure that has to be compensated for
as the LX meters off the film, and the MX doesn't. More info will follow,
I am sure.
I noticed no difference whatsoever in exposure when I replaced the screen that came in my MX with a (new-series) LX screen. I did notice a difference in the useability of the viewfinder.
So:
either the exposure difference only applies to older LX screens, or, my (used) MX already had an LX screen in it when it arrived (which I doubt)
or, the exposure difference was too small for me to notice,
or, the exposure difference is An Urban Myth.
In any case the answers to the questions you posted seem to be "No" (you won't have problems) and "Not much, if any" (in reply to "how big is the change?")
ERN
Thanks people for the answers. So the change to a modern screen isn't really necessary then? I read on Boz's site that they have developed through the years, quote:
"The quality of focusing screens has improved constantly, and each new generation is finer and looks brighter. The designations of the Pentax focusing screens use two letters and normally two digits. The first letter indicates the screen's dimensions, and distinguishes between screens with different designs, patterns, focusing aids, etc. The numbers indicate the screen age or generation. Higher numbers normally indicate more modern (and usually better) designs. Screens without numbers or with a single digit are from the first (level-10) generation."
/Henri
