ON the DS, I found the screen quality not quite what I wanted for manual focusing as, at the time I got it, I was using older manual focus lenses more of the time. I wanted something with less clutter and a better focusing surface. My custom scribe lines were more of a "while I'm doing this anyway" kind of thing.
I found the K10D screen to be as good for manual focusing as the KatzEye was on the DS, and also found that since I was using more recent, all AF lenses, that the additional markings for them were not as much of a distraction. (I still manually focus about the same amount of the time, but I often do so using the QS feature of the DA/ DA* lenses rather than having to turn AF off.) I guess overall that by the time I had the K10D in my hands, it was no longer a priority worth spending $100+ to change. Godfrey On May 28, 2008, at 7:20 AM, Tim Øsleby wrote: > I remember you used it at the DS, and was happy with it. > Why didn't you get a new one for the K10/20D? Any particular reason? > > MaritimTim > > 2008/5/28 Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> My custom screen for the *ist DS was made without focusing aid, >> just a >> few scribed lines for horizontal/vertical reference and framing. I >> was >> quite happy with it. On May 28, 2008, at 6:50 AM, Axel Belinfante wrote: > Did you get it to avoid clutter, > or to improve ease of (manual?) focusing? > > I guess I'm echoing Tim here - wondering whether > there is a difference between ease of manual focus on > the matte of the Pentax and the KatzEye screens. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
