p.4 #1 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
This is quite bizarre. Are my posts difficult to comprehend? Do I write poorly or vaguely? I ask because so far, three different people have misread or misinterpreted my earlier post, and I cannot understand why.
Let me try to be more clear, then.
Manual focus users like to use the super-precision matte because it is an important focusing aid, offering an improvement in visual acquisition of focus through the optical VF over the standard precision matte.
However, many AF users such as myself, like the super-precision matte not because it helps us focus, or confirm focus, but for a different (but related) reason: because we tend to favor the use of fast-aperture primes, we like the super-precision screen's ability to let us better see the true extent of blur in the out-of-focus regions of the image. If I'm relying on AF for the shot, I don't need to study the optical VF to see if it hit or not. The super-precision screen is there so that I can better estimate the way the bokeh will look when I actually take the shot.
In my personal experience, when I switch between the Eg-A and Eg-S, I notice a little difference in the way the focus looks, but even with the Eg-S, I can look through the VF all day and not be 100% sure I hit critical focus. The only way I can be sure is with 10x Live View. Don't believe me? Try it for yourself. Put the camera on a tripod, then use 10x Live View to focus on a super-shallow DOF scene. Then tweak the focus ever so slightly off. Now flip the mirror down and look through the viewfinder. Can you see that the focus is off? You just can't. Nobody can. It's like trying to check for accurate focus using a scaled down image versus the 100% crop. It looks sharp at 900x600, but not at 5616x3744.
To summarize, in terms of focus precision (assuming a stationary camera and subject), MF with LV > AF > MF with super-precision matte > MF with standard matte.
In my opinion, the days of the interchangeable screen are mostly over. This isn't something that's going to come back, folks. I'm not saying I'm okay with that, but it's something we all have to expect will be the trend going forward.
p.4 #3 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
wickerprints wrote:
even with the Eg-S, I can look through the VF all day and not be 100% sure I hit critical focus.
I don't find it a problem at normal fast apertures like f/2 and non-macro distances. (It is true that, corrected with spectacles or contacts, my vision in that eye tests as better than normal.) So I really don't agree with your proposition that live view is the only way to focus accurately. It is *one* way to focus in pathologically difficult cases. Another that works for me is an angle finder.
The -S screen is also useful for checking that AF did not lock on the wrong detail, and not just for fast lenses. That actually was why I bought my first one, and figuring out what the AF was doing was a lot easier when I could see it in the finder instead of having to puzzle through later on a computer. It turned out that, as mentioned above, the AF points were not where they claimed to be; that is a problem as much for an f/4 lens as an f/2 one, definitey visible on the -S, and for some reason not as obvious on the stock one.
Mar 03, 2012 at 03:59 AM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #4 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
melcat wrote:
The -S screen seems to be an odd bird, in that, when fitted to the camera, it doesn't need to know the aperture of the lens to adjust for the exposure. At least with the lenses I've used on an adaptor, none faster than f/2, none with an EF chip, the only exposure error I see is due to fall-off in a lens, i.e. a hotspot. So it would be more accurate to say that the camera has to consult a table of exposure corrections when an -S is *not* fitted. I'd be fine with a screen requiring such a table now I've retired my last adapted lens.
Zeiss say to use a split-image screen and not believe the AF confirmation. I have never understood that advice. As others have said, the fast Canon lenses AF correctly. The AF confirmation agrees exactly with the -S screen and the final image for my one Zeiss and the 1DS k III. But I wouldn't try it with my 5D, whose AF points are offset down from where the screen marks them. Maybe that's what Zeiss mean. ...Show more →
What focusing screen that is best for MF lenses like the Zeiss (or others) depends on what lens you use. The S: Super Precision Matte screen is made to be used together with fast lenses (like wickerprints wrote) and is very good for that. For very slow lenses it's not good. Other screens are better for them. It also depends on personal taste and what kind of shooting you like. I have 6 different focusing screens for my 1 series bodies. For fast lenses the Ec-S: Super Precision Matte is probably best. Overall for all kinds of lenses I probably like the standard Ec-C IV: Laser-Matte. It's nearly as good as the S with fast lenses and can do all the others also. The different Microprism, Split, New Split & Cross Split screens have too small circle in the middle where you do your MF focus to be good (IMO) for most kind of photography
p.4 #5 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
wickerprints wrote:
The reason why is quite simple. Metering in modern AF bodies is done via the primary mirror because it sees the entire image. The secondary AF mirror behind the primary is small and cannot see the image periphery. Therefore, to put the metering with the AF system would mean you can only meter based on the central portion of the image visible to the secondary mirror, rather than the entire frame. This has the potential to result in metering error, and this configuration does not lend itself to evaluative or center-weighted average metering.
this also the reason why the AF point spread is not bigger. the sub mirror is not very large.
when you look at the 3 formats (FF APS-H APS-C) they all have the same actual size sub mirror/phase chip . so on the smaller 1.6 crop the % of the fram the AF points cover is bigger.
My hope is that the 5D3 will have a better focus screen then the pretty poor one that in the 7D . thats fine for AF but pretty much pointless for MF . its just not got the precision .
p.4 #6 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
Lars Johnsson wrote:
The S: Super Precision Matte screen is made to be used together with fast lenses (like wickerprints wrote) and is very good for that. For very slow lenses it's not good. Other screens are better for them. It also depends on personal taste and what kind of shooting you like. I have 6 different focusing screens for my 1 series bodies.
And they're a menace to change. I agree that the stock screen is better for slower lenses. Luxury is having multiple bodies.
The -S has some nasty image artefacts. At f/1.2 in bright light, it can be hard to see the AF oval and spot metering circle; the manual warns about this. With f/4 lenses I've seen an annoying Fresnel pattern that isn't present with the standard screen.
For these reasons I hope Canon have put some heavy optical work into this screen and finder, rather than just lifting some previous screen design off the shelf. As far as I know, they haven't up to now had one that's generally good for f/2 and faster. I do not know whether Nikon has such a thing.
Mar 03, 2012 at 06:56 AM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #7 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
melcat wrote:
And they're a menace to change. I agree that the stock screen is better for slower lenses. Luxury is having multiple bodies.
The -S has some nasty image artefacts. At f/1.2 in bright light, it can be hard to see the AF oval and spot metering circle; the manual warns about this. With f/4 lenses I've seen an annoying Fresnel pattern that isn't present with the standard screen.
For these reasons I hope Canon have put some heavy optical work into this screen and finder, rather than just lifting some previous screen design off the shelf. As far as I know, they haven't up to now had one that's generally good for f/2 and faster. I do not know whether Nikon has such a thing. ...Show more →
I have the 1 series screens and bodies. And there is non of those problem you write about. They works very good with those bodies and it only take you a few seconds to change the screen
p.4 #8 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
I really don't get all the fuss over screens. Nikon doesn't offer user-serviceable screens for any of their DSLR bodies except for the D3 (and presumably, the D4) series. Apparently, Nikon shooters don't whine about their focusing screens the way Canon users seem to.
And as for third-party screens, it's not like the non-flagship Nikon bodies have support for metering compensation.
Yes, the way Canon designed the new focusing screens on the 7D and 5D3 is a pain. Yes, you have to unscrew a plate (I'm assuming the design for the 5D3 will be similar to that for the 7D). But it's really not that much more onerous than changing the screen for a D700--in both cases, you just need the appropriate tools, some patience, and a steady hand. I've removed the SI plate on my 5D2, and it wasn't hard. Anyone who cares enough to install a custom screen already should know how to unscrew the plate because they also need to check and adjust the shims.
Frankly, at this point a lot of what we know about the 5D3's focusing screen is speculative, in the sense that we don't know if it might be a higher-precision matte design compared to the Eg-A. For all we know, Canon could have decided that with all the interest in using fast-aperture AF and MF primes (in part because of the emphasis on video), they might have said "we want the 5D3 to take these lenses into consideration, from the AF system to the VF and the pixel size. So let's use a focusing screen that's better suited for such lenses." Or maybe they didn't. My point is that we really don't know yet, and it makes little sense to wring our hands over the unknown and declare how Canon's design choices are a disaster before anyone has a chance to actually use the damn thing.
It really just is NOT that huge a dealbreaker. If you really MUST use a super-precision matte of some kind, or a split prism, or what have you, then there surely will be such products available from third parties. Install it yourself, and you're probably going to be shooting with lenses that are f/2.8 or faster anyway. You're probably not going to notice much of a metering difference unless you're using a lens that's f/4 or slower, in which case, I question why you really need a super-precision matte. No, it wouldn't have killed Canon to let the screen be interchangeable. But I find it perplexing how insistent some people are about this one issue. I suspect some of you are just trying to find ways to reject this new camera. And no, I'm not a Canon fanboy. There are plenty of legitimate things to criticize about the 5D3 that we *do* know (like the intro price being $500 more than the D800). I just recommend some of you might want to take a deep breath, relax, and have a bit of patience.
p.4 #9 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
geniousc wrote:
I think that I read where the LCD overlay is removable, to what effect this will have on MF I don't know. This is dissappointing, I have a ton of high end MF lenses.
I wonder what they were thinking about when they did this. As someone else said, designers don't use cameras.
Well as much as it might suck, Canon is not in the market to keep alt glass users happy. I use some alt glass, but haven't changed screens. I have to use lenses from f/1.4 to f/5.6, so won't cop the dull VF when using the slower glass.
p.4 #10 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
KaaX wrote:
A focusing screen is what you look at in the optical viewfinder, it's a piece of glass that the image coming in through the lens is projected on.
There are certain trade-offs in the design of focusing screens. In particular, there's one between brightness and "resolution". Most contemporary cameras pick more brightness and less "resolution" because the camera auto-focuses and you don't need to see where the precise focus is. That is not true if you're using a manual focus lens and focus through the viewfinder (as opposed to, say, by LiveView). Therefore people who use manual focus lenses much will often swap out the stock focusing screen for another one which is less bright but is more suited to manual focusing.
If you don't use manual focus, you generally wouldn't care. ...Show more →
Not to pick nits with an excellent explanation but many landscape/architectural photographers switch to a grid screen even though they may not focus manually very much. Unfortunately Canon's optional grid screen isn't very good, at least mine isn't. The grid lines aren't dark enough so it's hard to see them.
p.4 #11 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
Considering that Canon has given up the S-screen, it becomes important for me to evaluate the Nikon D800 opportunity... so I repeat my previous question: why do Nikon users seem not to feel the need of a better a "S-like" focusing screen? Is there something in their cameras that helps focusing a manual lens (Nikon tilt&shift lenses or Zeiss ZF lenses)?
p.4 #13 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
fracas wrote:
Considering that Canon has given up the S-screen, it becomes important for me to evaluate the Nikon D800 opportunity... so I repeat my previous question: why do Nikon users seem not to feel the need of a better a "S-like" focusing screen? Is there something in their cameras that helps focusing a manual lens (Nikon tilt&shift lenses or Zeiss ZF lenses)?
Nikons come with a screen that works well with manual lenses. The D700 and D3 VF's are also a lot brighter than the 5D2 which allows them to use an S type screen without the penalty of getting too dark.
p.4 #14 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
geniousc wrote:
Nikons come with a screen that works well with manual lenses. The D700 and D3 VF's are also a lot brighter than the 5D2 which allows them to use an S type screen without the penalty of getting too dark.
Thanks! So we have to wait for D800 and 5DmkII before deciding ... maybe also new Canon screen could be good with MF lenses ...
Mar 03, 2012 at 11:44 AM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #15 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
geniousc wrote:
Nikons come with a screen that works well with manual lenses. The D700 and D3 VF's are also a lot brighter than the 5D2 which allows them to use an S type screen without the penalty of getting too dark.
The Nikon D700 is less good than the 5D2 when it comes to focusing screens
p.4 #16 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
If you are talking standard screens I wouldn't agree with you at all. The D700 pentaprism is brighter, the info on the bottom is very easy to see, you don't have to change screens to use MF effectively. Much improved over the 5D2. I shot both for several years. Check it out.
p.4 #17 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
mco_970 wrote:
I wondered if it was a sign to Samyang, Zeiss, etc. to get their scurfy manually focusing paws off of Canon's 35/85/100 lens market.
I use a 1Ds and have the stock screen, and haven't had an AF lens in several years. I have used the Samyang 85mm 1,4 and 35mm and haven't had a problem with focusing...
p.4 #18 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
melcat wrote:
If the only decent viewfinder on a full-frame EOS is on a $6800 camera, what's really the point? Why are we humping around retrofocus wides when the SLR mirror doesn't provide the benefit it did in 1970?
Good point! However, I think the 5D Mark III will have a good viewfinder, even if its screen isn't as good as an Eg-S screen. Certainly, it will have a far better viewfinder than the best electronic viewfinders. Every month or two when I'm in an electronics store I pick up the latest Panasonic, thinking it might be the one that proves electronic viewfinders can finally challenge optical. Nope. They're all shockingly bad. You'd have to be blind or blinded by technology to prefer one of those over even a cheap pentaprism viewfinder.
But clearly, very few photographers care about interchangeable focusing screens. Nikon has even dumped them for the D4, breaking a tradition that started in 1959 with the original F. Judging by the scale of the outcry, I was the only one who noticed!
Mar 03, 2012 at 05:44 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #19 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
geniousc wrote:
If you are talking standard screens I wouldn't agree with you at all. The D700 pentaprism is brighter, the info on the bottom is very easy to see, you don't have to change screens to use MF effectively. Much improved over the 5D2. I shot both for several years. Check it out.
When talking about "which one that is the best when it comes to focusing screens"
I would say the 5D2 wins rather easy. Just the feature it has with different focusing screens, that you very quick and easy can change yourself is such a huge advantage. It's not like one kind of screen is the best for all people, all lenses or all kind of photography.
p.4 #20 · No interchangeable focusing screens for 5D3
Dustin Gent wrote:
I use a 1Ds and have the stock screen, and haven't had an AF lens in several years. I have used the Samyang 85mm 1,4 and 35mm and haven't had a problem with focusing...
You and your impeccable eyesight! For MF I need the EG-S screen in my 5D2, or a good live view system (ala Sony 5N) works well, too... I am curious to see if they have tweaked the live view system in the 5D3 to make it a little faster and more convenient.
??!!!!!!! WTF CANON
For MF I need the EG-S screen in my 5D2, or a good live view system (ala Sony 5N) works well, too... 
I am curious to see if they have tweaked the live view system in the 5D3 to make it a little faster and more convenient.