baachitraka
Established
How are hopf ground glass compared to original Rolleicord Va glass or any Rollei glass?
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
My name is Ray and I am a Rolleiflex junkie. I have Maxwells and stock screens on my Rollei's. I find the stock screen with the dome in the middle to be the best overall screen for ease of focus. However the stock screen has a lot of glare so for outdoors shooting waist level the stock screen can white out while the Maxwell will not. This is important to me.
JPD
Retina and Rollei user
The original ground glass is easy to focus on, as the grain size is "just right" and if the mirror is good. And it's brighter than in any pre-Vb Rolleicord since the viewing lens is a 2,8 instead of 3,1. Use the loupe when you need to and you'll be fine. If you want brighter corners you can always get a Rolleigrid fresnel lens to put over the ground glass.
furcafe
Mentor
Ditto. For me, the Maxwell screens have increased usability compared to the stock screens. The only Rolleiflex that I occasionally have trouble focusing is the Wide because of the increased perceived DoF in the VF, but I have the same problem w/wides on all TLRs/SLRs, no matter the screen type.
thompsonks
Well-known
I wish you could see for yourself the original and the Maxwell in side-by-side cameras. I prefer the grid without the focusing aid and have never had trouble focusing with Maxwells. I think you'll end up wanting one, so I'd suggest you get it done initially – then you don't have to send it away twice, which is going to be a nuisance!
JHutchins
Well-known
I'm on the fence with this. I used Rolleiflexes almost exclusively 'til 7 or 8 years ago and it's still my favorite film camera. And I always used the stock screen. Recently I had one overhauled by Harry Fleenor (enthusiastically -- and unsurprisingly -- recommended) and had him put in a Maxwell screen.
I think it is marginally harder to identify the precise plane of sharp focus. It's not a tremendous difference, but it really does exist. I also use it a lot in questionable light and had grown accustomed enough to the stock screen that it worked more or less like an extinction meter -- I was reasonably good at judging exposure based on what I could make out on the screen even where I wasn't particular good at judging exposure based on what I could see with my unassisted eyes. That's lost now too.
On the other hand, it really is a joy to look through now in a way that it wasn't before. It's just a more fun camera to use and is definitely much easier to use whenever light is shining on the screen. And it can be focused. So it's really going to be a taste thing in the end.
I'd use it for a bit before sending it off to give yourself a basis to judge the usability of the original screen.
I think it is marginally harder to identify the precise plane of sharp focus. It's not a tremendous difference, but it really does exist. I also use it a lot in questionable light and had grown accustomed enough to the stock screen that it worked more or less like an extinction meter -- I was reasonably good at judging exposure based on what I could make out on the screen even where I wasn't particular good at judging exposure based on what I could see with my unassisted eyes. That's lost now too.
On the other hand, it really is a joy to look through now in a way that it wasn't before. It's just a more fun camera to use and is definitely much easier to use whenever light is shining on the screen. And it can be focused. So it's really going to be a taste thing in the end.
I'd use it for a bit before sending it off to give yourself a basis to judge the usability of the original screen.
Luddite Frank
Well-known
How many TLR folks use the built-in focusing magnifier when shooting, and does this help with critical focusing when using a Maxwell screen ?
( I'm a TLR newbie as far as shooting the damned things... have been picking them up here and there for years...)
Luddite Frank
( I'm a TLR newbie as far as shooting the damned things... have been picking them up here and there for years...)
Luddite Frank
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I certainly ALWAYS use the magnifier for any 6x6 TLR or SLR with a waist level finder. It's the only way to reliably achieve critically accurate focus, with any screen.
G
Jonathan
Established
Sightly OT, but years ago I had a Beattie screen fitted to my Hasselblad, was a great move.
Still use it today.
Jonathan
Still use it today.
Jonathan
filmtime
Member
I did some walking around today and went through the motion of making photos, even though there's no film in the camera right now.
I did find the screen fairly dim.
However, I used my light meter, and it seems that whenever the screen is unpleasantly dim, the shutter speed would need to be so slow (with the lens wide open) that I wouldn't be able to hand hold a shot then anyways.
I am beginning to consider the Maxwell screen again though...
I'm sending it out the Harry Fleenor this evening. I might wait to see what his overhaul estimate is before deciding on the screen. I think I'm a bit worried about the whole thing costing $600 - $700 altogether if I add a Maxwell.
Frankd
Established
I had a Maxwell screen put on my Rollei 3.5F. It is definitely brighter than the original screen. I had a split image in the middle surrounded by a ring of microgrid. The split image is useful for focusing on straight lines and I can use this without my glasses. The microgrid works well with the magnifier. If you use the magnifier all of the time I would recommend just having a circle of microgrid for focusing.
Oren Grad
Well-known
This is a real dilemma. The only way to know whether an upgraded screen will be better for you is to try it, but it's a $250 job by a qualified repairman and potentially many weeks' wait to make the change if you do want to try it. And what if you don't like it?
FWIW, I had Harry Fleenor overhaul a 3.5E, including installation of a Maxwell screen without focusing aid. I did not like the Maxwell screen at all. It certainly was brighter, but I found it very difficult to determine the point of best focus. Yes, I always use the magnifier. YMMV, which is precisely the problem.
The Rolleiflex has since moved on to another owner; there were other things I didn't like about it beyond the screen so there wasn't much point in fussing further.
I do still have a late-model Minolta Autocord with a split-image focus aid. That seems to be very helpful, but I only recently got the camera back from an overhaul by Karl Bryan and haven't yet had a chance to critically assess my focus accuracy and precision on film using the split-image vs the rest of the screen.
FWIW, I had Harry Fleenor overhaul a 3.5E, including installation of a Maxwell screen without focusing aid. I did not like the Maxwell screen at all. It certainly was brighter, but I found it very difficult to determine the point of best focus. Yes, I always use the magnifier. YMMV, which is precisely the problem.
The Rolleiflex has since moved on to another owner; there were other things I didn't like about it beyond the screen so there wasn't much point in fussing further.
I do still have a late-model Minolta Autocord with a split-image focus aid. That seems to be very helpful, but I only recently got the camera back from an overhaul by Karl Bryan and haven't yet had a chance to critically assess my focus accuracy and precision on film using the split-image vs the rest of the screen.
JHutchins
Well-known
That will probably be just about right. Here's what he did for mine:
overhaul transport $134.00, overhaul shutter (slow) $154.00, straighten bent feet $16.00, replace leather on back latch (missing) & leather on side (torn) & leather on front (torn) $59.00, install plain Hi-lux screen with grid $255.00 labor $10.00, UPS ground shipping with $900.00 insurance $55.00, total is $683.00
That was in August.
PMCC
Late adopter.
An Autocord overhauled by a specialist should be a very fine camera, and maybe a way to avert the original dilemma. Please let us know how it turns out for you.
vitaly66
slightly tilted
Yes exactly.
Couple other downsides the Maxwell advocates usually fail to mention:
1) The electrostatic charge of the plastic screen is a dust and crap magnet when compared to the orignal ground glass.
2) The surface of the plastic screen is very very delicate, easy to scratch, and requires considerable care in handling and caution to clean without spoiling it.
It is always a horror to me when, while focusing on a warm day, a bead of sweat rolls off my nose or forehead and falls *splot* right in the middle of my plastic focusing screen. Until the viewfinder can be safely disassembled and the screen carefully removed for cleaning, focusing with the sweat-stained screen is even that much harder!
furcafe
Mentor
maddoc
... likes film again.
For me it is impossible to focus without using the magnifier (having the Maxwell screen installed) and this extra step (flipping out the magnifier, focus, flipping it back to compose) costs valuable time when for example you try to take a quick portrait of your kids.
MikeL
Go Fish
This was true for me too with a 2.8E. I went back to the original screen. While the corners were dark in low light, it was worth the ease of focusing.
I have a 2.8F now, and the original screen for it is somewhere between the old ground glass (2.8E) and a Maxwell for focusing ease.
Srono
Established
I have maxwell screen on 2.8F and i have to second that it is fragile.
My camera went to Essex camera because it had back focus issue. It went back with the focus fixed plus 1cm scratch on the Maxwell. I didnt make any complaint though. I still found myself lucky as Essex was hit by Sandy right after that and out of business. They are good technicians.
My camera went to Essex camera because it had back focus issue. It went back with the focus fixed plus 1cm scratch on the Maxwell. I didnt make any complaint though. I still found myself lucky as Essex was hit by Sandy right after that and out of business. They are good technicians.
maddoc
... likes film again.
Now the problem is, as Harry Fleenor told me by email, the original screen and the Maxwell screen slightly differ in thickness so both screens have to be mounted with shims to keep focus. This would require also to send him the Rolleiflex back for converting to the old screen and I am hesitating to send cameras back and forth all the time ... Can the conversion be easily done DIY ?