Put a SA-26 (LX-screen especially designed for long tele-lenses) in the LX
with a 4/200 and it will help you (a bit) against dark corners in the viewfinder.
Now put it in the MX. Shock!! Where is the light!? Only a spot in the middle,
the rest is deep darkness.

Now a SA-21 (for general photography) and a SA-1(same MX-type)
both in MX-bodies
(for example with 4/100 macro lenses).
Compared with a SA-1 the SA21 might be that "famous-forum-1/3-f-stop" brighter,
but the grain is horribly precise to see, whereas in the MX with its own screen
the grain does not jump in your eye so sharp, black and brutal, that with wideangle-
lenses it even covers the fine structures in your picture.
And don't let's forget, that we sometimes have more darkness in the corners
when using LX-screens.

We don't need more examples, we don't need normal LX-screens, and we don't
need (sorry, if you have already bought one) LX-2000-screens.
I'm sure type 60 is better than the old 20, because that never was so good,
whereas other brands (Minolta, Hasselblad, Leica,...) already had
high-tech-inventions in their viewfinders many years ago.

But with the finer grain the MX-user would also get an
under-exposure of nearly 1,5 EV.
And to make confusion perfect, nearly every single type of LX-screen will give us
 an un-expected metering result, no matter whether it's an old or new type:
SE60=1,5EV / SE20=1,5EV / SA26=1,5EV / SA21=0,5EV . . .

Nobody who has really tested 5 or more LX-screens in a MX,
will continue to talk about the
"small amount of under-exposure you can ignore".
Which MX-User will really be delighted, to adjust his exposure metering
whenever he has changed the screen?

As I mentioned above, both cameras have total different viewfinder systems.
Look through a MX and a LX with a standard lens. One could think there is a short
tele on the MX! Why? Because the MX has a much greater finder-magnification!!
The next big difference you know very well: Little MX has a very small prism-glass!!
Third: Different optical distances from eye to viewer-image!!

Now, who could await, that under these circumstances LX-screens would work
properly ( or even better !!! ) in a MX, whose findersystem demands
total different fresnell-lines on the screens.

What we need (and I'm glad to have it) is a screen of new technology,
that is made for a camera very similar to the MX (no, it's not the OM-1),
with exact the same focus distance.
Do we want it much brighter? Letting pass much more light?
No!
So nobody has to throw his MX-screens away
(after all we've found them working even better than those LX-ones).

The new high-tech-screen has to bring a bitmore light in the corners of our
MX-viewfinder, and we want a finegrain, that is nearly unremarkable.

The result is that bright and clear "panorama"-image, that many
MX-fans are longing for from the first day on.
That's the Hitecscreen.

The only problem to solve, is to fit it into the MX screen-frame,
because of its larger area.
I will do this risky cutting work for you professionally, and of course leave
a little "tongue" to grip the screen with the tweezers of the MX or LX screen-case
(if you don't have these tweezers, I will send you one I made by myself).

Naturally it is good "old" japanese technology and not one of those
american wonder-screens, that were sold from different USA-companies
for huge amounts of money, until finally the growing communication in the web
brought together all those, who had bought one and made bad experiences.