Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > How important is a lens hood?

Reply
Thread Tools

How important is a lens hood?

 
 
Harlen Ng
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2004
I'm curious on how important is a len hood. These are
the ones attached to the end of the camera lens. Are there
special situations that it is really needed? Most camera
lens are multi-coated and having a hood attached extends
the length of the camera lens.

Thanks -

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Jeremy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2004

"Harlen Ng" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I'm curious on how important is a len hood. These are
> the ones attached to the end of the camera lens. Are there
> special situations that it is really needed? Most camera
> lens are multi-coated and having a hood attached extends
> the length of the camera lens.
>
> Thanks -
>


Estremely important. The lens must be shielded from off-axis light, or you
risk veiling glare. You should use a hood even at night. You paid a lot
for an excellent lens--it would be a shame to cripple it's contrast by
failing to use a hood.

It is entirely possible that a cheap lens, used with a hood, will have less
flare than an excellent lens, used without a hood.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
J. A. Mc.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2004
On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 07:36:17 -0800, Harlen Ng <(E-Mail Removed)> found
these unused words floating about:

>I'm curious on how important is a len hood. These are
>the ones attached to the end of the camera lens. Are there
>special situations that it is really needed? Most camera
>lens are multi-coated and having a hood attached extends
>the length of the camera lens.
>
>Thanks -


As long as you love 'sunspots' ... don't bother.

 
Reply With Quote
 
David
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2004

"Harlen Ng" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I'm curious on how important is a len hood. These are
> the ones attached to the end of the camera lens. Are there
> special situations that it is really needed? Most camera
> lens are multi-coated and having a hood attached extends
> the length of the camera lens.


It really depends on the individual lens and your situation.

If the light source is to your back, for the most part you don't need one.
However, if the sun is overhead or slightly in front of you, lens flare can
ruin your shot.

Some lenses are more prone to flare than others.

And some photogs have used lens flare on purpose for effect. Personally, my
philosophy is to avoid it. I'll add it digitally later if I think it will
enhance the shot.

Dave
Earguy


 
Reply With Quote
 
Roger
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2004
On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 07:36:17 -0800, Harlen Ng <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>I'm curious on how important is a len hood. These are
>the ones attached to the end of the camera lens. Are there
>special situations that it is really needed? Most camera
>lens are multi-coated and having a hood attached extends
>the length of the camera lens.
>
>Thanks -


I use a lens hood whenever possible. For all the light shielding
reasons already mentioned and for sheer lens protection from bumps and
finger prints. On a more rigid lens, like sturdy zooms or very durable
single focal length, that might be used on a (D)SLR a hood can save a
lens from serious damage in a collision with car/revolving doors and
other fast moving object (e.g. the ground). On my very compact P&S,
Contax T3, the hood doesn't offer the same kind of collision
protection because the basic lens isn't really robust enough. However,
there is dramatic improvement on an already good lens when hooded and
used in the bright sunlight. It's standards equipment on that camera,
especially when outdoors.

I prefer hoods for protection over filters.

Regards,
Roger

 
Reply With Quote
 
Roland Karlsson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2004
"Jeremy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in newsJaRb.26316$i4.16345
@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net:

> Estremely important. The lens must be shielded from off-axis light, or you
> risk veiling glare. You should use a hood even at night. You paid a lot
> for an excellent lens--it would be a shame to cripple it's contrast by
> failing to use a hood.
>
> It is entirely possible that a cheap lens, used with a hood, will have less
> flare than an excellent lens, used without a hood.
>


If it is extremely important - I assume you use a zoom hood not to
ruin your tele pictures. Right?


/Roland
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jeremy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2004

"Roland Karlsson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Xns947CBD66EF011rolandkarlssonchello@130.133. 1.4...
> "Jeremy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in newsJaRb.26316$i4.16345
> @newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net:
>
> > Estremely important. The lens must be shielded from off-axis light, or

you
> > risk veiling glare. You should use a hood even at night. You paid a

lot
> > for an excellent lens--it would be a shame to cripple it's contrast by
> > failing to use a hood.
> >
> > It is entirely possible that a cheap lens, used with a hood, will have

less
> > flare than an excellent lens, used without a hood.
> >

>
> If it is extremely important - I assume you use a zoom hood not to
> ruin your tele pictures. Right?
>


I don't use zooms, only primes. My digicam has a 38-86 zoom and I DO have a
lens hood affixed. My 35mm lenses all have hoods. I have a 85-205 zoom for
the 35mm camera, but I don't use it,as it has too much veiling glare and
poor contrast. It, too has a hood, but the quality of the glass was just
not up to par.

Since I've begun using hoods, my photos all have benefitted from higher
contrast and more saturated colors. I would suggest that, for the little
bit of money spent, use of a hood has the best bang for the buck in
improving one's images. Hoods and tripods are the two accessories that are
essential, in my view.


 
Reply With Quote
 
DHB
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2004
Totally agree with the use of lens hoods for all of the reasons thus far
mentioned but here is fuel for thought:

If my understanding is incorrect, I hope other more knowledgeable people
on this news group will politely let me know.

Since I own a DSLR (Canon Digital Rebel/300D) which has a smaller sensor
than standard 35mm film, it's made me rethink the lens hoods I use when I
use 35mm lens on this camera.

Since this DSLR has a FOV crop factor of 1.6x, that means that a 50mm
has an effective FOV of an 80mm lens. Would it not also be wise to narrow
the angle of acceptance of the lens hood to more closely match "effective
FOV" of this lens when used on such a DSLR?

In most satiations the 35mm lens hood designed for the lens by the
manufacturer would be best but with a DSLR with a FOV crop factor of 1.6x, I
think a longer lens hood should be considered when shooting pictures with a
bight light source unavoidably close to your subject in order to minimize
the possibility of unwanted light entering the lens.

Personally I have used extended lens hoods without vignetting. After
all if a 100mm lens has a FOV of 28 degrees why use a lens hood with a 50
degree angle of acceptance? Would a lens hood with a 30 or 35 degree angle
of acceptance perform better in most situations?

Just my 2 cents but it makes me wonder if others out there with
specialized lighting needs have not also done this?

Respectfully, DHB

"Roger" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 07:36:17 -0800, Harlen Ng <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
> >I'm curious on how important is a len hood. These are
> >the ones attached to the end of the camera lens. Are there
> >special situations that it is really needed? Most camera
> >lens are multi-coated and having a hood attached extends
> >the length of the camera lens.
> >
> >Thanks -

>
> I use a lens hood whenever possible. For all the light shielding
> reasons already mentioned and for sheer lens protection from bumps and
> finger prints. On a more rigid lens, like sturdy zooms or very durable
> single focal length, that might be used on a (D)SLR a hood can save a
> lens from serious damage in a collision with car/revolving doors and
> other fast moving object (e.g. the ground). On my very compact P&S,
> Contax T3, the hood doesn't offer the same kind of collision
> protection because the basic lens isn't really robust enough. However,
> there is dramatic improvement on an already good lens when hooded and
> used in the bright sunlight. It's standards equipment on that camera,
> especially when outdoors.
>
> I prefer hoods for protection over filters.
>
> Regards,
> Roger
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Roland Karlsson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2004
"Jeremy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:v8dRb.26473$(E-Mail Removed) ink.net:

> I don't use zooms, only primes. My digicam has a 38-86 zoom and I DO
> have a lens hood affixed. My 35mm lenses all have hoods. I have a
> 85-205 zoom for the 35mm camera, but I don't use it,as it has too much
> veiling glare and poor contrast. It, too has a hood, but the quality of
> the glass was just not up to par.
>
> Since I've begun using hoods, my photos all have benefitted from higher
> contrast and more saturated colors. I would suggest that, for the
> little bit of money spent, use of a hood has the best bang for the buck
> in improving one's images. Hoods and tripods are the two accessories
> that are essential, in my view.
>


You are absolutely right.

Unfortunately most here use some kind of zoom camera
or they use a DSLR with a zoom lens. In both cases
lens hoods are awkward, and in many cases for the
compact zoom camera they are near to impossible.

I have tried to figure out how to use one for
my Canon G2 - but with no success.


/Roland
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jeremy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2004

"Roland Karlsson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>
> Unfortunately most here use some kind of zoom camera
> or they use a DSLR with a zoom lens. In both cases
> lens hoods are awkward, and in many cases for the
> compact zoom camera they are near to impossible.
>


My Ricoh RDC 5000 comes with an excellent lens hood, that matches the camera
body color scheme. Results are dramatic on sunny days! Too bad all
digicams don't come with matching hoods.

Most of my other gear is 35mm SLRs, and I use all Pentax prime lenses, all
with their matching hoods. I have an Olympus Stylus and a Yashica TLR,
neither of which have lens hoods, but I don't use them much.

I became educated about lens hoods only a few years ago, and I am amazed at
the improvement they make in my images. I only recently became aware that
hoods are equally essential at night--as there is plenty of off-axis light
from street lights, etc., that can get into one's lens and cause flare or
glare. Now I use hoods at every opportunity.

Strange thing is that all of my Pentax primes came with matching hoods,
EXCEPT for the normal 50mm lens that came bundled with the camera--and that
happens to be the prime lens that I use most! Go figure . . .


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: How include a large array? Edward A. Falk C Programming 1 04-04-2013 08:07 PM
How important are lens hoods? Tom Hise Digital Photography 50 04-04-2010 03:47 PM
Canon A620 or Panasonic DMC-FZ7, is a large lens important? Bart Wakker Digital Photography 2 04-02-2006 03:28 PM
Help deciding on Zeiss lens camera T* that important? AdopteCH Digital Photography 3 12-29-2005 07:13 PM
Tamron lens *is* crap --> interesting lens comparison! Beowulf Digital Photography 12 08-24-2003 05:21 PM



Advertisments