Can you go lens... then Circular Polarizer Fitler... then "Petal" type hood?

I am thinking of buying Canon EW-78BII Lens Hood for EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6
IS Lens. Can you attach the circular polarizer filter to the lens and then
put the hood on and use the hood to adjust the filter or with this being
"Petal" shape hood is it not possible. The thought was you might be able to
do counter twisting to keep the hood placement. If you place the filter in
the hood... how easy is it to get your hand in the hood to adjust the
circular polarizer filter?

 

No, you can't use the hood to turn the filter. Canon hoods mount behind the
filters...not TO them.

It's not usually very easy to adjust with a hood on, but it partly depends
on the surfact of the rotation on the filter. Some filters have grip
grooves on the front...others on the sides. My super slim filters would be
hard to turn with a hood on because there's very little to grip.

 

Consider one of the rubber lens hoods that can be set for partial
collapse. They are cheaper than the Canon lens hoods and especially
useful for standard zooms. Pop the hood out all the way for the longer
settings, and set it half-way for normal focal lengths. Collapse it
all the way for the widest setting and to put the camera away.

Those hoods usually screw into the filter, so you could turn the
polarizer with it.

KS

 

Most Pentax lenses have a little hatch on the side of the hood so you
can get your finger in there and turn the polarizer. I'm surprised more
manufacturers don't do this.

In a lot of situations, though, you can just take off the bayonet hood,
adjust the filter, and then put the hood back on if you want.

 

Canon are too tight to even include the hoods with their lenses, so it
is no surprise that they don't think of things like the hatch on the hood.

 

You might get your facts straight, Mr. Pentax, before making stupid
remarks.

 

Well, they don't include hoods with any but their "L" lenses, as far as I
know.

 

Actually, every Canon L lens comes with a lens hood.
Most people who buy consumer lenses don't care to use them anyway, and for
those that do...it's usually about $20-25 for teh custom hood.

 

AFAIK, also. But he made a blanket statement that's wrong on its face.

 

Ok, sorry - I should have said "Canon are too tight to even include
hoods with their lenses, except the L series. The L series are canon's
high end lenses, which finally include things like hoods and pouches
that are included standard on most other manufacturer's entire range of
lenses". Makes you wonder where they get off though charging $20-$50 for
a piece of plastic that would probably cost about 10c to make in china,
which pretty much everyone else throws in for free. Especially when a
hood can have such a bearing on the quality of the photo. Or maybe it is
a smart move... Punter buys gold ring lens, finds the contrast
terrible and lots of flare spots and instead of thinking "I need a hood"
he thinks "I need an L lens".

 

Canon includes lens hoods with L glass.....


(at least they did with my 24-105)

 

Hi Ryan,
I have had the 28-135 for 4 years now and have no problems adjusting
the polariser filter through the cutouts in the hood.
You need to train yourself to slide your finger down the inside of the
hood so you don't end up with greasies on the filter. YMMV

Cheers,
Allan

 

It's called business, chum. They are a company that exists to make a
profit. If you don't understand this, then perhaps you should make sure
that you always work for someone else.

The fact is, the vast majority of consumer-level shooters wouldn't likely
care to use the hood, much less understand its benefits. That small
percentage of users doesn't likely justify sending millions of hoods to
everyone. It would be nice if they'd include a hood, but it doesn't take a
business genius to see why they don't.

 

Actually, the way things work is that if you don't like it, you don't
buy it. Canon's aware that the decision to buy their product typically
doesn't revolve around whether the petal hood is included or not, so
they charge for it.

 

See the sedon part of my post.
I agree.