I am currently building a brace of lenses for my Nikon F4s. The most recent purchase is a spotless Nikkor ai 24mm f2.8. I have read that these nifty wide angle lenses benefit greatly from a lens hood. The Nikon chart calls for an HN-1 hood for this lens but of course I only have a HN-2 at the moment (for 28mm f3.5). Would it be unadvisable to use the HN-2 as opposed to using no hood at all? Has anyone tried it?
Lens Hood Question
-
A
- Thread starter WILL WORK FOR FILM
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale US suspends de minimis exemption effective August 29, 2025
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale ORIGINAL ROLLEIFLEX LENS SHADE
- Started by Philippe-Georges
-
For Sale T-max 4x5 100 kodak ready loads. expired 2008, kept frozen
- Started by Early Riser
-
For Sale Images in Science, excellent scientific imaging. $10
- Started by laser
Forum statistics
Lens hoods are like condoms. Never use one without the other. To see if your HN-2 works try it with the lens stopped down all the way and check your DOF. If you don't see any vignetting you are probably ok. Not sure if the F4s shows 100% of image area so if it doesn't you will have to do some shooting for a final test. If you filters you will have to redo the test with them.
Not sure about Nikon, but for 42mm Pentax, the 28 hood will not on the 24 lens, will vignette in each of the corners, not all that noticeable until you print. But has Eric Rose says stop the lens down and check.
There's a chance the HN-2 will be OK, but as mentioned, the only way to be sure is to take some shots. Subjects with a lot of sky will show any problems easily. I've got the older 24/2.8 pre-AI and it's a good performer in harsh light. I do keep the HN-1 hood on at all times.
Good advice. I would never had thought to check the DOF button. And the F4 has a 100% viewfinder. Only one thing left to do. "Try it on for SIZE".
Thanks to you all.
Thanks to you all.
Just as long as you know what they are for.
Ahhh, so we fill the lens hoods with water and throw them off the roof. Got it. Now I know.
Just don't wear a lens hood instead of a condom or you may end up with a surprise in 9 months!
I always thought that automatic transmissions were like condoms. You can get the job done with either but it's just not the same feeling.
I love my manual transmission!
Absent anyone's direct experience here, the only way to know is to try it. Even so, sometimes even Nikon doesn't make a good recommendation. A case in point is the 28-85 on my F3/T: Nikon charts specifically recommended the HK-16, which I bought:
which vignettes badly at 28mm. I have to go to 35mm on this lens to avoid it.
...
I love my manual transmission!
[off-topic rant]
Both of my sports cars have manual transmissions. I prefer it for the sense of involvement in driving; a computer isn't making the decisions for me. It's not about the automatic / semi-automatic / paddle whatever shifting in 12 milliseconds. I don't care. I'm not racing for millions of Euros. There is so much fun, skill, and mastery of technique with a manual gearbox. I'm keeping the older sports cars because the newer ones are all automatic now (no choice). The new ones have more power, but with all their electronic subsystems they're disposable. No one will maintain them much after 10 years. Hmmm... sounds familiar.
[end rant]
I agree with you, Theo. Even stopping down sometimes you can't tell if a hood vignettes. You just have to try it and see.
I don't own a sports car but I do own a Jeep. On or off road I still prefer the manual transmission. An automatic transmission in a sports car or Jeep ruins them in my opinion.
Until you are rock crawling with a manual transmission and it stall part way through a climb. If you move your foot to the clutch to put it into neutral and release the brake to give it gas, you roll back. Some will disable the neutral switch on the clutch so that they can use the starter to crank them over the object. It is much safer and easier to have an automatic which will not stall in that situation. I am talking about real rock crawling with a good watch to work ratio, not the wussy mud and tree stuff back East.
No central handbrake to hold on the hill / rock? Maybe not - for rock climbing I'd guess you need to brake all four wheels for safety.
Back in the day, in England, if you rolled back on a hill that'd be cause for failing your driving exam.
Yes, rock crawling is definitely easier with an automatic. It takes more skill to use a manual transmission. Here in Missouri it's more about mud and trails through woods and creek beds. I was a passenger once in my friend's souped up Chevy Blazer. We came up a muddy hill at speed and all you could see through the windshield was sky. Even with seat belts with shoulder straps our heads hit the roof when we landed. First with the rear tires hitting the ground and then the front tires. It may not be rock crawling but I wouldn't call it wussy.
I'm a long time subscriber to JP magazine and have read a lot about rock crawling in the west. I also have four wheel drive cd's showing people doing it. I would have loved to have driven the Rubicon or the slick rock in Moab. My back isn't up to that stuff any more though.
Last edited:
According to the grapevine, most of the photos in JP magazine were made with an F4s and a 24/2.8 lens. Had a hood on it though.
It is called rock crawling for a reason and I use offroad suspension seats to take out most of the bumping and bouncing. I do not have sponsors so I take is slowly. No desert racing for me because I have to pay for my own damage.
So you are Sirius Off Roader as well as Sirius Glass!
Yeah, I know all about paying for my own damage. Been there and done that. I can't afford it anymore plus it's just too hard on my back. I had a back fusion back in December of 1994. The arthritis in my back has steadily gotten worse over the years, so I do what I can.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |