Lens hoods: To each his own foolishness!

[Andreas Thaler]

I believe that everyone has a special weakness, a preference, a tic, a folly.

Be it that, we're talking about photography, of course, he avoids odd aperture numbers because they bring bad luck; chases a certain Leica across the globe in ascending order by serial number; or built an extension to his house for his uncontrollably growing collection of photographic equipment.

What fantasy creates is already reality somewhere.

It doesn't have to be that bad, milder forms of the foolishness are enough.

For me, I absolutely want (must have) the original lens hood for each of my lenses and I do everything I can to achieve that

Only when it comes to my Tokina do I have mercy on myself and turn a blind eye.

I don't know why, but otherwise - currently it's Tamron - I'm tirelessly searching ...

 

[BrianShaw]

For decades I was satisfied with generic rubber collapsible type. Last year I got rid of them and replaced with original Nikon metal shades. At least one for each lens and several spares too. I’m much happier now. You are not alone!

 

[Andreas Thaler]

You are not alone!

Great!!

 

[Andreas Thaler]

It's just that I have seven lens systems …

 

[xkaes]

I learned a long time ago that lens shades are the cheapest and easiest way to improve your results. Just about every lens that I've bought new had a lens shade, but for various reasons, I decided to check their effectiveness. I wanted maximum coverage without the possibility of vignetting -- especially at close distances, and when using filters, both of which I often do. I found the for nearly all of my lenses, a lens hood for a slightly longer lens always did better -- withOUT creating a problem.

For example, my 24mm lens uses a shade for a 28mm lens. My 28mm lens uses a shade for a 35mm lens. My 35mm lens uses a shade for a 50mm lens. And on it goes. For my 58mm lens, I use a shade from a 80-200mm zoom.

 

[BrianShaw]

I assume you meant to write “… withOUT creating a problem.”

Very interesting experience… I just took manufacturer recommendation yet can see how your data would often be better.

 

[laser]

There are three effective and inexpensive camera accessories to improve picture quality: lens hood, skylight filter, and tripod.

 

[Andreas Thaler]

There are three effective and inexpensive camera accessories to improve picture quality: lens hood, skylight filter, and tripod.

Skylight?

That‘s new to me?

 

[xkaes]

I use UV instead, and it's mainly to protect the lens glass.

I second the tripod -- but that doesn't fall into the "cheap and easy" category for me.

 

[BrianShaw]

Generally I state it as "tripod or monopod, depending". A monopod can sometimes be extremely useful and effective.

 

[Paul Howell]

When I was in college we were taught to always use a lens hood. In the 60s and into the 70s coating were not as good as they are today, a decent 50mm with 5-7 elements were prone to flare. My old Argus C3 single coated even with a lens hood will flare at the drop of a hat. I always thought that lens hood also gave the front element a bit of protection when shooting in a crowd.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have been successful with after market lens hoods for Hasselblad and some of my 35mm lenses, but I am always careful to get lens hoods designed for a particular lens rather than taking a chance with a generic lens hood. Others do have good luck with generic 35mm lens hoods designed for the focal length lens they are using, that should work but that is always a fallback for me.

 

[Hassasin]

tripod is not for every occasion, monopod can also get in the way, even if both help a lot where they can be used.

skylight filter I think was designed by marketing departments.

 

[IMoL]

Yes! I feel weird using a lens without the correct lens hood. The only exception in my arsenal is my Nikon AF-D 28-105 - the original lens hood is so monstrously large that I use a hood for another Nikon lens that works ok and also allows the lens to fit in my camera bag,

 

[Disappointed_Horse]

I have original lens hoods for most of my lenses. However, I have some JJC screw-in metal lens hoods as well and I have to say they are even better than the originals. I have the standard JJC hoods in 49mm and 52mm, and the great thing about them is you can attach a 58mm lens cap on the front of the hood. (Although in truth I've usually got a UV or colored B&W filter on the lens anyway so don't worry too much about not using a lens cap when I use my original hoods.)

 

[guangong]

UV filters are unnecessary for modern lenses which already have UV protection built in. However, UV filters do protect the lens from the elements. Some say that an extra piece of glass degrades the image, but that is something I have never detected.
Not all images are suitable for using a tripod. For less than LF, images can be improved by practicing how to release shutter while holding camera steady.

 

[Rayt]

It drives me nuts when I see people in tourist areas shooting with zooms with their hoods inverted the way they came out of the box. I walked up to a total stranger once to correct that behaviour. But there are too many too many. Must divert eyes.

 

[Andreas Thaler]

It drives me nuts when I see people in tourist areas shooting with zooms with their hoods inverted the way they came out of the box. I walked up to a total stranger once to correct that behaviour. But there are too many too many. Must divert eyes.

This protects your lenses. This is why some people never remove the front cover

 

[Flighter]

For me, I absolutely want (must have) the original lens hood for each of my lenses and I do everything I can to achieve that

Yes, me too, but I'm still searching for some, a couple of the OM Zuiko ones are very expensive.

 

[ic-racer]

I thought people would share their rare, expensive or just fancy lenshoods here.

I have some I like. These three are clamp-on with a little knob. The Rolleiflex goes for $400 new, though mine came to me attached to a lens. The other two are for the Horseman 6x9 Technical camera's widest and longest lenses.

 

[Jim Jones]

$400? What an opportunity for Chinese entrepreneurs! Better yet, an opportunity for the rest of the World to provide much less expensive hoods made with TODAY'S technology with the photographer's name or whatever the photographer desires engraved instead of the commonplace Rollei logo merely printed!

 

[mshchem]

The beautiful dedicated metal lens hoods are the best. I don't like the looks of the "tulip shape" lens hoods. I use appropriate size 77mm RZ hoods on my Nikon zooms, folded these protect from bumps.

 

[Jim Jones]

The beautiful dedicated metal lens hoods are the best. I don't like the looks of the "tulip shape" lens hoods. I use appropriate size 77mm RZ hoods on my Nikon zooms, folded these protect from bumps.

I agree that the tulip shape hoods aren't pretty, but they should be about as efficient as the rectangular ones, and that's the important thing. They may also be easier to fabricate.

 

[ic-racer]

The Switar (Bolex H8) lenshoods are essential of one wants to use filters. Unlike the H16's Wratten filter holder behind the lens, there is not enough room behind the lens of the 8mm Bolex.
The filters are 'Series' size and are held in place by the lenshood.
In my case, filming B&W, the neutral density filters are nice to avoid those tiny pinhole apertures on bright days.

 

[ant!]

For my Minolta stuff (manual and AF), I'd say I have 3/4 of the original hoods, but still looking for the others. I don't mind that I share the same screw in one for all 50mm (f2/1.4/1.2).

All original for Pentax 645 (manual and AF), but the older manual use the rubber collapsible type, and at least one for my most used lenses the rubber hood detached from the metal filter screw ring. Tried to glue it, but not great, might need a different one or alternative

For my Praktina with 50s Zeiss Jena lenses: all hoods missing, I think I should just get some generic ones, doubt I'll find the originals easy. Same for some rangefinders and folders...