sebboh wrote:
this is why i don't care about IQ, i can just sit at my computer and say "enhance" until i magically have a beautiful gigapixel image even without a hood.
On a really good day, you can do this even without a camera...
I use the ones with my 70-200L and Rokinon 85mm cos they fit in the LowePro bag attached to the lens. The hood for my wide angles are so much larger diameter than the lens that they don't fit in the lens bags, so i often don't bother with them.
I use them on my digital cameras with interchangeable lenses, 35mm, and Medium Format cameras and except when using circular polarizing filter, grad filters, square filters and a filter holder system like my Cokin P. When I shoot Large format which has become almost nil right now, not often.
Hoods are useless when the sun is in frame, So I typically use lenses that can handle flare like that, or I use lenses that produce nice flare, so lenses with bad flare rarely get used. I wish more lenses had a built in hood.
Almost always, but only because most of my lenses have built-in hoods. For the ones that don't, it's closer to 50% or less.
I think it's a shame designers stopped including built-ins, at least where they made sense (normals to super-tele primes). I really think they should move to built-ins on their premium zooms and make them so you can lock the hoods in and have them geared to the zoom function to lengthen and retract with your changing focal length. If you don't want the hood, to avoid flash shadows or whatever, you unlock so it stays retracted. That way you'd always have the lens hood you needed, not some big hunk of plastic that typically compromises performance at one end of the zoom range in favor of the other.
freaklikeme wrote:
I think it's a shame designers stopped including built-ins, at least where they made sense (normals to super-tele primes). I really think they should move to built-ins on their premium zooms and make them so you can lock the hoods in and have them geared to the zoom function to lengthen and retract with your changing focal length. If you don't want the hood, to avoid flash shadows or whatever, you unlock so it stays retracted. That way you'd always have the lens hood you needed, not some big hunk of plastic that typically compromises performance at one end of the zoom range in favor of the other....Show more →
I have 'em mostly, but often don't have time to use them...second the preference for the built-in hood, several of the Leica Rs do this very well, and interestingly many great lenses from other makers. Very wide angle hoods are a cruel joke or maybe a fashion statement, except for protection if you bang it on something, or drop it face down.
Some of the tele hoods are huge, too big to carry. Have others noticed how often you see ghosts in movie footage these days - just saw Django Unchained, had a fair bit of it. Fine movie too.
Hats work well. I only lose maybe one shot in 400 to ghosting, which sometimes looks pretty good.
'What doesn't vignette your photos, makes you stronger!' Makes your mouse hand stronger when you add it to lots of images, lol. Or use Zeiss..
ricardovaste wrote:
There are very few lenses that don't benefit from having a hood (with regard to flare control), but almost every lens benefits from a hood with regard to protecting it a little more. I always have my hoods on.
Two exceptions for me are 1) crowded, jostling events, 2) on-camera flash creating shadow. These often happen in the same situation. For events, I usually use 5D2 and 24-70L, or 60D and 15-85 IS, with filter and no hood, 280EX II flash.
