Lens Hoods

niemeyjt

Just putting all my lenses into a new camera case, it dawned on me how much extra space the lens hoods take up.

I cannot find a thread on this, so thought I would ask others views:

- an obsolete throwback to simpler times to be left in original packaging?

- an essential item to be carried at all times?

Or maybe something else.

J

spraynpray

Essential as a lens hood, essential as a protector of the end of the lens, handy to hold on a long lens, I can't think of a reason not to use mine. Turn it round if you are tight for space.

NSXTypeR

There are collapsing rubber lens hoods that screw onto the lens filter, but then you're going to have problems if you decide to use circular polarizers and stuff like that.

PB_PM

I always use lens hood, the lens designers don't make those things for the lenses for the fun of it. They cut of stray light that can negatively effect images.

heartyfisher

I have it on the lense most of the time. Or its in my bag. For packing in the bag you can put stuff in the space between the "petals" like a smaller lense or diffusers etc.

tcole1983

I always have and use my lens hoods. Personally they are always attached to my lens backwards when the lenses aren't in use. When using the lens it is my form of protection if nothing else...I don't use lens filters so the hood keeps me from bumping the front glass into anything. I actually recently dropped my camera and lens on a rock....the hood took the brunt of the impact and cracked. $20-$30 hood was much cheaper than $1000 lens.

TomB

Given that it is proven to aid images I cannot see the argument for not using a hood. Especially on longer teles. BUT given that Nikon Hoods are how we say, bloody expensive and way too easy to damage, I have chosen to use the Lenscoat Travel Hoods on both my 300 f2.8 and my 600 f4. They are easily packed flat so I can fit both of those lens, two bodies, and a few other lens into a remarkably small case. I will keep my carbon Nikon hoods but they are currently gathering dust in my gear closet.

pictureted

I always used lens hoods, but recently changed my mind. I had the hood on my 24-85 VR when my camera bag rolled forward. The hood acted as a lever and broke the front element. I've subsequently looked at the hoods and decided they are now a mixed bag. Yes they do provide offset from the front element, but on some of the wide and mid zooms they offer little protection from stray light and might be harmful in some impacts. I no longer use them on the 10-24DX, 16-85DX and 24-85VR.

Ironheart

Personally I only see the need when shooting in strong/contratsy light (i.e. almost directly into the sun, stage/concert lighting, etc...). That being said there is almost always a hood on my lens, just 'cause I don't know where else to put it.

NSXTypeR

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention the petal hood instantly adds +1000 credibility to your photography... or random snaps.

You won't get that if you leave the hood off.

Pistnbroke

I always keep the original hood (and lens cap/rear cap) unused in the box ready to sell the lens .I buy a cheap screw in hood on ebay for about $5 and stick it in the lathe remove the threads and turn it to get the right diameter for the bayonet on the lens.In with a file and it fits and locks into place.
With the 18-140 you don't even get a hood so its either $$$$ or modify one.
On my old sigma 17-35mm I made a hood with three petals cutting one off so the flash did not hit it !!
On my now sold Sigma 150-500 I had a $10 canon hood ET86 which had the lathe treatment ...new unused original sold with the lens.
So yes I use a hood as my cameras swing from a harness at weddings and it gives some bump/rain protection

spraynpray

"On my old sigma 17-35mm I made a hood with three petals cutting one off so the flash did not hit it !!"

Once more, @Pistnbroke displays 'outside the box' thinking LOL! I like it.

Pistnbroke

and whats more spray if you rotated it you could have a petal at the top and nothing at the bottom .....not a lot of sun shines out the ground

nukuEX2

I always use the hood.

PB_PM

Pistnbroke said:

.....not a lot of sun shines out the ground

If light didn't reflect off the ground, you wouldn't be able to see it (okay you could, but it would all appear black). Just use a polarizer on any kind of vegetation, and you'll soon see how much light reflects of the likes of grass, plants and other greenery.

Pistnbroke

PB-PM always willing to learn but I thought the hood was there to keep the front element in the shade ...ie so the direct light from the sun could not fall on the front element.............now I now Mr Trump is unpredictable but where I live the sun is in the sky

spraynpray

PB_PM

Pistnbroke said:

...where I live the sun is in the sky

Irrelevent. Light reflects off of all surfaces, which is why we can see them in the first place. If light did not reflect off a surface,you wouldn't be able to photograph it! Of course the lens hood is most effective for blocking intense light (sun, moon, artificial lighting), but it also reduces impact of light reflecting off other surfaces as well.

To put it simply, the hood can reduce the chance of odd colour casts in your image due to stray light bouncing off other objects, whether they be above, to the side or below you.

As for Mr.Trump, lets just say the American's can keep that nut for themselves.

Pistnbroke

If you got an expensive lens hood that keeps on falling off then buy a step up ring and fit that after the hood ..
So if the lens or UV are 72mm buy a 72-77mm step up ring and fit that ...hood cannot fall off ..under $5 on ebay cheaper than $50 for some hoods

Ironheart

@Pistnbroke if necessity is the mother of invention you are one clever mother-f'er

pictureted

To be clear my comment about the potential danger of using a hood is only for lenses that extend when zooming. If I zoom my 24-85 or 16-85 to 85mm, there is some play at the hood attachment. Not at all with the 70-200/4 or 16-35/4 or lenses than don't extend.
Before reflexively deciding, I'd recommend looking at your own lenses that extend when zoomed and see for yourself. I used to think the hood provided safety, now I use a Sigma ceramic filter instead. Since I stopped using these hoods, I really enjoy not carrying and fussing with them (the wide petal ones). I haven't noticed any denigration in images either.

spraynpray

For sure if pushing your luck with light sources like the sun isn't your style, or if the lenses you use aren't unusually prone to flare (hello Mr 14-24), then you're probably OK leaving it off. Care to share your lens collection with us @pictureted ?

donaldejose

I think lens hoods have the best effect when they keep the sun from directly hitting the front element. In the studio I mostly don't use them or need them. Outside I mostly use them because I cannot control the sun. I will also use my hand as a flag outside. I should add that when using primes the lens hoods are most effective because they can be extended to provide maximum effect. The lens hoods on wide angle to telephoto lenses are least effective because they have to be made so wide for the wide angle end that they offer little protection on the telephoto end. In some situations I will look for a place to shoot the telephoto shot from a shady spot or if there is some one with me have them stand so as to cast shade on the front of the lens or to hold a hat as a a flag to shade the front element. But I am glad the design and coatings on modern lenses are so good that lens hoods are not as important as they used to be.

pictureted

Lens Collection as requested:
AIS - 20/4, 28/2.8, 50/2, 55/2.8 (stuck blades), 85/2, 105/2.5, 200/4
Misc. - 500/8 reflex - last version (love the 1:2.5)
DX- 10-24, 10.5/2.8 Fish, 16-85VR, 35/1.8
FX - 16-35/4, 20/1.8G, 24-85VR, 28/1.8G, 50/1.8G, 60/2.8G, 70-200/4, 70-300VR, 85/1.8G, 105/2.8VR, 200/4 Macro, 200-500VR, 300/4 AF-S
TC1.4II and TC2.0III
Samyang 14/2.8, Zeiss 50/2 and100/2, Arax 80/2.8TS
Standard Kit - 20/1.8G, 24-85VR and 70-200/4
Most often used - (other than standard kit) - 200/4 macro, Zeiss 100/2, 200-500VR
Least used and liked - 28/1.8G, 85/1.8G, Zeiss 50, Arax 80/2.8TS
Least used and disliked - 16-35/4VR, 105/2.8VR

Pistnbroke

I don't understand Pictured what you mean by "fussing with them".
Each lens has its hood which stays on 24/7 . If its prone to rotate on its own a small blob of easily removed black silicone stops that.
I tend to be a one lens one body man thought I do carry a spare ( in the car..no bags)

I left off my equipment list until Spraynpray sorts out the signature problems ( ???)

spraynpray

@pictureted - Does the use of your 10-24, 10.5 fisheye and 16-35 not get restricted by your no lens hood policy?