Lens Hoods

Pistnbroke

The 10.5 has a fixed lens hood.....but I have a lathe if you want me to take it off for you ......

Msmoto

Lens hood...always used. The reduction of ambient light entering is potentially helpful for IQ.

Also, if the lens is dropped and lands on the hood, often this is what needs replacing rather than a full refurbishment of the lens. Much less expensive.

I think all Nikkors come with the hood, but alas if one needs to replace this....for a 400mm f/2.8, the hood is.....a bit over USD $600......

Ironheart

Apparently it didn't slow @Msmoto down, as she took a hacksaw to her 10.5...

pictureted

The fussing is that I find the wide petals hoods fit better in a camera bag when removed - so, on and off - that's fussing to me.
The 10.5 doesn't have a removable hood.
The 10-24's hood is so wide (to allow for 10mm FOV) that I really don't think it's doing much either to block stray light or provided any front element protection.
I never use the 16-35. It's my least favorite Nikon lens among all those I own, except for the 55/2.8 macro with stuck blades. I consider it my biggest acquisition mistake.
Has anyone extended their 24-85VR or 16-85VR to 85mm? Maybe my copies of these are somehow defective. MY 24-85 was a refurb, but following Nikon's repair "after-the-fall" it's still not as secure as the hood on my 70-200/4 (which I use - hood and lens).

Pistnbroke

It is certain lens hoods are not required Ken Rockwell said so.

pictureted

Pistnbroke said:

It is certain lens hoods are not required Ken Rockwell said so.

Wow, that makes me feel so much better… I rest easier in my decision.

Paperman

Contrary to everyone here ( which means I am doing it the wrong way :-) ) , I never use my lens hood. Shooting mostly landscapes, my polariser is almost always on during the day and lens hoods make it harder to control. And unless it is a sunset scene, landscapes usually never come out right if shot facing the sun or with an angle towards the sun. If I ever have to shoot with sun coming at an angle and I see flares , I just use my hand to stop the flare.

Ironheart

@Paperman As has been mentioned, flagging works just as well as a hood in static (tripod) situations. It can be done "on the fly" as well, but just a bit trickier to do. However, if you are doing a 2min landscape exposure, your arm might get tired

Paperman

Why would I do a 2 minute exposure when there is enough sunlight to create flares

Ironheart

Point taken

heartyfisher

Paperman said:

Why would I do a 2 minute exposure when there is enough sunlight to create flares

I have seen a few of these .. its nice ... one of my Photog friend does it often.. using NDs and graduated ND. and yes he gets a sore arm.. :-)

niemeyjt

Pistnbroke said:

It is certain lens hoods are not required Ken Rockwell said so.

Ah - I see you have found the source of my first quote. :-)

J

Snowleopard

I always keep the lens hoods on the lenses when transporting them in my camera bags.

framer

The only lens that I don't use a lens hood on is the AFS 50mm f/1.8. What a joke. Remember the sliding hoods on some of the AIS manual nikkor's had. Now that was perfect. Yes the AFS 400 f4 and the 105 & 135 AFd DC nikkor's also use the sliding hood .

framer

WestEndFoto

You know, there are a lot of interesting perspectives here for something as simple as a lens hood. I am surprised what I have learned from you guys on this.

I keep my 24-70 2.8E's hood on but backwards. This may be due to laziness as every other hood is in its original box in storage. Except it has now grown on me from a purely esthetic perspective. One exception to my hoods being in the box is my 135 DC 2.0, which is inseparable from the lens.

Msmoto

Having been out on the road for a week, I am not up to date on the threads, but, noted a comment about my 10.5.....so....the remains of the hood...

And, oh yes,

Pistnbroke

So much nicer with a lathe !!! Lens value is now........???

( did see one guy do it with slitting saw on a milling machine and someone else with a dremmel )

I also noticed a group of paparazzi ..no lens hoods as the extra space and hitting people with the hood was an issue...

tcole1983

I frequently leave mine off if using a flash or shooting indoors as you get the shadow of the hood, but almost always outside. I did just shoot my 18-55 and realized it didn't have a hood either, but then again...the cost of lens and it not being a pro lens.

Ironheart

$18 @ B&H will get you an HB-45 for your 18-55:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/532523-USA/Nikon_4941_HB_45_Snap_On_Lens_Hood.html

KnockKnock

I will have to give my hoods another chance. I have never noticed them helping and prefer to shoot as incognito as possible. If I shoot into the sun I use my left hand to block whatever it can. Lots of very pro claims here though so I will give it a go - thanks all.

tcole1983

@Ironheart since i hardly use the lens and it costs like $50 I won't invest in that. Didn't know they sold one though so thanks for the info. The only reason I still have it is for a light weight throw around lens on my D5000.

Ironheart

I hear ya, I was kinda being funny, $18 on top of a $50 lens is hardly worth it. I use mine the same way, as a quick point and shoot on my D3100 when the 35mm DX that is usually welded on isn't up to the task (i.e. when I can't zoom with my feet).