1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Who needs lens hoods??

Discussion in 'Weekly Poll' started by Damien_Demolder, Nov 24, 2007.

  1. Footloose

    Footloose Well-Known Member

    Using a lens without a hood or filter, is likely to degrade the quality of your images - both of these improve contrast, but also impact in other ways too, such as removing or reducing flare, increases colour saturation and therefore accuracy. I would not mind betting that with an AF lens, focussing speed and accuracy, is also affected, since any diffusion or defraction reduces it's ability to 'snap' into focus on something.

    Not often mentioned are the problems that flare causes when editing an image, as it 'creeps' across the boundaries or and edges of an object or colour, a bit like fringing. This can cause major problems because when trying to locate the edge of an object from that surrounding it.

    I suspect that the loss of definition that the lack of either of these causes, is a bit like having ultra-accurate hearing or less than perfect eyesight. Unless someone better equipped than you points out what is missing or shouldn't be there. This is a bit off tangent but I remember meeting someone who mixes paints for Film and TV scenery and was amazed by their ability to see minute differences and identify what was needed to enable a more accurate match.
  2. NorthernMonkey

    NorthernMonkey Well-Known Member

    In the past, I haven't used them, but following reading this thread, I think ill start using them a lot more.

    The only lens I used with a hood regularly, was the canon 300mm f4, as this has one conviniently built in
  3. justablur

    justablur Member

    Why not test it for yourselves? Stick a camera on a tripod outdoors with a low/high sun and take two pictures say every 60 degrees with a hood on and a hood off. Any difference in contrast or flare?
  4. DaveS

    DaveS Well-Known Member

    Chances are I'll be using the slide from the 10x8 film holder I'm about to expose. Casts a lovly shadow
  5. Benchmark

    Benchmark Well-Known Member

    Since buying my E1 I have used lens hoods all the time. It is so convenient keeping the hood on the lens that there is no excuse for forgetting them.

    I didn't use hoods very often with my OM kit as they were separate (apart from the lovely rubber hood that came with the 24 mm lens). I have also used hands on occasions, but find that these often seem to creep into photographs, even though they cannot be seen in the viewfinder. :eek:
  6. sirmy

    sirmy Well-Known Member

    That really depends on the quality of the filter, some cheaper filters will be made of glass vastly inferior to that of the lens and could degrade the image even more.
  7. Cuthbert

    Cuthbert Well-Known Member

    There are two lenses I use without a hood.

    One is a cheapish 70-210 zoom, which I got used, and didn't have one, although since I got something better that doesn't get used much these days.

    The other is a 100mm macro (bought used, not even sure this ever had one!). The front element of this lens is sunk quite deep inside the barrel for anything except for macro work, so I suspect the barrel makes quite a good hood anyway, and for macro work, I'd think a hood might get a bit to close for comfort to the subject!

    With my other lenses that have removable hoods, the only time I remove them is if I am using on-camera flash to ensure that the top of the hood doesn't shadow the flash.

  8. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Well actually only one of them does - filters actually make all these things worse, not better, with the possible exception of colour saturation.
  9. skellum

    skellum Well-Known Member

    These days I use mostly a 5x4 field, on a tripod, with cable release. So, I have no lens hoods. If the sun is in frame it would be redundant. If the sun isn't in shot I shield the lens with my own shadow (or the darkslide). Always do the same with my TLR. Only hoods I have are the built in ones on a couple of my lenses for 35mm :(
    Thirty years ago I dropped the standard lens from my Praktica on cobblestones. Bent the metal lens hood near flat, lens 100% okay. Gotta be a moral there somewhere (though it did teach me to be careful).
  10. bellyboy

    bellyboy Well-Known Member

    Same here (for the filters part) - it can be quite annoying when there's glare when you've a filter attached and your hand can only shield a certain amount before appearing in the frame :(
  11. beejaybee

    beejaybee Marvin

    I've never found a better one.... mind you the cheap ones sold at 7dayshop are just as good.

    They do ... I got one with both my "L" lenses. But I'm hesitant to use them as they seem rather unprotective compared with the more robust lens cases I'm used to.

    Eh? I'm surprised no-one else has challenged this... the lens hood, being (hopefully) out of the path of rays forming the image, cannot affect depth of field. I suppose if you metered flare then you could end up using a smaller aperture and hence get more DoF (the opposite effect to what is being claimed) but then the subject would be seriously underexposed if the effect was enough to be significant.

    Or have the laws of optics been changed in the week I've been off the 'net?
  12. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Well the rest of it was so wrong I hadn't actually read that far... :eek:

    You're right on all counts IMHO.
  13. huwevans

    huwevans Not Really Here

    The poster didn't actually use the phrase depth of field, but spoke rather of 'adding depth to the field'. I would imagine that was just a way of referring to contrast, albeit perhaps an unusal one.
  14. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Ah, it is the festive season-ish, so let's me charitable... :D
  15. Brian

    Brian Venerable Elder

    As a very non serious photographer I must agree with Erm........never use em, and those 'tulip' things are really cissy.

    A joke, right?
  16. sey

    sey Well-Known Member

    I think that remark is a direct attack on the Big Will! :eek:
  17. MamiyaRB67

    MamiyaRB67 Active Member

    I own and use medium format in both film and digital form, on a tripod. The risk of getting flare in my images or having my lenses damaged on location is a risk that I don't want to take.
  18. Ian_A

    Ian_A Well-Known Member

    I use one when it is appropriate to do so.
  19. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    All the time then?
  20. alan321

    alan321 Well-Known Member

    I use a Cokin bellows hood all the time. Would'nt be without it!

Share This Page