Lens Hoods on Macro lenses

Braeden

Braeden

Suspended / Banned
Messages
553
Name
Lee
Edit My Images
Yes
As the title really, are they needed or would it be a waste of money?

I am close to ordering the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 macro lens and am unsure as to whether I need to buy a hood or not.
 
Hood would offer a good form of pretection to the front element, and personally prefer this to a protective filter.

You could always buy one of those cheap rubber ones from Jessops or make a paper one (theres a link somewhere on here) if you dont think you'll se the hood that much.
 
My tamron 90mm macro lens came with a hood, I'm not sure on what difference it provides though, theres less chance of unwanted light getting in I guess, I'm not sure. Someone else will be able to give you more information than I can.
 
Darksaber said:
My tamron 90mm macro lens came with a hood, I'm not sure on what difference it provides though, theres less chance of unwanted light getting in I guess, I'm not sure. Someone else will be able to give you more information than I can.
Click to expand...

As did my sigma105. However I've not noticed any difference to the images with/out the hood.

As has been said it does provide a good degree of protection.
 
I tend to use the hood on my Sigma 150mm when shooting in sunlight as it does help with flare a fair bit, esp. when I'm doing artsy shots with backlit bugs :D
 
The lens hood is great when you're using the lens as a general purpose portrait, walkabout lens etc but it's completely useless for Macro photography.
You need to get relatively close to your subject and with the hood attached you'll cast a shadow over it, especially if you a flash on the camera pointing down.

Also, if you get a Macro Ring flash then you won't be able to it use anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top