Lens Hoods... Something Else To Carry, Or Do They Serve A Purpose?

68lbs

68lbs

Suspended / Banned
Messages
5,450
Name
April 2008
Edit My Images
No
As per the title...

I have one on the Siggy 10-20 that came with the lens. Other than that, I have none.

Yet, every time I see a pic on here of someone with a big FO lens on their camera, it is lengthened a further 6" due to this peculiar shaped bit of plastic on the front.

Why?

And if they're recommended, what's the best sort. I've seen flat ended ones, curvy shaped ones, rubber ones, etc etc!
 
they are there to stop flare. the petal shaped one are used on zoom lenses with different angles of view. Prime lenses have literatly a cilinder on the end.
it also stops accidental damage to the from elements.
stops people sticking fingers all over the lens. (my wife is guilty of this for my lenses that dont have hoods).
 
More importantly, they protect the front element as well..........:thumbs:
 
Is unwanted light a big problem, or is this one of those things to think about way down the line when the standard of my images requires it? I've never used the little bit of rubber on the camera strap to obscure the viewfinder window either.

I can see it'd be handy from a 'fingerprint' point of view. I use UV filters to protect the front of the lens from damage.
 
Deflects Motorcross muck n dirt unless it comes straight at you :D
 
Yes, unwanted light is relevant to you now.

Wether or not UV filters are the best protector or simply an image degrader is a whole different can of worms, internet argument or whatever............:lol:
 
ok so when should you use lens hoods all the time? just in bright light? if you get flare on your picture?
 
Toothie said:
ok so when should you use lens hoods all the time? just in bright light? if you get flare on your picture?
Click to expand...

I always use one if I have one for that lens. The only one I don't have one for is my kit lens.

Just for the "muck aspect", never tried an experiment to see how much unwanted light effects a shot, but scientifically you don't want extra light that might get into the lens that is not being reflected by your subject scene. It will degrade the image definitely, but if you aren't bothered about getting the very best image possible, then obviously it won't be utterly useless without.
 
The only lens hood I don`t use all the time is when doing macro. All other lenses always have the hoods on, wether that is right or wrong I don`t know for sure, but it is how I work......:shrug:

68 lbs, lens flare can be problematic in certain light scenarios, hoods help reduce that.

I don`t use UV filters, hence the hoods are my protectors, so they are always on.
 
Thanks, I've suffered lens flare before and thought they helped counter that.

Regarding unwanted light, I'm guessing this is a problem when metering for exposure? So more applicable if you're shooting AV or TV ? :shrug:
 
The 'unwanted light' is what causes the flare. Basically, any bright light, eg the sun, coming straight into the lens, is going to cause problems.

The image your sensor produces, is taken out of the centre of a larger circle of light, that your lens produces. Even light coming into the sides of this circle (but not actually in the final image) can cause problems with flare. A lens hood helps to reduce this.

PS. If something is causing a problem with your metering, it will effect the meter in exactly the same way regardless of what mode you shoot in. Av, Tv, M, P, whatever.
 
it does the same thing as wearing a hat on a sunny day it cuts glare and lets you see more clearly.
remeber its not only sun from above its sheilding the lens from but reflective surfaces etc..

I use them in a studio enviroment and they do help when using harsh lighting.
 
The other purpose, of course, is to make your lens look much bigger and more impressive! :D
 
I always use a lens hood, more for protection than anything else.
 
-RV- said:
I always use a lens hood, more for protection than anything else.
Click to expand...

but it's got a big hole at either end;)
Always use them myself.
 
I use a hood and UV filter on my 70-200. Only really use the hood when i'm shooting outside though, and ALWAYS keep the UV filter on it.

Don't use either on my 17-40 though. I used to use a UV filter on it but moved it to the 70-200 when I bought it (more expensive lens gets priority protection). I don't like the 17-40 hood, it's really wide.
 
I've seen some horrible degradation caused by filters (specifically on 100-400mm) but a lens hood is must for me whether I have a filter on or not. Light does not travel in straight lines (unless polarised) so lighet enters your lens from all sorts of angles. The lens hoods are often coated ont he inside to absorb light rather than reflect it. It does help to optimise the directions that the light is hitting the front element from and thus helps to reduce lens flare in most conditions.

Hope that helps.
 
68lbs said:
Is unwanted light a big problem, or is this one of those things to think about way down the line when the standard of my images requires it? I've never used the little bit of rubber on the camera strap to obscure the viewfinder window either.

I can see it'd be handy from a 'fingerprint' point of view. I use UV filters to protect the front of the lens from damage.
Click to expand...

Using a hood - apart from mechanical protection - reduces unwanted flare, general image degradation and helps maintain contrast. Using filters without a lens hood just introduces more flare, etc. as the reflective surfaces are now even further out from the front element of the lens.

I have Canon hoods appropriate for each of the lenses I own and would never be without them. They screw on reversed for neat storage when not in use (but maybe everyone knew that already?)

Anthony.
 
TV holiday programmes and computer games may influence us to regard flare as a desirable indicator of sunny conditions. Quite funny for a first person shooter . . .
 
Most petal hoods supplied with zooms only work properly at the shorter end - zoom in a bit and the hood is less effective.

Most hoods these days are bayonet fit and can be carried easily reversed on the bayonet so are hardly a chore to carry. Turning them round for use takes all of a couple of seconds.

If flare is still a problem, even with a hood fitted, a piece of stiff black card can be used to shade the front element from direct light.
 
Flashman said:
The other purpose, of course, is to make your lens look much bigger and more impressive! :D
Click to expand...

A benefit not to be ignored of course. :lol:

A lens hood is an absolute must in my book. As everyone has said, stopping stray light from getting onto the sensor will make your images richer in colour and improve contrast. The added protection that it gives the lens is great for me too, as I will not have a filter on any of my lenses.
 
So is there any downside to using a hood? Like during sunset when its getting dark etc?
 
The only possible downside is that the camera becomes a little more cumbersome when hanging off your shoulder between shots and even then, it may be a little bigger but not really any heavier. There is no situation I can think of where it would degrade the image.

Ahhhh, Okay I've just thought of one.....

If you had a petal shaped hood and you wanted to shoot through some glass, you'd be better off removing it so you could get the front of the lens flat against the pane and reduce reflections as much as possible. :)
 
My tripod fell over with camera attached, landed on rock right onto the lens. Result? One completely smashed lens hood. One slightly grazed filter. And one completely untouched 500 quid lens. Need I say more? :)

Suffice it to say - I also have a new tripod.
 
aberal said:
............ And one completely untouched 500 quid lens. Need I say more? :)

Suffice it to say - I also have a new tripod.
Click to expand...

Yes!!!
 
I always use a lens hood but never use a UV filter. I do however use Circular polariser and Neutral density filters as required.

AliB said:
Light does not travel in straight lines (unless polarised) so lighet enters your lens from all sorts of angles.
Click to expand...

Actually light always travels in a straight line...until it hits a reflective object (This doesn't necessarily mean shiny) at which point it will bounce off in another straight line. The reason it can appear to come from different angles is because the air is full of dust particles that scatter it.
 
billandben said:
So is there any downside to using a hood? Like during sunset when its getting dark etc?
Click to expand...

Yeah, when you use an on camera flash... you can get a shadow.
 
Rozzy said:
Not nessecarily true

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffraction
Click to expand...

That would depend on whether you consider light to be a particle or a wave ;-)

But seriously, light travels in a straight line in a vacuum, but rarely I suggest are you taking pictures in vacuum (Dyson internal macro shots perhaps? LOL) and the air itself causes distortion but all of that being said, a lens hood REDUCES unwanted light striking the sensor.

Quite how much by is a discussion for a physics forum and not a photography one I suggest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top