Recently dosk wrote:
>
> Read an article in a photomag by an older, experienced writer whom I
> respect. He says these new tulip shaped "perfect hoods" are anything but!
> Seems their odd scooped-out shapes allow all kinds of flare and glare into
> the lens. Man says nothing beats a $5 (imperfect?) rubber lens hood for
> effectiveness...
Having just spent all of 60 seconds thining on this topic, and having done
no experiments, my gut reaction is to disagree. The "tulip" shape is due
to the fact that we are trying to cut out the potions of the light cone
that are outside of the rectangular film frame.
I think that you will agree: it is better to use a tulip-shaped shade than
another shape that is the result of taking a tulip shape and cutting the
four "protrusions." This is the longest that a shade can be (at the givne
angle) without causing vigneting.
Cheers,
Boz
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
