Re: Silver MZ-S/ Re: "Imperfect " hoods....
IMO, the rectangular hoods, not the square,k like they used to make for the 50mm M lenses are the best. BTW, If someone has one they want to sell please e-mail me. --Tom 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... - 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 .
Re: Silver MZ-S/ Re: "Imperfect " hoods....
On 7 Mar 2001, at 10:28, Bojidar Dimitrov wrote: > 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. Absolutely true for a fixed lens, the tulip shape is derived mathematically as a function of the principle points vs the lens AOV and if designed properly will provide the most comprehensive lens shading possible without causing hood induced vignetting Any shape of hood is generally a compromise on a zoom as it has to accommodate a varying angle of view, you can't zoom the tangs on a tulip hood. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 Fax +61-2-9554-9259 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html - 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 .
Re: Silver MZ-S/ Re: "Imperfect " hoods....
One reason I avoid zooms is the mental effort it takes to remember to adjust their "adjustable" hoods. Even on a prime, if the hood is collapsible rubber, I often forget to open it to its working position. So I can't even count on it to protect the front of the lens in a fall. The best hood for zooms is probably the one built into a few Tamrons. It telescopes in and out to match the focal length. On each of my primes, I use a metal or rigid plastic hood attached at all times--=even in storage and transport. I buy oversize lens caps to fit the hood. For me, life is too short to mount, dismount, remember to take along, or hunt for a hood. Paul Franklin Stregevsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] W: (703) 834-4648 - 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 .
Re: Silver MZ-S/ Re: "Imperfect " hoods....
on 3/7/01 12:41 PM, dosk at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'm sorry, but I cannot follow your logic and understand almost nothing of > what you're talking about here. The article I read had all kinds of flare > tests performed, with results that stated that the "perfect" hood was > definitely not Hi Skip & all, I am no expert on the hood but there are pros and cons on both types (tulip and regular) of hood. Tulip type is obviously to eliminate the vignetting at the wider end. But it is a compromise and the problem is that at the longer end, those cut-outs will often allow the stray light from the side. This problem becomes more prominent on the zoom with 24mm wider end (it is a HUGE cut-out). As much as I dislike the rubber hood, it does have an advantage (besides acting as a protection from bumping etc) as it gives a full circumferencial shade but you may have to fold it when going to the wider end. You may or may not be able to see the vignetting depending on the depth of the rubber hood. OTOH, the tulip type does give the protection at the wider end from the stray light coming straight down. I understand that the new Pentax 24-90 has a "oval" tulip type hood which will provide a better shade effect even at the longer end. > > Man says nothing beats a $5 (imperfect?) rubber lens hood for > > effectiveness... I heard the same story from my favourite camera store. Did not remember the reasoning but probably because it is "adjustable" although cumbersome. Cheers, Ken - 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 .
Re: Silver MZ-S/ Re: "Imperfect " hoods....
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 .
Re: Silver MZ-S/ Re: "Imperfect " hoods....
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... I agree... Because IMO, form should always follow function! But in our modern consumerist culture, if it looks good (sexy?) (-a machine?) then that's much more desirable even if it can't do the job... Dosk > > What's the lens on the silver body? FA*85/1.4? > > Yes. The hood is impressive. > > regards, > Alan Chan > > _ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > > - > 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 . > > - 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 .
