Re: Lens Hoods

After a bit of trial an error, I worked up a technique that results in a very solid bond. The lens caps are sanded down so that the mating surfaces are flat and somewhat rough (80 grit paper, IIRC). I then apply an epoxy that comes in two joined tubes and which is expressed with a single plunger

Re: Lens Hoods

I use the 2 rear caps as well, but had the epoxie let go 20 years ago. (Yes, I had properly prepared the mating surfaces!) Since then, I've gone with duct (duc) tape arounf the edges. It works great and is easy to check if it is still holding tight. Regards, Bob S. On 12/25/05, Fred <[EMAIL PROTE

Re: Lens Hoods

> In addition, I've made some rear lens caps that are solidly cemented > together, allowing two lenses to fit in the space that one lens often > takes. The caps work very well and hold the lenses securely. Once you've > learned which combinations (tele + wide, with/without hood, for example) > fi

Re: Lens Hoods

No lens hood, no matter how deep or well designed, will protect "the front element of the lens from direct light rays." That doesn't mean that a bright light, directly in front of the lens, will cause acute flare and image degradation. I've seen a few Pentax and Zeiss T* lenses that controlled f

Re: Lens Hoods

Mike Johnston wrote a good SMP column about flare, lens hoods, etc.] http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-03-01-12.shtml "By the way, a common misconception about lenses is that you need the longest possible hood to protect the lens. This isn't necessarily so. With some lenses, acutely-im

Re: Lens Hoods

Being a minimalist, in that I don't like to carry a big bag about stuffed with lots of gear, or because I sometimes want a fair amount of gear in a small bag, I always look for ways for some things to do double or triple duty, here's what I do to save space. It's possible, as David notes, to have

Re: Lens Hoods

On Dec 25, 2005, at 4:34 PM, David Oswald wrote: I agree that always using a hood is a good practice. However, I find it difficult to live by that mantra. They take up so much space in camera bags. That's probably the biggest problem for me when I'm using the camera on the go. I tend t

Re: Lens Hoods

In a message dated 12/24/2005 7:44:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've got caps on all my hoods. They're easy to find. I get all of mine in the supermarket - the plastic lids from various containers work very well. Plastic caps from Hershey's chocolate syrup, and those fr

RE: Lens Hoods - know your worst case

iscuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Lens Hoods - know your worst case Perhaps, but if you don't stop down, you can't see the vignetting in the image. Not enough DOF. Try it, you can see for yourself. Paul On Dec 25, 2005, at 12:30 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > Correction, the worst

Re: Lens Hoods

On 24/12/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed: > Is there some kind of mathematical formula? HTH: Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com __

Re: Lens Hoods - know your worst case

Perhaps, but if you don't stop down, you can't see the vignetting in the image. Not enough DOF. Try it, you can see for yourself. Paul On Dec 25, 2005, at 12:30 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: Correction, the worst case for hoods ( most likely to cause vignetting) is not close focus and small apertu

Re: Lens Hoods

I take the cap off before installing the hood and leave it off until I remove the hood. Some of my hoods fit over the lenses in my case. I have three or four others that fit one within the other. I think I have eight hoods in my case, and they work with thirteen lenses. Paul On Dec 24, 2005, at

Re: Lens Hoods

On Dec 24, 2005, at 7:34 PM, David Oswald wrote: I'm with Paul and Shel. I *always* use a lens hood. The only exception is when it interferes with something (like the built in flash, possibly ... if I ever used it, that is). I agree that always using a hood is a good practice. However, I

RE: Lens Hoods - know your worst case

Correction, the worst case for hoods ( most likely to cause vignetting) is not close focus and small apertures, it is with lens at infinity (widest angle of view) and wide open ( optical path closest to hood). It seems to me a common myth that stopped way down and lens set to mimimum focus would be

Re: Lens Hoods

David Oswald wrote: Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I'm with Paul and Shel. I *always* use a lens hood. The only exception is when it interferes with something (like the built in flash, possibly ... if I ever used it, that is). I agree that always using a hood is a good practice. However, I find

Re: Lens Hoods

I've got caps on all my hoods. They're easy to find. I get all of mine in the supermarket - the plastic lids from various containers work very well. Plastic caps from Hershey's chocolate syrup, and those from some Jelly Belly jelly beans cans work great. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Davi

Re: Lens Hoods

Whoops. I always screw that up make sure you've focused close Shel > [Original Message] > From: Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Date: 12/24/2005 7:34:16 PM > Subject: Re: Lens Hoods > > This might get you started ... > http://www

Re: Lens Hoods

You left out an important step, Paul ... ;-)) Shel > [Original Message] > From: Paul Stenquist > Shooting with the hood in place is the best way to check for > vignetting. Shoot a solid white surface with the lens at its smallest > stop. If you don't see any corner darkeness in the image, i

Re: Lens Hoods

Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I'm with Paul and Shel. I *always* use a lens hood. The only exception is when it interferes with something (like the built in flash, possibly ... if I ever used it, that is). I agree that always using a hood is a good practice. However, I find it difficult to live by

Re: Lens Hoods

This might get you started ... http://www.vanwalree.com/optics/lenshood.html However, it's so simple to put a hood on a lens and snap a pic. Be sure to focus to infinity and stop that puppy down to get a worst case scenario. Might be good to check the hood with a filter attached if you ever plan

Re: Lens Hoods

Shooting with the hood in place is the best way to check for vignetting. Shoot a solid white surface with the lens at its smallest stop. If you don't see any corner darkeness in the image, it's not vignetting. Paul On Dec 24, 2005, at 10:20 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shootin In a message dat

Re: Lens Hoods

In a message dated 12/24/2005 7:20:05 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: One thing that's nice about round metal hoods is that they are easier to use with a Pol filter. Mount the filter to the lens, the hood to the filter, and then turn the hood to adjust the filter. Rubber hood

Re: Lens Hoods

In a message dated 12/24/2005 7:17:22 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Nothing wrong with rubber. But most rubber hoods are too short and too wide to provide much real coverage. They're designed to be a "one size fits all" solution. But any hood is better than no hood. Paul ==

Re: Lens Hoods

The material from which a hood is made should have little or no influence on performance, all else being equal. I prefer some rubber hoods to plastic hoods, as plastic hoods often have a shiny or reflective inner surface. A number of people have flocked their plastic hoods. Also, I have a strong d

Re: Lens Hoods

Nothing wrong with rubber. But most rubber hoods are too short and too wide to provide much real coverage. They're designed to be a "one size fits all" solution. But any hood is better than no hood. Paul On Dec 24, 2005, 10:01 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 12/24/2005 12:46:1

Re: Lens Hoods

In a message dated 12/24/2005 12:46:13 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: obtuse angles. At worst, extraneous light can cause serious flare. At least, it can cause some loss of contrast. You might not see the difference in most situation, but when you do see it, it's too late to

Re: Lens Hoods

I'm with Paul and Shel. I *always* use a lens hood. The only exception is when it interferes with something (like the built in flash, possibly ... if I ever used it, that is). My lens suite with hoods: http://homepage.mac.com/godders/lenshood-lineup-1845.jpg Godfrey On Dec 24, 2005, at 12:4

Re: Lens Hoods

> Date: 12/24/2005 12:46:34 PM > Subject: Re: Lens Hoods > > Use a hood all the time, except perhaps with an on-camera flash that it > might obstruct. The idea is to prevent light from hitting the lens at > obtuse angles. At worst, extraneous light can cause serious flare. At > least

Re: Lens Hoods

Use a hood all the time, except perhaps with an on-camera flash that it might obstruct. The idea is to prevent light from hitting the lens at obtuse angles. At worst, extraneous light can cause serious flare. At least, it can cause some loss of contrast. You might not see the difference in most

RE: Lens hoods (was: Why did this lens sell for so much???)

Hi, While it's nice to be though of as being right, I'm not quite sure what I was right about. Perhaps that metal lens hoods offer better protection in a fall? I'm not sure I agree with that premise. A fall is a pretty random act, and numerous things - surface upon which the object is dropped,

RE: Lens Hoods

However the pentax hood on my 100mm f2.8M [49mm] finally broke yesterday [not bad after 20 years] and I can't think of a logical replacement for that .any body any ideas ? The old Takumar 100/4 lens hood is a nice metal 49mm. I have it on my M 100/4 macro. You may also be able

Re: Lens Hoods

The Takumar hood for the 105/2.8 and 100/4 macro is a nice metal screw in hood with a 49mm thread. It should work well. I found mine on ebay for $3.00 USD. William in Utah. - Original Message - From: "Clive evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003

Re: Lens Hoods

<< However the pentax hood on my 100mm f2.8M [49mm] finally broke yesterday [not bad after 20 yaers] and I can't think of alogical replacement for that .any body any ideas ? >> Short of the obvious, an OM 100mm F2.8 hood seems ideal. It's a rigid rubber type that won't exp

Re: lens hoods

I found that to be true with my Universa Press and the 100/2.8 lens. I still have the hood in the hopes of someday replacing the camera. Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto - Original Message - From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > BTW as good as the Mamiya 7 lens

Re: lens hoods

>Someday, somebody will invent a dynamic dedicated hood for zooms, so that the length and shape changes as you zoom :-) Andre wrote: There are two brands that make "zoom" rubber hoods, Hoya and Hama. -- Tamron made an ingenious rigid-plastic telescoping hood for its SP 70-210/3.5. The lens rece

Re: lens hoods

>Someday, somebody will invent a dynamic dedicated hood for zooms, so >that the length and shape changes as you zoom :-) Andre wrote: There are two brands that make "zoom" rubber hoods, Hoya and Hama. -- Tamron made an ingenious rigid-plastic telescoping hood for its SP 70-210/3.5. The lens rec

Re: lens hoods

Just moving onto zooms. Anyone thinking about the mechanics of a zoom lens will have surely pondered that the lenshood of such an optic will have to be a compromise. Now, if you have a 28-70 mm (say), then you will have deduced that the(fixed plastic or metal) hood is really a 28mm hood and nowhere

Re: lens hoods

> Ahh, I started shooting seriously using SMC glass, I didn't know that you > shouldn't shoot into the sun until I met some Canon and Nikon shooters :-) Ditto here, but with Contax T* lenses. --Mike

Re: lens hoods

>> >> Are you supposed to use a lens hood when shooting indoors >or at night, or is >> the hood only to prevent flare from sunlight? If I may offer the list my working practices My lowest common denominator is: if in doubt, use the lenshood. However, it is quite obvious that a lenshood serve

Re: lens hoods

>"ALWAYS use a hood" is sound advice. > Well, that sound clever, but what about the risk for vignetting (or what it's called)? Last autumn I used my LX often together with the M 24/2.8 during a field trip in Greece. Plus a hood I 'thought' was suitable for the lense. Great shots. But ... a lot of

Re: lens hoods

> "ALWAYS use a hood" is sound advice. Or, you could never use a hood. I've done both over the years. Generally, the flare performance of a lens is determined by its coatings. The better the coatings, the less necessary a hood becomes. The worse the coatings, the less a lens hood is going to be

Re: lens hoods

ebruary 01, 2003 5:05 PM Subject: Re: lens hoods > Unless I have a particular need for a filter, I don't use one. Most of > us aren't going to spend the $50-70 that a good filter costs just to > protect our lenses. Your UV filter may have added to your problem if > it wa

Re: lens hoods

Unless I have a particular need for a filter, I don't use one. Most of us aren't going to spend the $50-70 that a good filter costs just to protect our lenses. Your UV filter may have added to your problem if it was one of the cheap off-brand filters. As tough as SMC coating is supposed to b

Re: lens hoods

Feroze Kistan wrote: > If you are using available light to take and indoor picture, > would you not than be limiting the amount of light reaching the > film, or is that the intention. Limiting only in the sense that the lens accepts just the light reflected directly from the fr

Re: lens hoods

Message - From: "Ken Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 4:39 PM Subject: Re: lens hoods > The camera's meter is only concerned with what the lens sees in it's > field of view. The meter does not dif

Re: lens hoods

The camera's meter is only concerned with what the lens sees in it's field of view. The meter does not differentiate between a 28mm or a 200mm. The lens hood, on the other hand, blocks extraneous light from striking the lens at angles outside of the lens' field of view. This extraneous ligh

Re: lens hoods

though and these are 2 diffrent issues? Feroze - Original Message - From: "Bill D. Casselberry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 9:42 PM Subject: Re: lens hoods > Feroze Kistan wrote: > > > Thanks guys for al

Re: lens hoods

Feroze Kistan wrote: > Thanks guys for all the replies. I had assumed hoods are only > for sunlight, can studio lights or household lamps cause flare then? Think of them as "blinders", as on a horse. They will cause *only* light rays coming directly from the framed image to

Re: lens hoods

It's not a dumb question and I hope this isn't a dumb answer. I always use a lens hood. SMC is great, but using a lens hood also helps to reduce lens flare. It also keeps rain off the front element and protects the front of the lens from incidental contact with hard elements, unless, of cour

Re: lens hoods

On 29 Jan 2003 at 15:12, Feroze Kistan wrote: > Another dumb question: > Are you supposed to use a lens hood when shooting indoors or at night, or is the > hood only to prevent flare from sunlight? Any light source outside the frame can promote flare (and inside the frame of course), so the best

Re: lens hoods

Feroze Kistan wrote: > > Are you supposed to use a lens hood when shooting indoors or at night, or is > the hood only to prevent flare from sunlight? Hi Feroze, The simple answer is to use the lens hood for every single shot. Always. I'm not sure what the complex answer is. I'm just a simple

Re: lens hoods (shades)--cool site & DOF/FOV/... calc

Friday, December 27, 2002, 2:16:10 AM, Paul wrote: PFS> I came across a nice illustrated discussion of lens hood geometry: PFS> http://www.vanwalree.com/optics/lenshood.html I couldn't resist writing few more messages before leaving... Hi Paul, thanks for the link. Very useful site! For

RE: lens hoods (shades)--cool site

Wow! Score another one for the gremlins! Len --- > -Original Message- > From: Bob Rapp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2002 9:46 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: lens hoods (shades)--cool site > > > Hi Len, > I use IE 6.0 as well. > > Bob

Re: lens hoods (shades)--cool site

Hi Len, I use IE 6.0 as well. Bob - Original Message - From: "Len Paris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 2:42 PM Subject: RE: lens hoods (shades)--cool site > That's amazing, Bob! I went back and tried a

RE: lens hoods (shades)--cool site

hinder IE users and I know some that do the same for Netscape users but it could still have been something accidental. I use IE 6.0, BTW. Len --- > -Original Message- > From: Bob Rapp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2002 9:18 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: lens hoods (shades)--cool site

Hi Len, I had no problem downloading the PDF Bob - Original Message - From: "Len Paris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 1:23 PM Subject: RE: lens hoods (shades)--cool site > A nice reference Paul. Thanks. Th

Re: Lens Hoods

Yes! Absolutely! And the tulip hoods take into account that the diagonal is the widest angle, as well. Len --- - Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2002 2:21 PM Subject: RE: Lens

RE: Lens Hoods

coverage matches the rectangular view angles of the lens, thus providing better shade on the top and bottom of the image over a circular hood. jco > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2002 2:

Re: Lens Hoods

>What's the idea behind contemporary lens hoods that look like a >flower blossom as opposed to older style lens hoods like the >collapsible rubber ones? More efficient. If the film surface was round, a round hood would be perfect. A square film format would asks for a square hood or a symetr