Recommend a Lens Hood, Please.

The23rdman

The23rdman

Messages
13,582
Name
Dean
Edit My Images
No
For a Canon EF 50mm II f1.8 :)

Assuming one is necessary!
 
Well I guess that'd be favourite. Now I wonder if it's necessary for this lens.
 
The23rdman said:
Well I guess that'd be favourite. Now I wonder if it's necessary for this lens.
Click to expand...

Lens hoods are never necessary. Lenses will work without them. But they are always very desirable.

If you're thinking that the front element of the 50 1.8 is already a bit recessed, kind of has a built in lens hood, then you are right. But as much shade as you can possible give is better.

Using the 50 1.8 on a crop camera, you can fit a surprisingly deep lens hood and still not get any vignetting.
 
HoppyUK said:
Lens hoods are never necessary. Lenses will work without them. But they are always very desirable.

If you're thinking that the front element of the 50 1.8 is already a bit recessed, kind of has a built in lens hood, then you are right. But as much shade as you can possible give is better.

Using the 50 1.8 on a crop camera, you can fit a surprisingly deep lens hood and still not get any vignetting.
Click to expand...

That was exactly was I was thinking. Thank you. :)
 
The23rdman said:
Thanks, Pete. Reading reviews of the Canon hood it doesn't seem to be brilliant for 20 quid. What type of generic hood would be best? Petal or perhaps a rubber retractable one?
Click to expand...

The Canon hood is pretty feeble TBH, but certainly better than nothing and, given what has already been said, perhaps with the balance of practicality in mind, goo enough (fitting the lens cap, or filters, or not being so big as to obstruct the built in flash etc).

You can't use a petal hood because the front of the 50 1.8 rotates. I used a cheap Jessops rubber one on my 50 1.8 before I sold it, but if I felt I was ever going to use that lens a lot (which I never did) I would have got a longer one.

Just as an observation, I had an EF-S 60mm 2.8 macro - fab little lens - which I used with the hood from an EF 100 2.8 macro. It still did not vignette but the hood was actually as long as the lens itself and at max macro range the subject almost sat inside it. So practical considerations have to come into it sometimes.
 
HoppyUK said:
The Canon hood is pretty feeble TBH, but certainly better than nothing and, given what has already been said, perhaps with the balance of practicality in mind, goo enough (fitting the lens cap, or filters, or not being so big as to obstruct the built in flash etc).

You can't use a petal hood because the front of the 50 1.8 rotates. I used a cheap Jessops rubber one on my 50 1.8 before I sold it, but if I felt I was ever going to use that lens a lot (which I never did) I would have got a longer one.

Just as an observation, I had an EF-S 60mm 2.8 macro - fab little lens - which I used with the hood from an EF 100 2.8 macro. It still did not vignette but the hood was actually as long as the lens itself and at max macro range the subject almost sat inside it. So practical considerations have to come into it sometimes.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I'll start out with the rubber one and see how that goes then work from there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top