17-40mm L Do I really need the hood?

T

The Edge

Guest
Coz it don't quite fit in my bag!

I understand how hoods work, but is it really necessary on this lens?

Cheers.
 
IMO no, you don't, and in any case the hood is too large in diameter for use with a 1.6x camera. (It doesn't fit in my bag either.) :wink: :D
 
Here is another no thrown into the mix :D I have never used it since I bought this lens over a year ago, as Silky has stated due to the crop factor when used with digital it has no benefit whatsoever. I have mine in my bag but it seems to have taken up permanent residence and doesn't know what daylight is. :LOL:
 
Thanks folks, it can go back in the box with the other packaging :)
 
There is probably some poor photographer somwhere who has lost or damaged his lens hood and is making do or has had to buy a new hood from Canon while we all have them sat there collecting dust. Its a shame really.
 
you could always put it on the ground and sit on it 8)

MyPix
 
If you still want a hood for this lens, I hear the EW - 83D - II from a 24mm/1.4 will fit the lens, and also provide far more shade than the original

CAEW83D.jpg


Sourced from here:

http://www.adorama.com/CAEW83D.html
 
I've also read that that hood works better on a digital body than the one supplied by canon.

I've yet to take mine out of the bag as yet, but i'd imagine it gives the "pro" look when fitted :LOL:

Liberalis, I got the impression he had the hood and wanted to know wether or not to bother using it, rather than where can I find one.
 
The hood supplied with the lens is no use at all, as the 1.6x digital factor renders it so. The replacement I suggested covers more of the lens making it useful.

I dont know for sure if it fits, I read it somewhere and looked up a supplier.
 
I always use a lens hood with all of my lenses, not only does it reduce lens flaring in photos but it also protects the front lens element from dust and accidents knocks.
 
SDK^ said:
I always use a lens hood with all of my lenses, not only does it reduce lens flaring in photos but it also protects the front lens element from dust and accidents knocks.
Click to expand...

I use a skylight filter to protect the lens and the hoods on all my others but it really is useless on this lens when used on a DSLR with a 1.6x crop factor. I am going to look into the alternatives suggested above for this year though as using it with none is less than ideal.
 
I got a hood off the 17-55 for mine, much better, I always have a hood on. Keep the other spare for when go full frame ;)
 
^^ignore my stupidness, bringing up old threads :) I was testing out the mobile forum. The EW-83J lens hood is great on the 17-40 :)
 
got the lens, tried the hood once
it's been gathering dust ever since
can't say that I've missed it either
 
does the same 'crop factor makes hood useless' apply to the 24-70.

I have just bought one to go with my 30d, just wondering whether to use the hood or not?
 
Surely if you're out shooting in bright sunlight (but not directly into) even this hood would help protect from lens flare a little?
 
Think this thread was just resting :LOL:

I never use the silly hood that came with the 17-40 either :)

I've usually got the 24-105 with me and I tend to use the hood from that but take it off if shooting near the 17mm end.
 
Shutter Stutter said:
does the same 'crop factor makes hood useless' apply to the 24-70.

I have just bought one to go with my 30d, just wondering whether to use the hood or not?
Click to expand...

The 24-70 is prone to flare at 2.8 at the wide end so a hood is beneficial. The previous version (28-70) didn't suffer this at all....has other disadvantages to compensate though.

Bob
 
SDK^ said:
I always use a lens hood with all of my lenses, not only does it reduce lens flaring in photos but it also protects the front lens element from dust and accidents knocks.
Click to expand...

:agree:

I use one on my 10-22 (same hood I think?) and it has saved the front element (and UV filter) from at least one knock so far when I forgot to tighten the tripod wheel on my Gitzo off centre head and the camera went forwards into one of the legs. Luckily the hood caught the impact!
 
An old thread bumped but an update from me :


I'm using the hood from the new EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS

Canon_17-40L-F4_m.jpg



Some other options

EW-83DII hood from Canon 24mm F1.4 L USM
EW-83H hood from Canon 24-105mm F4L IS lens

00Gh7I-30204884.jpg
 
Yeah, he's a hoodie! :D
 
Surly if you used a hood designed for a 24mm it would cause some vignetting around the edges, particularly the top and bottom? The 17-40 is an ultra wide angle, so it's not really supposed to work with a hood.

I know for sure you'd get a bad drop-off at the bottom if you used the pop-up flash, I even get a slight shadow without a hood lol (not that I ever use the pop-up flash, but have tested it a few times on my 40D).

I really dislike the 17-40 hood, it's too big and not really very useful.
 
I use the EW 83J designed for the 17-55 and get no vignetting. The hood that comes with the 17-40 is more suitable for full frame.
 
8utters said:
Surly if you used a hood designed for a 24mm it would cause some vignetting around the edges, particularly the top and bottom? The 17-40 is an ultra wide angle, so it's not really supposed to work with a hood.
Click to expand...
17mm x 1.6 (crop) = 27mm :)
 
The supplied hood is pants - not sure it benefits in ANY way:shrug:

That being said, it always goes on with me, but more out of habit :bang:
 
Always used the supplied hood, partly out of habit, but partly because it works. It's always on my lens when I'm doing magazine shoots outdoors, especially in low, tricky lighting during winter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top