Lens Hoods - seriously what is the point?

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

trencheel303

Messages
4,888
Edit My Images
No
As the thread title suggests, I've never been able to see any use for them. My bridge camera (when I had it) came with one, and I'd end up taking it off every time I needed to flash as it would cast a shadow.

My Sigma 10-20 came with one, but because it's such a wide lens it's really a laughable hood. And, since I use a circular polarizer, the hood is naff all use to me, so it gets left off.

Honestly, apart from getting in the way, what purpose do they serve?
 
Not being sarcastic, I just genuinely haven't noticed much difference with and without.

For protection of the front I use a filter or lens cap. I can't use my circular polarizer with the hood on so it has to come off anyway.
 
I was once told the only reason for using a lens hood was because the photographer was tring to look like a pro - so that must be it then :D
 
perhaps i should start wearing it on my sigma then... it's just a complete arse to turn the filter with it on
 
Protection - without loss of IQ - and controlling flare. If you don't know why you need one then I guess you're pretty new to all this! You'll learn!
 
Invaluable for reducing glare on night shots with a lot of light sources about. If I didn't know you, I'd suggest someone INSIDE Canon started this thread just to make it seem like their tight-wad line of only supplying them with 'L' series lenses is like the white paint - they just want to look like a pro.
 
Seriously: to protect the lens and help reduce or eliminate flare in difficult lighting conditions...

I have had my lenses literally saved from destruction by lens hoods as they have absorbed much of the impacts from hits that would have struck squarely on the front elements...

And to be honest, anyone who couldn't figure all this out for themselves and also starts a thread about it is a bit bloody thick if you ask me...
I mean...seriously...?
 
Arkady said:
And to be honest, anyone who couldn't figure all this out for themselves and also starts a thread about it is a bit bloody thick if you ask me...
I mean...seriously...?
Click to expand...

Such a pleasant man :)
 
Arkady said:
Sometimes, but not today...
Maybe if your OP had been less contentiously worded, but honesly, what did you expect?
Click to expand...

I'm sincerely sorry for not being an expert on the matter, nor being able to notice a discernable difference in situations with and without lens hood. I was obviously wrong for seeing the disadvantages mentioned in the post as well.

I must remember to be rude to someone when they ask what is seemingly a silly question about a subject they know little about, as it is obviously the preferred way of doing business these days.

Back not so long ago, people were actually pleasant to each other.

toodeloo. :wave:
 
Flash: My avatar is a joke...
We've not met in person so let's leave it at that aye??!

Not in my line of work they're not...
Click to expand...

Well that's not my fault is it my friend.

Everyday I get asked silly questions about computers but I don't tell them that I think they're thick for not knowing the answer. Just like I'd expect not to be called thick for asking a simple albeit perhaps naive question about lens hoods.

-smh-
 
actually your avatar is in contravention of the rules, so ive deleted it. No swearing?
 
My lens hoods keep my front element out of the dirt when i put the camera down. Just gives an extra level of protection before something can get at the glass. Its saved me from a few stone chips this year too.... unlike my glasses... maybe i need sunshades for them?

On wide angles they are a bit of a token effort i find and cause more issues with flash than they solve with flare.
 
It was the way you posed it... as I stated - contentiously - I mean it's almost like you started the thread hoping to provoke a reaction, rather than asking for clarification on a bit of equipment you were unsure had any physical merit.
 
I'm sorry but that wasn't the intention at all
 
Arkady im sure is just feeling a little grumpy today. He suffers from PMT you know. Im sure he may apologise at some point for suggesting you may be a bit thick...
 
Oh all right then...you're not thick... but it was a dumb-ass question if you'd thought about it...

As Matty righly surmises - S*** day at the end of a S*** week at the end of a S*** 6-month Tour in a S*** country working for incompetant Tw*** - mostly in the RAF it must be said, who can't take honest criticism without crying - yes, crying!!!

And I'm the one who gets to take an early bath...? fume...rant...
 
Arkady said:
Seriously: to protect the lens and help reduce or eliminate flare in difficult lighting conditions...

I have had my lenses literally saved from destruction by lens hoods as they have absorbed much of the impacts from hits that would have struck squarely on the front elements...

And to be honest, anyone who couldn't figure all this out for themselves and also starts a thread about it is a bit bloody thick if you ask me...
I mean...seriously...?
Click to expand...

:lol::lol::lol:

trencheel303 said:
Such a pleasant man :)
Click to expand...

Yep,he is......:thumbs:
 
I can give some credit to the OPs intentions. I was first in this school of thought when under Lord Rockwell's influences - he claim's they're nothing more than just to show off IIRC. They're so much more than that now!
 
Back on topic, ;) I was taking my lens hood off a couple of weeks ago, and whilst not concentrating, unscrewed the lens which dropped on the floor. :eek: :bonk: It was a very sick feeling, as I feared the worst, and had no one but myself to blame.

The lens hood hit the ground and took the brunt of the fall and broke. :eek: New lens hood £5 (£30+ for Nikon original :eek:) new lens £380+, which is now actually more than I paid for it.

Now of course if I hadn't been using a lens hood, I wouldn't have had to take the thing off in the first place, and stupidly unscrewed the lens. :bonk: :lol:

In my experience most people new to DSLRs don't feel the lens hood is of benefit so don't use it, so I don't think it was a bad question to ask.

I'd also like to add the the lens hood is lens specific. I was talking to someone last week and he said he didn't use the lens hood because it caused some vignetting, so I asked him whether the lens hood is for that lens, he said no, but it was the correct diameter. ;)
 
Kanine said:
I can give some credit to the OPs intentions. I was first in this school of thought when under Lord Rockwell's influences - he claim's they're nothing more than just to show off IIRC. They're so much more than that now!
Click to expand...

I might not have made it clear in my OP but I had tried with hood off and on in various circumstances and hadn't noticed much difference - and I am a pixel peeper. It got in the way of flash and made using my polarizer a pain. As for protecting the lens thats one of the reasons I use filters. I didn't mean to cause a riot with my post :suspect::thinking::shrug:
 
if this isn't a wind up thread then the OP is being deliberately provacative.....I would say....and he needs to get a decent flash and not rely on a cam pop up!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top