Use of lens hood

Hi all. Hope you guys had a wonderful Christmas. I just want ti know how many M users here routinely use the lens hood on their lenses. I am refering specifically to the clip-on type, NOT the build-in entendable ones. Do you fine noticeable improvements in your pics when the hood is used? The reason I ask is that these hoods are quite inconvenient to use and do block the viewfinder quite a bit. I cannot honestly tell that the pics without hoods are any worse than those with, but then I am very careful about incoming light source angles and take precautions to avoid situations that will cause flare. Any comments will be most appreciated. Also, pls do have a wonderful New Year, too.

Steven,

 

<p>

 

I do not know whether lens hoods contribute to picture quality,

probably not to any significant degree. Nevertheless, lens hoods are a

permanent fixture on both my M2's, 35/1.4 and 50/1.4. If nothing else

they protect the glass from any stray flying objects, my accidently

bumping into something and fingerprints. For me they do not block the

viewfinder at all, I do not even notice them when looking through the

viewfinder, maybe it is because of the slots on the hoods which does

away with blockage. So I am a lens hood fanatic and use them on all

lenses, Leica or Nikon.

 

<p>

 

I wish you a great '01 and good shooting.

I too am a hood user. I never did a side by side test to see if

there was any contrast difference, but logic says that there would be

at certain lighting angles. I use the hoods for protection of the

front element from inadvertent finger prints and bumps from other

solid objects. I also rely on the hoods when shooting fast, I can

place the lenses hood side down in the slots of my bag, and don't

have to worry about or fumble with the front caps when changing

lenses.

 

<p>

 

I have the 50mm Summicron, the last before the current model, and the

hood's cutouts prevent obstructions in the finder. I think the shape

of the hood of my 35mm Summicron is a masterpiece of design, offering

the most protection with the least volume. Had Leica stayed with a

round hood for this lens it would have been larger, and probably not

blocked the light as effectively. The pull out hood on my 90mm lens

is not really a convenience problem, it is ready in a half a second,

and due to the angle of view, very effective.

 

<p>

 

Considering the thought that Leica put into the hoods, they are all

individually designed specifically for a particular lens, the company

know for its Spartan offerings (function over fluff) must think the

use of hoods is valid.

 

<p>

 

Good luck in the New Year.

I've noticed less images ruined by flare when using the hoods on the

older, non-multicoated lenses, especially the 50 and teles. Since

you can't see the flare in a rangefinder like you can in an SLR, I

think they are a must. Of course on the newer lenses I always pull

out the built in hoods as well. I also noticed the same when using a

hood on the old Rollei TLRs.

USE THE HOOD!!

When there is strong sidelighting (more noticable at some

angles than others), light glancing off the lens surface definitely

deteriorates the image. I have been working for a number of

years on a series of photographs taken with available light in

cafe settings.

I have the 35 Asph Summicron (large, quite flat front element),

with the clip on hood as you mentioned. When presented with a

quick grab-shot I sometimes didn't have time to put on the hood

and was getting terrible flare on some of the sidelit shots. Now I

leave the hood on at all times and have never had the problem.

Steven, I use two filter rings on the 35/1.4 asph because I hate the

viewfinder occlusion. One ring has the UV filter in place, the other

is empty. This seems to work well and is less bulky than the plastic

hood. I'm going to test the 24/2.8 for a similar set-up, although

it's not so relevant there as you have to use the add-on viewfinder

anyway.

 

<p>

 

As for improvement, I've never noticed it because I never take the

filter rings off unless to clean the filter. But then some people

will also tell you that using a filter degrades your image so much

that you might as well be using an instamatic anyway...

 

<p>

 

Rob.

Steve, I always use a hood on my M2 with Rigid 50/2. I don't notice

it in my field of view any more, but when others look through th

viewfinder they often comment on it (and some wonder if it will show

up on the photo :).

 

<p>

 

Can't say I have ever done flare tests to confirm the flare

reduction, because a hood is a freebee. It can not under any

circumstances reduce image quality, it helps keep fingers off the

glass, and it may sometimes reduce flare.

 

<p>

 

The biggest reason I always have it fitted is that the M2 lacks the

lens release button collar, I have often found that I have

accidentally released it, and it is no longer locked into the

Bayonet. I hope that the day the lens falls off, it falls on the hood

(and something soft).

Yes, I would say that some of my photos were saved using the hood

because it helped unwanted light (flare) ruin the negatives. Try

pointing your camera (SLR) at a subject against the light. Now shade

the lens with your hand to see if you notice any difference. If

unshaded, some light that you may not even see will get into the lens

and bounce inside it to make your slides or negatives have that milky

look to it (less contrast). I'd say, use it as much as you can and

you get an added bonus of getting extra protection for your lens.

Thanks for the response. Seems like the hoods are used more frequently

than I thought. One comment got me thinking. Does the use of stacked

filter rings as hood, as suggested by Rod, cause vignetting, especially

on a 35 or 28? Can you confirm on this? By the way, the metal clip-on

hoods with cut-outs that I have are not freebees, and since I have

already paid for it, I suppose I might as well use it:)

Thanks for any further comments.

Dear Steven; I went to the same question time ago, and to confirm the

need of a shade specialy in older lenses; I put the lens in any

reflex body to be able to see throuh it,you will see it focused very

near, but is just to be able to make a judgement , and then check the

diference with and without the shade with a side ligth like a

lamp,lens wide open, better if you do it in a dark room with a side

lamp to see flare.Good look.

My opinion; use the shade.

R. Watson

Steve,

 

<p>

 

I have two lenses that I use routinely (35/2 and 75/1.4) and I always

use the hoods. Especially on the 35 as I find flare to be more of a

problem with wide-angle lenses in general. Besides, the hood on the

35 Summicron is really quite un-obtrusive and I detest filters so it

actually protects the lens from the odd bump'n scratch.

 

<p>

 

Just my take but if your paying THAT much money for Leica glass then

why introduce another airspace with a planar filter?

 

<p>

 

Regards,

""Does the use of stacked filter rings as hood, as suggested by Rod,

cause vignetting, especially on a 35 or 28? Can you confirm on

this? ""

 

<p>

 

No vignetting for the 35 up. I'm stacking two B+W filter rings, which

are quite deep. For the 24, which is why I'm "testing" the set up, it

probably won't work!

 

<p>

 

Rob (not Rod).

Shooting without a lenshood feels as uncomfortable to me as going

downtown without my pants on (not that I've tried the latter). In

fact, the availability of a hood is a deciding factor in whether I'll

buy a used Leica lens.