Anybody using hood EW-83D II (from the 24/1.4) on 16-35 2.8L?

There was a thread a while back about this, with a link to an outside page which

suggests it is possible to use the EW-83D II hood (spec for 24 1.4L) on the 16-

35 2.8L.

 

Link

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=007emc

 

A user here said it doesn't work. I'd like to know if anybody refutes that. I would like

to use the narrower hood for the size advantage, and also for better flare and

physical protection. Anybody doing it?

 

Cheers.

It didn't work for me. Wouldn't budge. Carefully tried putting it on for quite a while. Returned it. Every one with a 17-40 seems to have no problem. This doesn't make sense. 16-35 and 17-40 use the same hood. Love to hear from others as well.

It works on the 17-40L, but is not a smooth fit like the supplied hood. I have to get it seated within the bayonet correctly & apply the right pressure to both sides at the same time as I push it in or it is hard to mount. It's a nice hood to use with the digital bodies because it's so much narrower, but I do with it went on smoother. I've looked at the bayonet area on the lens, wondering if there was anything that could be loostened by the repeated mounting of this hood, but I don't see anything there that looks like it could be damaged.

When I replaced my 17-35mm f/2.8L with the new 16-35mm f/2.8L, I noticed that the bayonet fittings on the lens hood had been redesigned. It seems to be a more rugged design but it's apparent that the new lens is not really compatible with the old style hoods.