Lens hood for the 70-300 IS

According to Bob, the appropriate lens hood for the 70-300 IS is the

same one as for the new 70-300 IS DO: ET 65 B. However, it is out of

stock in B&H and Adorama.

 

1. Does anybody know of a store in NY vicinity which has it

in stock? If so, please provide links.

 

2. Is it possible to mount another lens hood on the 70-300

IS? If so, which one?

 

3. Is it possible to mount the ET-65 III (the one for the

85/1.8) on it? If so, that will be great because I already have it.

 

 

TIA.

 

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

For an all prime guy whose so particular about sharpness your 1D plus consumer zoom idea is going to leave you rather disappointed, but then you weren't interested in hearing that anyway.

People are saying some pretty good things about that new "consumer zoom," Yakim; let us

know your experience after you've shot with it.

 

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/308680

Yakim,

 

I'd be very interested to hear your impressions of moving from the Elan 7 to the 1D.

 

Panos

I'm not trying to be nasty, really, just interested considering the 70-200 f4L wasn't sharp enough for you.

There must have been a batch of bad EF 70-200 4L USM out there. I think both Yakim

and I were proud owners of such misfits. Yeah, yeah, most of them are great. My 75-

300 IS out performed my 70-200 4L

and it sucked...

<p> Hi folks, </p>

<p> The choice of the 70-300 IS over the 70-200/4 was not an easy one. What I really wanted (and still do) was the 70-200/2.8 IS but it was too expensive. The 70-200/2.8 non-IS is too heavy and too pricy for what you get (IMHO) and the 70-200/4 is slow and lacks IS. I remember that there were times where even f/2.8 on my 200/2.8 did not allow me shutter speeds which were high enough for handhold ability. Thus, my true indecision became with the 200/2.8 (which I sold to get a DSLR) and the new 70-300 IS. <b></b> </p>

<p> Several threads in FM (e.g. <a href="http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/306630">here</a>, <a href="http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/308680">here</a> and <a href="http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=294">these reviews</a>) as well as <a href="http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/70-300is/review.html">Bob's review</a>, convinced me that this lens might be like my 50/1.8. Lousy to feel and operate but with excellent picture quality. I thus decided to give it a try. In the worst case scenario, I will simply sell it. Heck, I'm sure it will sell more quickly than my 200/2.8. But as it seems from net reviews, I will keep it until I will be able to afford the 70-200/2.8 IS or until Canon will manufacture IS versions of the 200/2.8 and/or 70-200/4.</p>

<p> Now that my motives for choosing the 70-300 IS are - hopefully - clear, will someone be kind enough to answer my questions?</p>

 

<p>Happy shooting, <br>

Yakim.</p>

Yakim,

<p>

According to <a href=http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html>Photonotes</a>, the relevant number here is 65. That's the size of hood mount.

<p>

Canon's press release says the proper hood for the 70-300/IS is the EW-65B. This doesn't make any sense, and I think it's a typo for a few reasons:

<P>

1) It doesn't exist. The EW-65 is a wide hood for the 28/2.8 and 35/2. This is a telephoto, it should use an ET hood.

<P>

2) Both the DO and non-DO 70-300s are supposed to use the same hood. The DO hood is an ET-65B.

<P>

3) The only store in Froogle selling an "EW-65B" is <http://www.samys.com/product.php?ItemNo=CANO9447A001>here</a>, and you'll notice the hood pictured is actually the ET-65B.

<p>

Anyway, you should be able to use the ET-65 III without issue. The hood mounts for both lenses look like my 100/2, and the diameter is of course the same. Availability for the ET-65B is December at B&H.

<p>

DI

Wow, that was pointless.

 

On closer inspection of a DO blowup, it appears to use a hood like the 50/1.4; a twist hood. The ET-65 III is a snap-on hood.

 

Thus, NO, it probably won't work.

 

[sigh]

 

DI

I seem to remember Yakim jumping into every thread with the word 'Sigma' in it to give his unsolicited opinion, can't really complain when we hijack your thread... ;-P

>> I'd be very interested to hear your impressions of moving from the Elan 7 to the 1D.

 

 

First impressions are that it's much bigger, a lot heavier, sits much better in my hand and has a gazillion more options :-) Pictures? Oh, that will have to wait a while :-( till I get a new computer and screen. Mine are way too old (~10 years).

 

 

>> There must have been a batch of bad EF 70-200 4L USM out there. I think both Yakim and I were proud owners of such misfits.

 

 

This seems like a very reasonable hypothesis.

 

>> Thus, NO, it probably won't work.

 

Thanks for the info. However, if anyone wants to disprove it, I will be more than happy :-)

 

>> Canon's press release says the proper hood for the 70-300/IS is the EW-65B. This doesn't make any sense, and I think it's a typo....

 

It is. Few lines before that on the press release they state ET 65 B. Also look at DPR and Bob's review. All are the same.

 

 

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

Ben, I am not anti-hijacking :-) but only as long as the original questions are answered.

 

Anyway, in a few months I plan to buy the Sigma 10-20 as it will not vignette on the 1D from 11mm and up. And if Sigma will come with OS versions to their 70-200/2.8 and 100-300/4 at reasonable prices I will consider them as well.

 

I can't help it, I have strong ideas of certain things (BTW, only few of them are photography-related) and am not afraid to say them out loud. Hummmmmm....... I wonder. If I never drove a Mercedes or BMW, can't I say that they are very good cars?

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

Nah give me a Jaguar XK8 anyday, just like the look of it!

 

That and the memories of photos of the 'Gas trucks' with the Mercedes symbol on the front...

Yakim, someone must have stolen you photo.net login. They are claiming you are going to buy a Sigma lens? When I heard that I knew it couldn't possibly be you.

 

m