Lens hood(s)?

Although the LH for 17-55mm f2.8 is EW-83J and for 24mm f1.4 it is EW-83Dll but the later works for both so then

what is the difference between 'J' and 'D'?

<p>About $20</p>

<p>http://www.ebay.com/itm/77mm-Soft-Rubber-Lens-Hood-Canon-EF-24mm-f-1-4-L-USM-II-Wide-Angle-Lens-/370661249607</p>

<p>Save some more money on this $6.99 piece of rubber. It was what I used to use on my 50/1.4 Rokkor X glass during my old school days. It worked then. Should work beautifully on your wide angle. </p>

<p>Although both may fit both lens, their shape are quite different and are not interchangeable because of the different angle of view. the EW-83J is a compromise for a Zoom while the EW-83DII was made for and fits the 24mm prime perfectly.</p>

<p>Although both these hoods are designated "83" and are of two-prong bayonet type, the fitting is not identical. The EW-83D[original/II] has a very slightly tighter fitting, and needs to be eased if it is to be used on one of the lenses taking a "standard" 83 fitting.</p>

<p>Why is this of any interest? One answer is that Canon do not supply alternative lens hoods for EF lenses that are optimised for use on 1-6-factor bodies. Before the current generation of EF-S lenses became available, the EF17~40/4L was quite a popular choice as a standard zoom on 1.6-factor bodies, but its supplied lenshood, designed for its FF use as a UWA, was useless for this purpose, and the EW-83D was used as an alternative, despite the imperfect fit.</p>

<p>The EW-83J (standard for the EF-S 17~55/2.8) is perfectly suited to 1.6-factor use on the 17~40, and is exactly the same fit. It is also preferable to the (standard) EW-83H when the 24~105 is used on 1.6-factor, and again the fit is exactly the same</p>