Substitute lens hood for 16-35 L on 10D

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by david_lelong, Mar 10, 2004.

  1. Is there another lens hood I could use with the 16-35 L on a 10D body instead of the EW
    -83E? It's a bit wide for my camera bag.

    - David
  2. I have a 17-40 f4L and have just picked up the hood EW-83DII, which is the standard hood for the 24 f1.4L. It works like a charm- much narrower, also reverses on my lens for storage and does not cut any of the image off at 17mm on my Digital Rebel. It ain't cheap, $50, but I like it alot with this outfit.
  3. I have actually been looking for a new hood for my 16-35, but not because of size... I would like a deeper hood (with it's resulting decrease of flare). Since the 16-35 is approximately a 25-55 on a 1.6x crop factor body, I'm thinking a hood for a 24-70 might work better?

    Anyway, the reason I replied was in my experience the 16-35 (as with all WA lenses) is somewhat prone to flare issues... A smaller hood (the 16-35's is already quite svelte) might cause you big headaches.
  5. EW-83DII It won't work on the 16-35mm L I just returned one to Adorama today. I don't understand why according to all accounts it works on the 17-40mm L. Believe me I tried for quite a while. It wont budge.
  6. My wife and I are both using EW-83DII's on our 17-40 L's. They are tight, but they do work in somewhat after a while. When mounting the hood you have to push in a bit to make sure it's in all the way before you start to twist it on. Then to do the twisting either grab one of the large petals and use it to twist the hood, or reach across the lens with the large petals on either side of your hand, hold onto the small petal at the far side, and press the side of your hand against the left large petal to screw the hood on, against the right large petal to remove it. It is a bit of a hassle, but in my opinion the more convenient size and much better flare blocking makes it worth it.
  7. David,

    With time, what will wear out, the lens's flange or the lens hood, or both?


  8. I don't think either will "wear out," Pierre. More like they'll just "wear in." So far there's no visible wear on the flanges of either of our lenses, and just an ever-so-slight amount on the hoods themselves. My expectation is that the hood flanges will wear just enough to make mounting is easier, and no more, and that the most Gail and I will see on our lens flanges is a bit of scuffing (though none has shown up so far). The same should be true of any other tight-fitting lens/hood combination provided the lens is an L series. I think it could possibly turn out to be a problem with Canon's cheaper lenses, however. Keep in mind that we've only been using the EW-83D II's on our 17-40's for a few weeks, so lens flange wear might possibly show up in the future, though I doubt it. If that was going to happen I think it would be right at the start, when the fit is tightest.

Share This Page