Hoods and Lenses

[Doktaduck]

Hi folks,

I was wondering about hoods. I've done a bit of reading and there are some mixed messages out there.


As I got the kit lenses

EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 - the recommended hood is :EW-60C

EF 50-200 mm f/3.5-4.5 - I can't find the suitable lens hood as the only thing I can find requires you to remove the rubber ring off the lens before fitting the ET-62 II

So to my questions.

Firstly I have tried to change the lenses fairly often to get a feel for how they perform, but is there a situation where I would use the 18-55 instead of the 50-200? I am liking the ability to really reduce the DOF, so the 50-200 seems to be on my camera most of the time, also with the ability to zoom closer to the object/subject this seems the most versatile.

Secondly, should I be worrying about a lens hood, as the reading suggests that due to the movement during focus etc, that they are not ideal...

Sorry if these questions are a little vague, but I'm still getting a grasp of when/if I should be doing things.

[ameerat42]

Hi folks,

I was wondering about hoods. I've done a bit of reading and there are some mixed messages out there.


As I got the kit lenses

EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 - the recommended hood is :EW-60C

EF 50-200 mm f/3.5-4.5 - I can't find the suitable lens hood as the only thing I can find requires you to remove the rubber ring off the lens before fitting the ET-62 II

So to my questions.

Firstly I have tried to change the lenses fairly often to get a feel for how they perform, but is there a situation where I would use the 18-55 instead of the 50-200? I am liking the ability to really reduce the DOF, so the 50-200 seems to be on my camera most of the time, also with the ability to zoom closer to the object/subject this seems the most versatile.

Secondly, should I be worrying about a lens hood, as the reading suggests that due to the movement during focus etc, that they are not ideal...

Sorry if these questions are a little vague, but I'm still getting a grasp of when/if I should be doing things.

I'm not a Canon user, but DON'T they come with a lens hood as part of the kit? OBVIOUS answer, No.

Looking at the pics of the hoods, the EW-60C looks insubstantial - that is, it hardly looks like it would "hood" anything.
The ET62II looks serviceable.

I have a Sigma 70-300 with a very similar hood, which I use most of the time. It does not interfere with focusing, whether on AF or manual focus.

I certainly didn't like its Ebay price (http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Canon-Lens-Hood-ET-62-II-HOOD-ADAPTER-RING-1695-/260604494828)

At worst, try making one up yourself with black cardboard.

Am.

[Doktaduck]

Thanks Am,

yeah , no hoods came in the kit.

I do like the 'Look' of the petal hoods, but other then camera aesthetics a lot of what I'm reading seems to lean away from using them.. also the fact that I can't find one made for use with the 50-200..

[ameerat42]

Having looked a bit more, I found this
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/eos/EF-lenses/EF50200mmf3545L/index.htm

If it's the same lens, then the hood is the
lens hood:- ET-54 (older AFD)

It's the shape I have on the Sigma 70-300, not the petal shape.
Am.

[Roosta]

Hi Doktaduck,

I don't own any kit lenses, but the 16-35 mm that came with my 50D had a lens hood/cap. There are different lengths and widths in the hoods, for things like angle of view with say Ultra Wide Angle (UWA) lenses, this is where the petal type sit. With the longer focal lenses, say your 50-200 mm, the hood would be longer and cup shaped, but still wide enough to not effect field of view when operating throughout the focal range.
The main idea of the hood is to stop side light and help reduce flair.
On my 17-35 mm I purchased a rubber cup style that just slips over the end of the lens, just be careful, not sure if the front element rotates on your lens, that will (If it does rotate) cause you some selection issues.
Given you're in Melbourne, there should be a good camera store near you, where they should have a range of hoods, and not just the sometimes widely over priced Canon genuine product. Try the slip on ones - but ask to use it in store and make sure it doesn't fall into view any where throughout the focal range.

Hope this is of some help.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, Not sure if you're familiar with Bryan's (http://www.thedigitalpicture.com/Reviews/) site, but being a Canon user, you should be/become accustomed. You can spend days on here. trust me.

Also, take a look here (http://www.d-d-photographics.com.au/categories/Lenses/Lens-Hoods/). Click on each hood, and it offers the required lens/es and a reason why.

[ameerat42]

Back to another Q in your 1st post: you'd use the wider lens typically, but not exclusively, for wide vistas, like landscapes and in cramped spaces.
The more I have looked at the lens hood Q, the more vexing it seems.

Don't forget the standbys: hand over top or at side of lens, just out of view, is very useful. Try not to shoot close to the sun/bright lights. You can often see lens flare in the viewfinder.

Some of those prices for lens hoods are not just prohibitive, but ridiculous. Don't laugh at cardboard and scissors.
Am.

[bushbikie]

Having a sturdy lens hood fitted can also go some way to protect the lens front element from damage.