how necessary are lense hoods?

[IIIMik3]

normally, how many of you use a lense hood for all your outdoor shooting? I know they're cheap, but i figure if i really don't need it, that's another couple bucks to go to another lense or something else.

[cubfan]

I sometimes shoot backlit scenes and the lens hood is absolutely essential for this type of shot. I wouldn't shoot outdoors towards the sun without one. My 28-135 IS lens is especially susceptable to flare.

[John_T]

I have two. One is a Hoodman H200 and the other is a Silvestri bellows hood with a 4X loupe. Now that I have them, I would absolutely not want to be without them.

[bwb s30]

I *always* use a hood when shooting outdoors ... I read somewhere that it does make a *significant* difference... especially when the sun is shining on the lens at an angle.

I also leave the lens hood on while I'm walking around .. one more bit of protection for the front of an expensive lens

besides the "flower" shaped hood on my 24-85 looks cool!

[lightandlife]

I never use them.

They are bulky and restrict your freedom. Of course, you have to bear the cost.

If you are sitting, you can lay the camera on top of something soft (e.g., book) If you hit or drop the camera, the lens may be dead. This may be particularly painful if L lenses are damaged.

But I value my freedom more.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Two good reasons to use a lens hood.

1. First and formost,. the hood is designed to prevent direct sunlight from hitting the front element of your lens. Direct light or even strongky reflecte light of this nature will dramatically effect the clarity and sharpness of your images. A good way to prove this is to look at images that have suffered the ultimate sideffect of direct sunlight,. ie: Lens flare. In an image with strong lens flare,. you can clearly see that the parts of the iage closest to the flre suffer a hazy soft effect.

This is the extreme,. but the same thing happens to a degree with any amount of light shining directly on that front element. Lens manufactureres apply coatings and desighn glass to reduce this effect as well,. but nothing will help more than a well desighned lens hood. For this reason it is best to use a specific hood desighned for your lens as opposed to a screw on circular hood.

In short,. investing in superior optics and then forgoing the hood desighned for the lens is like shooting through saran wrap. It is effectively reducing the lenses designed image quality.

2. Another reason for a hood is it offers another level of protection to the lens. I walk in the woods a lot, and the lens hood thus far as absorbed 100% of the twigs that would have otherwise hit the front lens element,.. or at least the Polarizer filter which at 86mm is pricey enough on its own.

[levi]

Case in point...

http://image.pbase.com/u32/levidickie/large/20706853.arch.jpg

although, the reflection was directed straight down the lens, i think most of the flare was from the side.

[IIIMik3]

ok, well then it looks like i'll go pick up a couple different lense hoods for my lenses. I mostly liked the point about being another form of protection for the lense.

So another quick question. Which would you say are better? the full circle hoods? or as bwb s30 put it, the "flower" style hood? i figure the 10D's cropping, might prevent most of the vignetting issues. but i do have to agree with bwb s30, that the "flower" style hoods do "look" better. he he.

[CyberDyneSystems]

The "flower" or "tulip" are preferable. They are desighned with those curves to stay just out side of the "vignette point" of the lens, and thus totally cover the parts of the lens that is not actually used in the image,.. (remember you get a rectangular image from a round lens),. the tulip shape casts a shadow that shades all the lens that is not included in the image rectangle, in essence creating a rectangular lens element. They are also referred to as "perfect" lens hoods for this reason.

A round lens hood will help,.. but it will not prevent as much extraneous light from striking the "outside of the rectangle" part of the lens. :)

[boobops]

IMO if you are using a 16-35 F2.8 on a 10D, then I would question if the lens hood has any benefits at all.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Did someone mention the 16-35mm "L" ?

I have the 17-40mm f/4 and it too suffers from an inferior lens hood,. somewhere in this forum I started a thread with my solution. I bought another hood that is much longer and modified it to make my own "perfect hood" The stock hood was complete crap for the 10D and I even question its usefullness on a 35mm or full frame sensor.