Lens Hood use with 85mm f/1.8

[angryhampster]

I plan on picking up an 85mm f/1.8 within the next couple of weeks to add to my "collection," and was curious how much this lens tends to flare. Do most of you that use this lens use a hood as well? If so, what model?

THanks!

[SkipD]

You really should use a properly designed lens hood on ANY lens you use unless the hood makes taking the photo impossible or impractical (such as when shooting at one inch from the subject).

[puddlepirate44]

Canon ET65 III is the hood, the cost, at Amazon is around $20.

[Mr. Clean]

I just got the lens hood for my 85 not too long ago. Had the lens for about a year without the hood and never had issues with flare. It all depends in how you shoot

[JaGWiRE]

I use some rubber thing the previously seller included. I like it, it even folds back.

[bolantej]

if you want protection for the front element, use a hood. I would not worry so much about flare.

[DaveL]

I do have the standard hood but I don't really like the way
it snaps on and off... I did fnd a couple other options, Ritz
sells a rubber hood for $5.99 but it doesn't really offer protection
against bumps. Some ebay sellers sell petal type hoods
that screw into the 58mm threads for about $10 plus
shipping... but, then you can't put the lens cap on while
the petal is on...

[superdiver]

You dont need one shooting indoors do you?

[SkipD]

You dont need one shooting indoors do you?I wouldn't use any lens anywhere without a properly designed rigid hood mounted to it unless that hood made taking the photograph impossible. An example of that would be a very close macro shot where the hood would hide the lighting from the subject.

A hood can prevent all sorts of contamination (from your own fingers, for example) or damage (from everyday knocking around) to a lens in addition to blocking stray light. Stray light is found indoors as well as out.

[superdiver]

Would it reduce the amount of available light for shooting sports indoors noticebly?

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Not a bit.

[Woolburr]

A hood does not reduce the amount of light available for a photograph. The hood simply keeps extraneous light from striking the lens and potentially having a negative impact on the image. And as Skip mentioned, the hood offers protection from bumps and bangs as well as inadvertent touches.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Stray light not only can produce flare, but it can throw off your exposure in, for example, AV mode. If stray light gets into the lens, but that light is not reflected off your subject, you will most likely get an underexposed image. The hood blocks this light, which is what you want. You only want to see the light on and near your subject. As Dan said, it will have a negative impact on your image otherwise.

[AeroSmith]

Always used the Canon hood on my 85/1.8....same good fits the 100/2. Can't comment on flare without the hood. But I've used the lens extensively outdoors with the hood and a UV filter and have never experienced any noticable flare.

[SuzyView]

The hood is tricky to put on and take off. I dropped it a couple of times already and one time, it went sailing across the room.:o

[superdiver]

I will start using my hoods religously then. I figured they might reduce the amount of light in already poorly light places...

[In2Photos]

I just picked up the 85 last week. I have the ET-65II that came with my EF 70-210 f/3.5-4.5 lens. It "fits" the 85 but I wonder if there is a big difference between it and the 65III. Anybody know?