Suggest lens hood instead of Canon plastic hood for L lenses

[citrus]

I have a 28-70 L as well as a 70 - 200 IS L lens - both have the awful plastic hood against reflections of light canon delivers with these products.

Former times (on smaller lenses) I used a soft rubber hood - I like this type much better......


Anyone can recommend a product he has made good experience with?

Or should I better stay with the plastic hood......

Do you use a hood frequently - or also okay without.... I can not really see the difference - but I guess hood also gives some protection...........

[Roger_Cavanagh]

Citrus,

Photographers whose opinions I respect have convinced me that I should always use a hood. Apart from the anti-reflection benefits, I use the plastic hoods on the 135/2, 70-200 IS and 100-400 IS as protection so I don't fit any skylight or UV filters. I reckon the hood will protect against any casual knocks and any bump that does do damage would not have been prevented by a filter.

On my other lens - 20/2.8 and 50/1.8 - I use both the Canon hoods _and_ UV filters because the hoods don't protect the glass adequately.

I've never seen any collapsible rubber hoods large enough for the 70-200. I cannot imagine that rubber would be stiff enough; you'd get droop that would cause vignetting.

Regards,

[Ray Amos]

Curtis,

I have a dozen rubber lens hoods. Almost all are worthless other than Tiffen. Some have bad threads. Some have threads too short and the hood falls off the lens when bumped. Many are too flimsy and offer no protection if bumped or dropped.

Tiffen, on the other hand, makes a very sturdy hood with good solid threads. I have ordered Tiffen from places who have sent generic hoods. They say there's no difference. They don't know.

Also, consider the effective focal length of the lens if you shoot digital. For example, a 100mm lens becomes an effective 160mm lens on a D60. You can use longer hoods on digital than film. Longer is better.

An advantage with rubber lens hoods is when you're using a polariazing filter, you screw the lens hood on last and just turn the hood, not the filter. When doing so, always rotate clockwise so you won't unscrew the filter and drop it. With the Tiffen hood, there is room to attach the lens cap. Makes a neat package. They're under $15.

I find the normal Tiffen lens hood to be a good all around hood that will work in most situations. It can be folded back for even the wider lenses like the 17-35.

Ray Amos
-
Canon EOS digital & film cameras and lenses from 17-500mm. Waiting patiently for my new Canon 24-105 f/2.8 IS lens.

[MrEWorm]

Question for Ray Amos:

You wrote "Waiting patiently for my new Canon 24-105 f/2.8 IS lens. "

Is such a lens avialbale for order? Details???????

[Far Side]

"Ray Amos
-
Canon EOS digital & film cameras and lenses from 17-500mm. Waiting patiently for my new Canon 24-105 f/2.8 IS lens."

Ray, which one are you getting, the f/2.8 or the /F/1.4?

[mrchips]

.....and where can one purchase this 24-105 IS lens ???

[aekurth]

I've been using a rubber hood that is made by Mamiya for my 100-400 zoom. It has 77mm threads.

[Rudi]

Far Side wrote:

Ray, which one are you getting, the f/2.8 or the /F/1.4?


Personally, I'm hoping they wil come out with the f/1.2 version. Wouldn't want the f/1.0 version, that would just be too large and heavy! :D