Lens Hood Problem

[hpeeler]

Rookie Question: When I put my lens hood on my 18-55 lense, I get dark corners in the pictures. Not very much, but noticable. I have a UV filter on the lense, then the hood; is this the problem? Any suggestions are appreciated.

[Patrick]

If you use the hood without the filter do you get any vignette?
If the filter causes your hood to extend further than it would while mounted directly to the lens then that will cause problems.
Are you using a generic hood or one made specifically for that lens?

[SkipD]

Canon hoods, to the best of my knowledge, do not screw into the lens' filter threads. Thus, it sounds like the OP is using a generic hood.

If my guess is correct, scrap the generic hood and get a genuine Canon hood that fastens to the lens behind the filter threads. That will solve the problem.

Of course, you could also get rid of the UV filter. It really is not at all necessary unless you're in a situation with blowing sand/debris, etc. I have never used a filter for "protection" of my lenses, and all of them - including all of the lenses that I bought in the mid 1960s (and I still own all of them) - have virtually pristine glass in them.

[hpeeler]

If you use the hood without the filter do you get any vignette?
If the filter causes your hood to extend further than it would while mounted directly to the lens then that will cause problems.
Are you using a generic hood or one made specifically for that lens?

I haven't used the hood without the filter, as the filter stays on all of the time. It is a generic hood so I may try a Canon one. Thanks for the help

[krb]

It is a generic hood so I may try a Canon one. Thanks for the help
It doesn't even have to be from Canon if you don't want to pay for it, but it needs to be the same size and shape as the one that Canon designed for that lens.

[SkipD]

I haven't used the hood without the filter, as the filter stays on all of the time. It is a generic hood so I may try a Canon one. Thanks for the helpI have another tip for you. Put your camera on a decent tripod and make two images of the same scene - one with and one without your UV filter on the lens. Do this in a variety of situations - lighting coming from various directions, different contrast levels in the subject matter, etc. Carefully analyse the results, looking for contrast differences, flare in the images, etc.

It is possible that, unless you have one of the highest quality filters available, that the filter could be degrading your images. Quite a few folks blame their skill, lens quality, etc., for their unacceptable images only to find that their clear filter was causing image degradation.

I'm not bad-mouthing the use of filters for "protection of the lens" in general, but suggesting that you experiment with yours to determine how yours performs.

Making sure that your filter is not degrading your images and adding a proper lens hood will go a long way toward making sure your equipment is capable of producing images that you can be proud of.

[jblaschke]

If my guess is correct, scrap the generic hood and get a genuine Canon hood that fastens to the lens behind the filter threads. That will solve the problem.

Canon hoods are absurdly overpriced for a hunk of plastic. I agree that the screw-in hoods are worthless, but the OP can find a lens-specific bayonet hood on Ebay for $10. Most of my hoods are Hong Kong knockoffs, and work perfectly.

Why Canon just doesn't include them with the lens purchase is beyond me (yeah, $$, but still...).

[number six]

Actually, the Canon or aftermarket hoods for the 18-55 are so short as to be pretty much worthless anyway. I have one I never use.

-js

[krb]

Actually, the Canon or aftermarket hoods for the 18-55 are so short as to be pretty much worthless anyway. I have one I never use.

-js
If the hood is any longer then it will cause vignetting at 18mm, hence teh subject of this thread.

[Roy G. Biv]

I had a generic hood on my old 18-55. I got the black corners you speak of. I took that bad boy to the band saw and cut it down to size. I took a propane torch and lightly ran it over the cuts to smooth them out. Worked well IMO.

[mike_d]

Actually, the Canon or aftermarket hoods for the 18-55 are so short as to be pretty much worthless anyway. I have one I never use.

-js

I've been debating forgetting the hood on my 17-40 for this reason. It's so wide that it's awkward to stow in my bag yet provides very little protection.

[DStanic]

generic hoods = bad

All of my lenses (except for the 85mm which didn't come with one) have hoods and they are all different in size.

+1 on buying a $10 ebay knock-off that is designed to be the same size as the Canon brand

[Tee Why]

I'm not sure how much flare protection you are getting if any. If it was me, I'd just skip the hood so I don't have to deal with dark corners from the hood, which I don't think you can fix too easily in post processing since it's the hood you are viewing and not shadows which can be lighten up.