Davevw3 wrote in post #17442729
I have a 50mm f1.4 and have no lens hood for it, however I don't feel the need for one either. I also have a 24-105 with a lens hood i use some of the time, but my big problem is the lens hood for my 17-40. It has a very wide lens hood and takes up so much more space in my bag. Does anyone else find them unnecessary? Better yet, has anyone ever noticed a benefit?
Yeah, I see the benefits all the time. Apart from the protection aspect, keeping stuff from striking the front element, they reduce flare and increase contrast. Having a hood on means I can keep both hands supporting the camera and lens rather than trying to shoot one handed while holding the other over the lens to control glare.
Granted, with really wide angle lenses the hood is generally short and not as effective (particularly with zooms, where it has to allow the wide FOV for the short end) but I would still find it better to have it on than not have it. The amount of times my cameras touch the ground, often hard surface, front of lens first, I would rather have the hood being the point of first contact then the front element.
The hoods go on as soon as a lens goes on the camera. Great for protection and can improve image quality significantly, why would I not use them?