Hood for efs 10-22 - Worth the $ ???

I just bought a used 10-22 that's on it's way to my doorstep right now. How many of you that have this lens have purchased and regularly use the EW-83E lens hood? I was just about to pull the trigger on one, but seemed like I'd run across a post where it was being poo-poo'ed.

I've been thinking about this lens for a while and have been reading up on so many forums lately, I may have actually dreamt it up cause I can't find that post anywhere. I typically shoot with a hood and will probably buy this one. But being of frugal mind, I wanted to check with the masses to make sure I won't be wasting $35.

i think that a hood is worth the money regardless of the lens. i use the hoods on all my lenses because it not only prevents light fall off but because it actually protect the lens. the hood saved my lenses from branches and other intusive items.

Yes, it is. Especially on a wide angle, where you are more prone to flare. Then of course hoods are a great way to keep your lens protected.

Oh, the lens doesnt come with a hood - my 12-24 Tokina did

Jus kidding. I would recommend a hood for this lens.

- being a wide angle, you may use a circ polarizer fairly often and having a hood means you can protect the lens without a UV filter. Atteast, that's what I do and my 12-24 is my only lens that doesnt have a UV filter.
- should help with CA and any other reflective issues.

This lens is very resistant to flaring. I own the lens. I use it ALOT. I don't own the hood.

BTW its a petal type hood, and awkward to store, carry and use.

[QUOTE=kram]
being a wide angle, you may use a circ polarizer fairly often and having a hood means you can protect the lens without a UV filter. Atteast, that's what I do and my 12-24 is my only lens that doesnt have a UV filter.
[\quote]

Where are these answers coming from??

What does this even mean? If you want to put a filter on a lens to afford it
protection, then any filter works.as well as any other filter for the purpose. For the sake of protection, if you're using a filter for that, its just glass.

Nevertheless, the hood for the 10-22 is a petal type hood that isn't really going to afford much protection.

Re filters: you might want to go with thin here, as in the case of most ultrawides, IF you're using one. Cleanliness is uber important, since the filter/front lens element can sometimes be IN FOCUS.

This lens has little to no CA issues. Even if it did, a hood is not the answer.

I never said it flares easily, but you lessen the chances of flaring. Makes it easier to get better contrast out of images. And of course the protection part. A petal hood is still going to protect it a little bit. I have one for my wide and its useful, when I'm running around with a lot of equipment. Heck, today I banged my camera at the hood as it swung.

Sure I've banged my lenses as well. And you do want to be careful with the front element of such a wide lens. On the other hand, the lens is very wide and the hood doesn't have a whole lot of depth: it doesn't extend very far in front of the lens, more to the sides. Its not going to provide the same kind of protection that you'd get from the hood on a 135, say. Personally, I don't think a "hood for protection" for this lens is worth the cost, roughly 5% the cost of the lens itself.

The best insurance against damage is insurance. Like from an insurance company.

Well, i'd agree with the last part. Yes, that is the truest of it all. However, some protection is better than no protection. And reducing some chances of flare is good too.

Obviously, its up to the user, but think of the lens as that price(just the hood comes in a later shipment). It's no ideal to bang your lens anyway, but crap happens and better to be more prepared than not.

But, as noted above, the hood on this lens is going to provide little to no protection if you bang the front element. Maybe if you were to bang it from the side. If you bang it from above or below, well there's almost nothing there.

It needs the hood as others have pointed out (even though its short and wide). If the Sun is remotely in the frame your gonna get Lens Flare on the wide end. Get the Hood.

I have the lens, I bought the hood. It is worth it to me for the protection against flare, and lumps and bumps. Each person has to decide if it is worth the price.
That being said, I have GREAT CONTEMPT for Canon, for not providing a hood for a lens like this. It is way too expensive not to have a hood provided.
I sometimes think that we, as a group, should let Canon know about this. I know, I know, Canon could care less about what we think.

Very easy - download one for free here!

Matatazela wrote:
Very easy - download one for free here!

Hey, that's very cool. A nice disposible cheap way to test whether the hood really makes any difference for you. I likey.

And, as can be seen from the pdf file, there's virutally nothing to this hood. The lens is still fully exposed to damage, knocking etc.

I have the Canon 24-105L IS USM and use the hood for the 10-22...it's ok at anything over 11/12 mm.
HTH
Tom