My friend lost his Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 non-IS lens hood. He wants to replace one. Is this hood the same as that on the f/2.8 IS and interchangeable? Does he better buy an original hood or buy the hood for the IS?
genewch Senior Member 360 posts Joined Aug 2005 Location: Hong Kong More info | Sep 19, 2006 11:10 | #1 My friend lost his Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 non-IS lens hood. He wants to replace one. Is this hood the same as that on the f/2.8 IS and interchangeable? Does he better buy an original hood or buy the hood for the IS?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Billginthekeys Billy the kid  7,359 posts Likes: 2 Joined Nov 2005 Location: Islamorada, FL More info | Sep 19, 2006 11:17 | #2 im not really sure if there is a problem with using the IS on the non IS. Mr. the Kid.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
aero145 Senior Member  909 posts Joined May 2006 Location: Germany More info | Sep 19, 2006 11:20 | #3 genewch wrote in post #2007984  My friend lost his Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 non-IS lens hood. He wants to replace one. Is this hood the same as that on the f/2.8 IS and interchangeable? Does he better buy an original hood or buy the hood for the IS? I'd buy the orginal hood, the design of the hoods are similar, but not equal. I think that matters... But I'm not sure. EOS 5D Mark II | EF24-105 f/4L IS | EF100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS | EF200 f/2.8L II | 580EX | Manfrotto 055xProB + 808RC4, and 679B
LOG IN TO REPLY |
SoaringUSAEagle Daddy Of The Crop  10,814 posts Likes: 3 Joined Dec 2005 Location: Cheyenne, WY More info | Sep 19, 2006 11:22 | #4 The hood for the IS will be too big for the non IS simply because the IS is 77mm and the non IS is 67mm Hope this helps. 5D4 | 50 1.4 | 85L II | 24-70L II | 70-200 2.8L IS II
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Billginthekeys Billy the kid 7,359 posts Likes: 2 Joined Nov 2005 Location: Islamorada, FL More info | Sep 19, 2006 11:25 | #5 SoaringUSAEagle wrote in post #2008037 The hood for the IS will be too big for the non IS simply because the IS is 77mm and the non IS is 67mm Hope this helps. incorrect. the F4 is 67mm. the 2.8s are both 77mm. Mr. the Kid.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
DC9 Senior Member  301 posts Joined Nov 2004 Location: Somewhere Over America More info | B&H Photo http://www.bhphotovideo.com
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Thanks. I'll ask a local shop if the two hoods are interchangeable and their prices.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
cdifoto Don't get pissy with me  34,092 posts Likes: 48 Joined Dec 2005 More info | Sep 20, 2006 10:56 | #8 genewch wrote in post #2012342 Thanks. I'll ask a local shop if the two hoods are interchangeable and their prices. Why bother? Why not just buy the original? Seriously...you seem really hung up on this "interchangeable" business.. Did you lose Digital Photo Professional (DPP)? Get it here
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Sep 20, 2006 11:01 | #9 ... My friend suspects that the one for IS is an improved design than the original one.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
cdifoto Don't get pissy with me 34,092 posts Likes: 48 Joined Dec 2005 More info | Sep 20, 2006 11:06 | #10 Did he have issues with the old one before he lost it? Did you lose Digital Photo Professional (DPP)? Get it here
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jon Cream of the Crop  69,628 posts Likes: 227 Joined Jun 2004 Location: Bethesda, MD USA More info | Sep 20, 2006 12:19 | #11 Billginthekeys wrote in post #2008010 im not really sure if there is a problem with using the IS on the non IS. but the non IS uses the ET-83 II hood. and the IS uses the ET-86 hood. Usually the number in the lens hood size refers to the bayonet diameter, so the ET-83 II would have an 83 mm diameter while the ET-86 would have an 86 mm dia. Jon
LOG IN TO REPLY |
cdifoto Don't get pissy with me 34,092 posts Likes: 48 Joined Dec 2005 More info | Sep 20, 2006 12:20 | #12 Jon wrote in post #2012669 Usually the number in the lens hood size refers to the bayonet diameter, so the ET-83 II would have an 83 mm diameter while the ET-86 would have an 86 mm dia.
Did you lose Digital Photo Professional (DPP)? Get it here
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Billginthekeys Billy the kid 7,359 posts Likes: 2 Joined Nov 2005 Location: Islamorada, FL More info | Sep 20, 2006 12:20 | #13 hmm, in that case wouldnt the original provide better light protection? Mr. the Kid.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jon Cream of the Crop 69,628 posts Likes: 227 Joined Jun 2004 Location: Bethesda, MD USA More info | Sep 20, 2006 12:44 | #14 That's the diameter where it attaches to the lens. Front diameter may be identical for all I know. But if you got the Et-86, it'd rattle around on the non-IS. Jon
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Billginthekeys Billy the kid 7,359 posts Likes: 2 Joined Nov 2005 Location: Islamorada, FL More info | Sep 20, 2006 12:49 | #15 wow that is interesting, i didnt know the front of the lens was any larger, how are the filters the same size then? Mr. the Kid.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such! 2698 guests, 166 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
