Does the EW-83J hood fit reversed on 17-40L

I’m still waiting on receiving the EW-83J (the hood originally designed for the EFS 17-55) and a B&W filter for my rather new 17-40L. I started wondering though if the EW-83J fits reversed on the 17-40L. Does anyone have this combo and what is your experience?

I'm still waiting to receive mine - I ordered it on ebay from a Hong Kong seller, and have a funny feeling I'm about to get ripped off....12 days and counting

Back to the point, the front of the lens is the widest point, if it fits the lens in the first place, it'll fit reversed too.

it should just fine. i use several different hoods on my 17-40 (the original for the 24L and for the 24-105L). both fit on backwards just splendid, dont see why the 83J should be any different.

Cool Thanks! I ordered the EW-83J together with the EW-60II (which is a gift for a friend). We'll my EW-83J has been reserved for a few weeks, but they're still waiting for the EW-60II... seems like it will be a long wait (they were saying 2-4 weeks). Now, I ordered the B&W UV (010) MRC today, and asked if they could ship it with the EW-83J whenever the filter arrives... I hate it when they don't have stuff in stock.

One thing to consider...a hood to fit a 17-55mm EFS format lens is going to look very different than a hood for 17-40mm EF format! 17mm for APS has 77 degree angle of view, 17mm on FF format has almost 104 degree angle of view. So the 17-40 hood is going to be much larger in diameter and much shorter, to accomodate the wider AOV.

Trying to use the wrong hood on the wrong lens will either result in vignetting or it will result in far less shading of the front element from stray flare-producing light.

Wilt wrote in post #3141317
One thing to consider...a hood to fit a 17-55mm EFS format lens is going to look very different than a hood for 17-40mm EF format! 17mm for APS has 77 degree angle of view, 17mm on FF format has almost 104 degree angle of view. So the 17-40 hood is going to be much larger in diameter and much shorter, to accomodate the wider AOV.

Trying to use the wrong hood on the wrong lens will either result in vignetting or it will result in far less shading of the front element from stray flare-producing light.

its a well known fact that either the EW-83 for the 24, 24-105, and 17-55 can be used without any problems on the 17-40 while in use on a crop body. i do it and so do most owners of the lens.

One of the advantages of a crop camera is that the edges of the image circle are not seen by the sensor, so you can use hoods that would vignette if used on a full-frame or 35mm SLR.

Wilt wrote in post #3141317
One thing to consider...a hood to fit a 17-55mm EFS format lens is going to look very different than a hood for 17-40mm EF format! 17mm for APS has 77 degree angle of view, 17mm on FF format has almost 104 degree angle of view. So the 17-40 hood is going to be much larger in diameter and much shorter, to accomodate the wider AOV.

Trying to use the wrong hood on the wrong lens will either result in vignetting or it will result in far less shading of the front element from stray flare-producing light.

Well, the hood that I got in the box for the 17-40L, does not do much to help with flare when the lens is mounted on my 350D. But I'll keep it for the future

fi20100 wrote in post #3143805
Well, the hood that I got in the box for the 17-40L, does not do much to help with flare when the lens is mounted on my 350D. But I'll keep it for the future

yes do hold onto to it. A. for resale value, B. incase you go full frame, and C. because its the hood for the 10-22 aswell.

I use the EW-83J on my 17-40 and it reverses just fine.

fi20100 wrote in post #3143805
Well, the hood that I got in the box for the 17-40L, does not do much to help with flare when the lens is mounted on my 350D. But I'll keep it for the future

My point, exactly!

As for the EW-83J on 17-40...

...on a FF camera (5D) the 17-40 hood is meant to cover the 33-70 degree angle of view of the 17-40 lens.

...on an APS-C camera the 17-55 hood is meant to cover the 16-48 degree angle of view of the 17-55 lens.

If the 17-55 hood is used on a 17-40 lens mounted on an APS-C camera, it was designed for a narrow AOV range so things are generally fine.

But if the 17-55 hood is used on a 17-40 lens mounted on a FF camera, hood cutoff of the image occurs from about 50-70 degree AOV because it is designed for a more narrow FOV.

And if the 17-40 hood is used on a 17-40 or 17-55mm lens mounted on an APS-C camera, the hood was designed for a wide AOV so it does not afford the degree of protection it should, as is noted by fi20100. It works, yes; it doesn't do as good a job as it should!

Wilt wrote in post #3145691
My point, exactly!

As for the EW-83J on 17-40...

...on a FF camera (5D) the 17-40 hood is meant to cover the 33-70 degree angle of view of the 17-40 lens.

...on an APS-C camera the 17-55 hood is meant to cover the 16-48 degree angle of view of the 17-55 lens.

If the 17-55 hood is used on a 17-40 lens mounted on an APS-C camera, it was designed for a narrow AOV range so things are generally fine.

But if the 17-55 hood is used on a 17-40 lens mounted on a FF camera, hood cutoff of the image occurs from about 50-70 degree AOV because it is designed for a more narrow FOV.

And if the 17-40 hood is used on a 17-40 or 17-55mm lens mounted on an APS-C camera, the hood was designed for a wide AOV so it does not afford the degree of protection it should, as is noted by fi20100. It works, yes; it doesn't do as good a job as it should!

I'm confused what point you are trying to make. No one here is suggesting using the hood on a full frame camera, its obvious the hood would be in the image. But on a crop camera there is no problem. It gives better flare coverage and physcial protection, and there is no disadvantage to it.

*edit* Wait are you agreeing with us. Im confused.

Billginthekeys wrote in post #3145769
I'm confused what point you are trying to make. No one here is suggesting using the hood on a full frame camera, its obvious the hood would be in the image. But on a crop camera there is no problem. It gives better flare coverage and physcial protection, and there is no disadvantage to it.

*edit* Wait are you agreeing with us. Im confused.

I was simply trying to make people aware of the fact that interchanging hoods for '17-40' and '17-55' are not going to necessarily get you a product optimized for use...like interchanging one hood with another lens can result in suboptimal uses. It may work, but not optimally. Or it might not work at all (except in a narrow band of FL range).

You then countered, 'It works'. My post did not contradict that...it only pointed out 'not as optimal as if you used the right hood'.

Wilt wrote in post #3145971
I was simply trying to make people aware of the fact that interchanging hoods for '17-40' and '17-55' are not going to necessarily get you a product optimized for use...like interchanging one hood with another lens can result in suboptimal uses. It may work, but not optimally. Or it might not work at all (except in a narrow band of FL range).

You then countered, 'It works'. My post did not contradict that...it only pointed out 'not as optimal as if you used the right hood'.

okay, but which hood would be most optimal then? thats what im wondering, i would say anything would work much more optimally than the huge pointless thing that it comes with.

Billginthekeys wrote in post #3146153
okay, but which hood would be most optimal then? thats what im wondering, i would say anything would work much more optimally than the huge pointless thing that it comes with.

The most optimal hood for the 17-55 on APS-C body is the 17-55 hood.

The most optimal hood for the 17-40 on FF body is the 17-40 hood.

Use of the 17-40 lens on an APS-C body is probably better served by the 17-55 hood, as it is designed for the Angle of View of those focal lengths on the APS-C body! It will not vignette at the widest (17mm on both lenses) and it will not interfere ever, at the the telephoto end.