How important are lens hoods?
Tom Hise
with me when traveling. I use a Nikon D80 with three different lenses
(30mm f1.4, 18-135mm F3.5, and 70-300mm f4.5). Each lens has a different
hood to go with it.
My question is, just how important are lens hoods? Would I be likely to
miss any 'great' shots if I stopped carrying the hoods.
I am not a pro, just an amateur who takes photos for fun, to show friends
and family and occasionally post on the web.
Thanks in advance,
Tom Hise
tony cooper
A lens hood reduces lens flare, but I haven't experienced much of a
problem with lens flare when not using a hood. My lenses are equipped
with those roll-back threaded rubber hoods, but to act as bumpers to
prevent the lens from being banged-up.
I seriously doubt if you'll ever miss a photo because of the lack of a
hood, but you may ding your lens.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Paul Furman
I don't generally use them. If flare is an issue, I'll hold my hand up
to block the sun from hitting the front element. There's two kinds of
flare: veiling flare and ghosting. The latter is those colorful circles,
often repeating in the opposite corner from the sun and veiling flare is
just a white haze, sometimes evenly covering the whole frame, reducing
contrast.
Lenses vary in their susceptibility to flare and tendency for ghosting.
Stopping down a fast lens generally reduces flare and lenses with
smaller front elements generally have less trouble. Shooting into the
sun, a hood won't help, shooting away from the sun it's not needed, so
it's mostly an issue when the sun just glances across the front of the
lens and often hoods are not really big enough for that so a carefully
positioned hand can work better (although it makes a mess of hand
holding stability).
Movie cameras use elaborate rectangular bellows with flaps and little
black cards on a flexible arm for trouble spots sometimes.
http://images.google.com/images?q=matte+box
When buying really old lenses, choose the coated version, often
indicated as 'MC' for multi-coated. Research the lens' versions,
sometimes there are improved coatings in later models. Some of Nikon's
newer lenses are given an 'N' designation for nano-crystal coating.
Neil Harrington
"Tom Hise" <nc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:nHNmn.415669$FK3....@en-nntp-06.dc1.easynews.com...
Theoretically the lens hood should improve the contrast of pictures (taken
outdoors at least) by excluding a good deal of the non-image-forming light.
Whether you would ever be able to SEE such improvement is somewhat
questionable, unless the sun or other bright light source were in a position
where it would shine directly on the lens surface, and perhaps not even
then.
Personally I always use a hood -- when possible -- when shooting outdoors,
on the principle that it may help and can't hurt, and also provides some
physical protection for the lens. Since with the Nikkors you mention (I'm
assuming that's what your 70-300 is as well as the 18-135) the hoods easily
reverse on each lens for carrying, they add almost no bulk or weight, so I
can't see any benefit to leaving them home.
Ken Rockwell (www.kenrockwell.com) on the other hand has said he never uses
a lens hood. But he does use his hand to shade the lens, which to me seems
more of a bother than using a hood -- and is probably less effective
besides, unless he paints that hand matte black.
John McWilliams
I always use a lens hood, more for protection of the lens than for
necessity to block out extraneous light sources. I find it's better than
a filter for my purposes.
--
john mcwilliams
Robert Coe
:
: "Tom Hise" <nc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
: > I'm trying to reduce the volume of camera related stuff that I haul around
: > with me when traveling. I use a Nikon D80 with three different lenses
: > (30mm f1.4, 18-135mm F3.5, and 70-300mm f4.5). Each lens has a different
: > hood to go with it.
: >
: > My question is, just how important are lens hoods? Would I be likely to
: > miss any 'great' shots if I stopped carrying the hoods.
: >
: > I am not a pro, just an amateur who takes photos for fun, to show friends
: > and family and occasionally post on the web.
:
: Theoretically the lens hood should improve the contrast of pictures (taken
: outdoors at least) by excluding a good deal of the non-image-forming light.
: Whether you would ever be able to SEE such improvement is somewhat
: questionable, unless the sun or other bright light source were in a position
: where it would shine directly on the lens surface, and perhaps not even
: then.
:
: Personally I always use a hood -- when possible -- when shooting outdoors,
: on the principle that it may help and can't hurt, and also provides some
: physical protection for the lens. Since with the Nikkors you mention (I'm
: assuming that's what your 70-300 is as well as the 18-135) the hoods easily
: reverse on each lens for carrying, they add almost no bulk or weight, so I
: can't see any benefit to leaving them home.
A good point that I was going to make if you hadn't. All decent lens hoods
either collapse or reverse.
: Ken Rockwell (www.kenrockwell.com) on the other hand has said he never uses
: a lens hood. But he does use his hand to shade the lens, which to me seems
: more of a bother than using a hood -- and is probably less effective
: besides, unless he paints that hand matte black.
Does Rockwell always use a tripod? I wouldn't want to try to hold a full-size
digital camera steady with one hand.
Bob
Alfred Molon
some photos with long exposure times. It was very dark and there was a
relatively strong light source from the side (the cave opening). In that
situation the lens hood made really a huge difference.
--
Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
Neil Harrington
"Robert Coe" <b...@1776.COM> wrote in message
news:dbjnp5dkh5bnp2v0u...@4ax.com...
I suppose he might wrap his left hand around the very front of the lens in
such a way that it shades the lens and still helps support the camera,
though that seems very awkward to me. I've never tried it.
I'm sure Rockwell doesn't always use a tripod, no. The photo of him at the
front of his site shows him using a Nikon with some monster lens on a
monopod, one hand on the camera and the other steadying the lens and
monopod. So that leaves him all out of hands and nothing to shade the lens
as he says he does. (The image is flipped you'll notice, which gave rise to
Rockwell's b.s. story about a "special left-handed Nikon." He is not always
absolutely believable, which he admits himself.)
tony cooper
wrote:
>I'm sure Rockwell doesn't always use a tripod, no. The photo of him at the
>front of his site shows him using a Nikon with some monster lens on a
>monopod, one hand on the camera and the other steadying the lens and
>monopod. So that leaves him all out of hands and nothing to shade the lens
>as he says he does. (The image is flipped you'll notice, which gave rise to
>Rockwell's b.s. story about a "special left-handed Nikon." He is not always
>absolutely believable, which he admits himself.)
>
Left-handed camera? I'm left-handed, and I've never felt that the
ergonomics of a camera were left- or right-hand favored. The only
left-handed device that I own is a circular saw. I've tried
left-handed scissors, but I don't find them much of an advantage.
S.G.
It reduces lens flare if you have some strong light coming from the side
or in front of the lens.
S.G.
...and it's generally not a big deal carrying them around because you
can always attach them upside down to your lens.
NameHere
Any lens-flare from the sun or other bright lights I've learned to
effectively cancel out by just using my hand or a well-placed finger to the
side of the lens. My photography style demands I pack light and be at the
ready all the time. I don't have time nor space to pack extraneous
accessories that will cause me to miss shots.
Some will claim that a rubberized lens-hood is great damage protection, but
I counter that if you don't take those "accessory" steps to protect your
camera then you'll be a little more careful with it overall. If you think
your camera is safe you won't pay attention to it as it's swinging against
the side of a cliff wall or brick wall while hiking or touristing. If it
isn't protected by hoods or daylight filters you'll pay attention and
protect all of it from harm, as it should be. You won't become complacent.
NameHere
If you had ever used a camera in your lifetime, you'd find out that that's
not true. You hold it with both hands, but the hand cradling the lens is
shifted to also block any flare, or just using one or two fingers to
accomplish the same.
Now kindly go back to your other newsgroups where you won't be outed so
easily for the armchair-expert-only that you are.
NameHere
wrote:
Of course you haven't. You've never held one camera in your life. You've
just made that painfully obvious to everyone.
NameHere
wrote:
>I discovered the importance of lens hoods when I was in a cave taking
>some photos with long exposure times. It was very dark and there was a
>relatively strong light source from the side (the cave opening). In that
>situation the lens hood made really a huge difference.
If needing to pack light, a lens-cap and piece of tape will do the same.
Robert Spanjaard
> Ken Rockwell (www.kenrockwell.com) on the other hand has said he never
> uses a lens hood. But he does use his hand to shade the lens, which to
> me seems more of a bother than using a hood -- and is probably less
> effective besides, unless he paints that hand matte black.
Why would you need to paint it black? If our hand is between a lightsource
and the lens, light from the source reflecting off your hand never reaches
the lens.
--
Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com
tony cooper
wrote:
I thought this was one of the skins of the P&S spammer. P&S cameras
don't accept lens hoods because the lens retracts into the body.
This guy just likes to post whether or not he knows anything about the
subject.
Ofnuts
--
Bertrand
Ofnuts
> don't accept lens hoods because the lens retracts into the body.
No true for all. I own a brodge camera that come with a hood. However,
since the hood must be wide enough for the smallest focal length, it is
about useless at the other side of the range (except as a shock protection).
--
Bertrand
NameHere
Damn, are you ever an ignorant an inexperienced fuck of a troll. Again
proving you've never touched any camera in your lifetime.
Ray Fischer
>>don't accept lens hoods because the lens retracts into the body.
>>
>>This guy just likes to post whether or not he knows anything about the
>>subject.
>
>Damn, are you ever an ignorant an inexperienced fuck of a troll.
Go away, dumbshit troll.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Tom Hise
>I thought this was one of the skins of the P&S spammer. P&S cameras
>don't accept lens hoods because the lens retracts into the body.
>
>This guy just likes to post whether or not he knows anything about the
>subject.
I appreciate all the constructive comments people posted. How a simple
question can turn into an excuse to vilify other posters is beyond my
comprehension.
Anyway, I think my question has been answered adequately.
Thanks,
Tom Hise
Peter
news:3gmnp5l0j8g43s7o9...@4ax.com...
> Left-handed camera? I'm left-handed, and I've never felt that the
> ergonomics of a camera were left- or right-hand favored. The only
> left-handed device that I own is a circular saw. I've tried
> left-handed scissors, but I don't find them much of an advantage.
You will find a big advantage using a left handed screwdriver. Left handed
monkey wrenches are easier to find.
(If you really want to drive someone nuts, ask for them in a Wal-Mart or
Target.)
--
Peter
Tony Roberts
news:nHNmn.415669$FK3....@en-nntp-06.dc1.easynews.com...
For me it depends.
Going to a local wildlife park or an airshow for a day out, yeah, why not.
But, when travelling, I don't generally use them because they not only take
up room, but also makes the lens a lot bigger than they are and more
difficult to quickly take in and out of the bag.
If you're going to a wildlife park, I would use one as it helps when
shooting through glass.
Neil Harrington
Rockwell's "special left-handed Nikon" was a gag, a flipped image that he
made up a story to go with.
But I would say most SLRs and other cameras are right-handed, i.e. shutter
release and film advance lever (when we still had film advance levers) were
on the right. The obvious exception was the old Exakta, which I would call a
left-handed camera.
If you're left-handed you have just adapted to a right-handed world, as most
lefties do, and I suppose that's why you don't notice the handedness of such
things.
Neil Harrington
"Robert Spanjaard" <spam...@arumes.com> wrote in message
news:15182$4b9beeca$546accd9$30...@cache50.multikabel.net...
But there's other light bouncing around, and the flesh-colored inside of
your hand would tend to reflect some of it into your lens. Why do they make
the insides of lens hoods non-reflecting black?
Neil Harrington
<P&S troll nonsense skipped>
>
> I thought this was one of the skins of the P&S spammer.
It is, of course.
Neil Harrington
"Peter" <pete...@nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message
news:4b9c24a7$0$27757$8f2e...@news.shared-secrets.com...
> "tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:3gmnp5l0j8g43s7o9...@4ax.com...
>
>> Left-handed camera? I'm left-handed, and I've never felt that the
>> ergonomics of a camera were left- or right-hand favored. The only
>> left-handed device that I own is a circular saw. I've tried
>> left-handed scissors, but I don't find them much of an advantage.
>
> You will find a big advantage using a left handed screwdriver.
For REMOVING screws, yes. For screwing them back in I always switch to a
right-handed screwdriver.
Of course this only applies in the Northern Hemisphere. South of the Equator
it's the other way around. But you knew that.
Alfred Molon
wh...@address.info says...
> If needing to pack light, a lens-cap and piece of tape will do the same.
A lens hood is not a heavy item, it's plastic and weighs a few grams.
tony cooper
wrote:
There are certain things that I can only do with my left hand
(writing, using shop tools, using a spoon or fork), but depressing a
shutter release is not a matter of handedness. On a film camera, I
never felt it was awkward to advance the film with my right thumb.
When on manual focus, focusing is easier with my left hand so holding
the camera in right hand is natural.
The most difficult thing for a leftie to do? Pour anything out of a
punchbowl dipper or a pitcher with the spout on the side. The worst
place to be? In a restaurant booth seated next to the wall and next
to a fat rightie with flying elbows.
Gary Edstrom
<alfred...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>In article <a8qnp5dbredeuitbi...@4ax.com>,
>wh...@address.info says...
>> If needing to pack light, a lens-cap and piece of tape will do the same.
>
>A lens hood is not a heavy item, it's plastic and weighs a few grams.
But it takes up space that might be at a premium.
Gary
sligoNo...@hotmail.com
>I'm trying to reduce the volume of camera related stuff that I haul around
>with me when traveling. I use a Nikon D80 with three different lenses
>(30mm f1.4, 18-135mm F3.5, and 70-300mm f4.5). Each lens has a different
>hood to go with it.
>
>My question is, just how important are lens hoods? Would I be likely to
>miss any 'great' shots if I stopped carrying the hoods.
>
>I am not a pro, just an amateur who takes photos for fun, to show friends
>and family and occasionally post on the web.
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>Tom Hise
It won't stop you from taking a photo, but it may help you get
a better photo. It also well help protect the lens while not
interfering with the results, other than to prevent problems like
flair that may degrade the resulting image.
N
"NameHere" <wh...@address.info> wrote in message
news:gvpnp5ptqs17v42vo...@4ax.com...
Please publish a photo of you holding a camera with 2 hands and shielding
the front lens element from the sun when the sun is on the right.
--
N
Robert Spanjaard
Because lens hoods are not directional. When the upper side is blocking
light from the lens, the lower side is reflecting light at the lens.
That's why ribbed lens hoods (and ribbed plastic or metal around the front
lens element in general) are designed to reflect light away from the lens.
It has nothing to do with "other light bouncing around".
Robert Coe
:
: "tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
: > On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 13:27:23 -0500, "Neil Harrington" <ne...@home.com>
: > wrote:
: >
: >>I'm sure Rockwell doesn't always use a tripod, no. The photo of him at the
: >>front of his site shows him using a Nikon with some monster lens on a
: >>monopod, one hand on the camera and the other steadying the lens and
: >>monopod. So that leaves him all out of hands and nothing to shade the lens
: >>as he says he does. (The image is flipped you'll notice, which gave rise
: >>to
: >>Rockwell's b.s. story about a "special left-handed Nikon." He is not
: >>always
: >>absolutely believable, which he admits himself.)
: >>
: > Left-handed camera? I'm left-handed, and I've never felt that the
: > ergonomics of a camera were left- or right-hand favored. The only
: > left-handed device that I own is a circular saw. I've tried
: > left-handed scissors, but I don't find them much of an advantage.
:
: Rockwell's "special left-handed Nikon" was a gag, a flipped image that he
: made up a story to go with.
:
: But I would say most SLRs and other cameras are right-handed, i.e. shutter
: release and film advance lever (when we still had film advance levers) were
: on the right. The obvious exception was the old Exakta, which I would call a
: left-handed camera.
The handedness of a DSLR is a matter of individual opinion. You have to steady
the lens (and do any necessary lens adjustments) with your left hand, and you
have to push the shutter button (and most of the other buttons) with your
right. It's not obvious that the separation of functions favors one handedness
over the other. It's especially not obvious to me, since I'm nearly
ambidextrous.
But DSLRs are clearly right-EYED. If you don't want to mash your nose into the
back of the camera (and risk hitting various buttons you may not want pushed),
you pretty well have to look through the viewfinder with your right eye. If
that's your weaker eye, tough luck.
Bob
tony cooper
I've spend hours looking for a hat...and haven't found one. I
generally wear a baseball-type cap outdoors all the time because of
the bright Florida sun, and I wear it pulled down over my eyes. I
shoot Nikon and often the camera pushes up against the bill and
interferes with me seeing through the viewfinder. If the flash pops
up, the bill stops it halfway. I'm too old, and too white, to turn my
baseball cap backwards or sideways.
I'd like to find a hat with a soft brim like the tan one at the top
left of: https://caymaninternationalschool.org/images/hats_lmcf.jpg
but without any printing or logo on it. Can't find one in a man's
size in this area.
I am left-eyed and have no trouble looking through the viewfinder with
my left eye, and I have a humongous nose.
N
Shouldn't be too hard to find a hat like that. Have you tried a fishing
tackle shop?
--
N
rwalker
<tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote:
snip
>
>There are certain things that I can only do with my left hand
>(writing, using shop tools, using a spoon or fork), but depressing a
>shutter release is not a matter of handedness. On a film camera, I
>never felt it was awkward to advance the film with my right thumb.
>
>When on manual focus, focusing is easier with my left hand so holding
>the camera in right hand is natural.
>
>The most difficult thing for a leftie to do? Pour anything out of a
>punchbowl dipper or a pitcher with the spout on the side. The worst
>place to be? In a restaurant booth seated next to the wall and next
>to a fat rightie with flying elbows.
>
>
I'm left-handed and missing the first joint of my right index finger,
but still find no difficulty in pressing the shutter release. As for
the rest of your post, I agree 100%.
Alfred Molon
GEds...@PacBell.Net says...
> But it takes up space that might be at a premium.
You can attach it to the lens reversed, and so it takes very little
additional space.
Bruce
>
>I appreciate all the constructive comments people posted. How a simple
>question can turn into an excuse to vilify other posters is beyond my
>comprehension.
Welcome to Usenet newsgroups. ;-)
Robert Coe
wrote:
Try one of the mail-order places like L.L. Bean, Land's End, or Eddie Bauer.
They're almost certain to have that or something similar.
: I am left-eyed and have no trouble looking through the viewfinder with
: my left eye, and I have a humongous nose.
Does that make you tend to displace the subject to the right-hand side of the
image? I'm right-eyed, and my nose doesn't completely clear the camera, so I
apparently tend to look into the viewfinder at an angle. I have to guard
against having my subjects displaced to the left (or, equivalently, having
nothing of interest in the right-hand side).
Bob
Savageduck
Here are a few for you Tony;
http://www.rei.com/product/798762
http://www.american-armynavy.com/boonie-ODRS.htm
http://www.bdu.com/boonies-cotton-ripstop.html
I use a $9.99 OD ripstop boonie hat;
http://www.bdu.com/F550155330.html
--
Regards,
Savageduck
tony cooper
That's not what I want. I have a "boonie", but I only wear it when I
only need sun protection. The wide brim bothers me when I'm
photographing. The hat I linked to covers my bald pate and gives me
some eye shading but doesn't bump into the camera.
Also, since I spend a lot of time doing "street" photography, I like
to be fairly inconspicuous. I don't want to look like Harrison Ford
from a distance.
Savageduck
> On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 06:56:02 -0700, Savageduck
> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2010-03-13 21:35:33 -0800, tony cooper <tony_co...@earthlink.net> said:
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK. I must be missing something here, I certainly wasn't thinking of an
Indiana Jones fedora. That would be as bad as a peaked cap.
I have a similar problem to you when shooting with a baseball cap. The
peak pushes all over the place, with the cap eventually being pushed
off my head.
A soft brimmed hat such as boonie gives me Sun protection & shade, with
the benefit of the brim just crushing up against the camera.
The soft brimmed hat you linked to certainly does the same. I
understand wanting to be a little more discrete in the urban setting
so, along with that first link I suggested, I give you;
http://www.rei.com/product/798772
http://www.rei.com/product/798766
and
<
http://www.coolibar.com/02509.html?source=googlebase&cvsfa=1739&cvsfe=2&cvsfhu=3032353039
>
or
< http://www.villagehatshop.com/henschel-canvas-booney.html >
or
<
http://www.columbia.com/mens-hats/men-accessories-hatsHeadwear,default,sc.html?sz=1&start=2
>
<
http://www.columbia.com/mens-hats/men-accessories-hatsHeadwear,default,sc.html?sz=1&start=6
>
--
Regards,
Savageduck
Peter
I know the feeling. I am a natural leftie who was forced to write as a
righty. I bowl, shoot pool, play darts and fire a rifle leftie, but play
golf both ways.
--
Peter
Peter
I alternate several of them.
You might also try a large gardeners hat. At my age I don't care about how
it looks, just functionality.
--
Peter
Irwell
>
> I'd like to find a hat with a soft brim like the tan one at the top
> left of: https://caymaninternationalschool.org/images/hats_lmcf.jpg
> but without any printing or logo on it. Can't find one in a man's
> size in this area.
>
My dermatologist gave me one like that pictured as a free sample,
it did have some drug company's logo on it, though.
tony cooper
I play golf one way: badly.
tony cooper
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
Does Indiana Jones wear a fedora? Never saw the movie. I thought he
wore something like a Tilley hat. Maybe that's that Australian guy
with the big knife.
>I have a similar problem to you when shooting with a baseball cap. The
>peak pushes all over the place, with the cap eventually being pushed
>off my head.
>
>A soft brimmed hat such as boonie gives me Sun protection & shade, with
>the benefit of the brim just crushing up against the camera.
>
>The soft brimmed hat you linked to certainly does the same. I
>understand wanting to be a little more discrete in the urban setting
>so, along with that first link I suggested, I give you;
>http://www.rei.com/product/798772
That's what I want...a "bucket hat". Now find one in a local store
for me. I like to try things on. I want a plain color with no
design. I'm sure there's some store in this area that carries them,
but I haven't found one yet.
tony cooper
Orvis is one of the stores I tried. No luck with my style. Just $69
Tilley hats that I would feel foolish wearing.
Robert Coe
: NameHere <wh...@address.info> wrote:
: >On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 17:02:48 -0500, tony cooper
: >>I thought this was one of the skins of the P&S spammer. P&S cameras
: >>don't accept lens hoods because the lens retracts into the body.
: >>
: >>This guy just likes to post whether or not he knows anything about the
: >>subject.
: >
: >Damn, are you ever an ignorant an inexperienced fuck of a troll.
:
: Go away, dumbshit troll.
You always say that, but it never does any good. And why should it? The kid
appears to be insane and may have no more control over how he reacts than you
do. I know it's your schtick, but why don't you give it a rest? It can't do
any harm, and it would effect a marginal improvement in the signal-to-noise
ratio of the newsgroup.
Bob
Mr. Strat
Hise <nc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> My question is, just how important are lens hoods? Would I be likely to
> miss any 'great' shots if I stopped carrying the hoods.
In my Hasselblad days, I used a professional shade. These digital days,
I use those big, plastic flower-looking things. But it depends on what
I'm doing. Sometimes I use 'em, sometimes not.
J. Clarke
It's called a "bucket hat" and googling that will find a wide range of
sources. There's a military version called a "boonie hat" that any
surplus outlet should have in camo.
Chris Malcolm
> On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 13:07:14 -0400, "Peter"
> <pete...@nospamoptonline.net> wrote:
>>"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>> I've spend hours looking for a hat...and haven't found one. I
>>> generally wear a baseball-type cap outdoors all the time because of
>>> the bright Florida sun, and I wear it pulled down over my eyes. I
>>> shoot Nikon and often the camera pushes up against the bill and
>>> interferes with me seeing through the viewfinder. If the flash pops
>>> up, the bill stops it halfway. I'm too old, and too white, to turn my
>>> baseball cap backwards or sideways.
>>>
>>> I'd like to find a hat with a soft brim like the tan one at the top
>>> left of: https://caymaninternationalschool.org/images/hats_lmcf.jpg
>>> but without any printing or logo on it. Can't find one in a man's
>>> size in this area.
>>>
>>> I am left-eyed and have no trouble looking through the viewfinder with
>>> my left eye, and I have a humongous nose.
>>Try:
>>http://www.orvis.com/store/product_directory_showcase3.aspx?dir_id=758&group_id=821&cat_id=5408&subcat_id=6444
>>
>>http://tinyurl.com/ygtcvtt
> Orvis is one of the stores I tried. No luck with my style. Just $69
> Tilley hats that I would feel foolish wearing.
In the UK most outdoor clothing stores sell cheaper replicas of Tilley
hats. It's amazing how much cheaper they can make them without
apparently affecting the quality. Of course my cheap Tilley replica
might not be able to be eaten by an elephant and be recoverable later
unharmed from the elephant's dung. That's one of the selling points of
the Tilley hat. Another is that it will improve your sex life if
Tilley hat wearers are the kind of people that turn you on.
--
Chris Malcolm
bugbear
> How a simple
> question can turn into an excuse to vilify other posters is beyond my
> comprehension.
You're new here, aren't you ;-)
BugBear
SMS
> I'm trying to reduce the volume of camera related stuff that I haul around
> with me when traveling. I use a Nikon D80 with three different lenses
> (30mm f1.4, 18-135mm F3.5, and 70-300mm f4.5). Each lens has a different
> hood to go with it.
>
> miss any 'great' shots if I stopped carrying the hoods.
Yes.
You might consider the flexible rubber lens hoods which don't have the
volume of the hard plastic lens hoods. They aren't quite as good, but
they're fine.
Frank ess
My favorite is like the soft one, has only the label of outdoors
outfitters Columbia on it. They have quite a range of head coverings
among their goods.
http://www.columbia.com/mens-hats/men-accessories-hatsHeadwear,default,sc.html
Looks as if they have trimmed their lines and blown the labels up by
4-500%.
Business. Sheesh.
--
Frank ess
Peter
my golf shots should be in the military.
left, right, left, right.
--
Peter
Peter
Considering my several bouts with skin cancer, including a malignant
melanoma, I will take stupid looking if it provides safety. I will wear
whatever I need to allow me to enjoy my outdoor photography. I really
couldn't care less what people think. (I freely admit that there have been
times my wife refused to be seen with me, unless I changed something. She
will stay in the car if I put on my photo vest.)
--
Peter
tony cooper
<pete...@nospamoptonline.net> wrote:
>Considering my several bouts with skin cancer, including a malignant
>melanoma, I will take stupid looking if it provides safety. I will wear
>whatever I need to allow me to enjoy my outdoor photography. I really
>couldn't care less what people think. (I freely admit that there have been
>times my wife refused to be seen with me, unless I changed something. She
>will stay in the car if I put on my photo vest.)
Most of what I've been shooting lately has been candid street
photography. You have to dress for the course. The idea is to fade
into the background and shoot people who are unaware they are being
photographed. The wrong hat - and God knows, a photo vest - and my
subjects would be pointing and laughing.
I don't do all street, though. Basically, I photograph what's in
front of me if it looks interesting. I might wear my boonie if I go
off looking for old barns go for auto junkyards.
Neil Harrington
"Robert Spanjaard" <spam...@arumes.com> wrote in message
news:329$4b9c66ed$546accd9$18...@cache60.multikabel.net...
> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:12:43 -0500, Neil Harrington wrote:
>
>> "Robert Spanjaard" <spam...@arumes.com> wrote in message
>> news:15182$4b9beeca$546accd9$30...@cache50.multikabel.net...
>>> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 11:35:17 -0500, Neil Harrington wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ken Rockwell (www.kenrockwell.com) on the other hand has said he never
>>>> uses a lens hood. But he does use his hand to shade the lens, which to
>>>> me seems more of a bother than using a hood -- and is probably less
>>>> effective besides, unless he paints that hand matte black.
>>>
>>> Why would you need to paint it black? If our hand is between a
>>> lightsource and the lens, light from the source reflecting off your
>>> hand never reaches the lens.
>>
>> But there's other light bouncing around, and the flesh-colored inside of
>> your hand would tend to reflect some of it into your lens. Why do they
>> make the insides of lens hoods non-reflecting black?
>
> Because lens hoods are not directional.
Well, the bayonet-attached petal-shaped ones are at least semi-directional
(only because you can usually put 'em on upside down).
> When the upper side is blocking
> light from the lens, the lower side is reflecting light at the lens.
Extraneous light can and often does come from any direction, not just the
sky.
> That's why ribbed lens hoods (and ribbed plastic or metal around the front
> lens element in general) are designed to reflect light away from the lens.
> It has nothing to do with "other light bouncing around".
Other light does, though. Cup your hand outdoors and position it as if using
it as a lens hood and you can still easily see (or photograph) the palm
side, can't you?
John Turco
<edited for brevity>
> In the UK most outdoor clothing stores sell cheaper replicas of Tilley
> hats. It's amazing how much cheaper they can make them without
> apparently affecting the quality. Of course my cheap Tilley replica
> might not be able to be eaten by an elephant and be recoverable later
> unharmed from the elephant's dung. That's one of the selling points of
> the Tilley hat. Another is that it will improve your sex life if
> Tilley hat wearers are the kind of people that turn you on.
If one of >my< possessions ever ends up in an animal's manure pile, I'll
promptly disown it!
--
Cordially,
John Turco <jt...@concentric.net>
Paintings Pain and Pun <http://laughatthepain.blogspot.com>
Robert Coe
: On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 08:55:15 -0600, Tom Hise <nc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
:
: >I'm trying to reduce the volume of camera related stuff that I haul around
: >with me when traveling. I use a Nikon D80 with three different lenses
: >(30mm f1.4, 18-135mm F3.5, and 70-300mm f4.5). Each lens has a different
: >hood to go with it.
: >
: >My question is, just how important are lens hoods? Would I be likely to
: >miss any 'great' shots if I stopped carrying the hoods.
: >I am not a pro, just an amateur who takes photos for fun, to show friends
: >and family and occasionally post on the web.
: >
: >Thanks in advance,
: >
: >Tom Hise
:
:
: It won't stop you from taking a photo, but it may help you get
: a better photo. It also well help protect the lens while not
: interfering with the results, other than to prevent problems like
: flair that may degrade the resulting image.
I think you're slightly off on that. Flair *enhances* an image. *Flare*
degrades it. ;^)
Bob
brian
>I'm trying to reduce the volume of camera related stuff that I haul around
>: >with me when traveling. I use a Nikon D80 with three different lenses
>: >(30mm f1.4, 18-135mm F3.5, and 70-300mm f4.5). Each lens has a different
>: >hood to go with it.
>: >
>: >My question is, just how important are lens hoods? Would I be likely to
>: >miss any 'great' shots if I stopped carrying the hoods.
>: >
>: >I am not a pro, just an amateur who takes photos for fun, to show friends
>: >and family and occasionally post on the web.
>: >
>: >Thanks in advance,
>: >
>: >Tom Hise
Just reverse the hood over the lens when you want to pack it away.
brian
sligoNo...@hotmail.com
>
>I think you're slightly off on that. Flair *enhances* an image. *Flare*
>degrades it. ;^)
>
>Bob
You got me there.
Paul Furman
I frequently use the panache button on my camera. It can't be duplicated
in Photoshop without a lot of tedious work.
--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com
C J Campbell
> I'm trying to reduce the volume of camera related stuff that I haul around
> with me when traveling. I use a Nikon D80 with three different lenses
> (30mm f1.4, 18-135mm F3.5, and 70-300mm f4.5). Each lens has a different
> hood to go with it.
>
> My question is, just how important are lens hoods? Would I be likely to
> miss any 'great' shots if I stopped carrying the hoods.
>
> I am not a pro, just an amateur who takes photos for fun, to show friends
> and family and occasionally post on the web.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Tom Hise
Depends. Some lens hoods are not very effective. The deep flower shaped
lens hood on the Nikon f/2.8 70-200mm VR II lens does a poor job of
reducing lens flare, for example, and the lens has been criticized in
reviews because of it.
Generally, I use a lens hood. Lens flare is not always obvious and it
is very difficult to edit out (at least until we get content aware
editing in PS 5). I also prefer the protection that a lens hood gives
me over that of a clear or UV filter. A lens hood will not generally
degrade your picture. A filter might.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor
Chris Malcolm
> Some lens hoods are not very effective. The deep flower shaped
> lens hood on the Nikon f/2.8 70-200mm VR II lens does a poor job of
> reducing lens flare, for example, and the lens has been criticized in
> reviews because of it.
Hoods for zoom lenses ought to be zoomable, otherwise they become
increasingly ineffective as you zoom the lens.
--
Chris Malcolm
Bruce
wrote:
>
>I frequently use the panache button on my camera. It can't be duplicated
>in Photoshop without a lot of tedious work.
Sounds like you found the irony key on your keyboard. ;-)
John McWilliams
Excellent points, both. Getting panache right in camera is always better
than trying to add/fix it in post.....
--
john mcwilliams
Pete
In verbal conversation it's also easy to confuse the words bear and
bare. Luckily, I had the mental dexterity to escape from the impending
disaster of my error :)
--
Pete