hood vs filter question

[jann1033]

looking for lens protection i was reading about the hood/ filter debate and wondered how do most hoods attach..the one have came with a lens and just twists to lock on the end of the lens...is that normal operating proceedure which means you need one for each size of lens...i got a step up ring for my lens i just bought so would a hood attach to that?

pros and cons of hood vs uv filter i can see so far. need a good filter or forget it and with a 72mm( ?) lens that is getting up there$$. but need a petal hood or it causes vignetting which seems more cumbersome to me than a little filter i wouldn't even notice and don't know what material is best/ worst

so what is your choice and why

 

[Kelly Grannell]

I use both. I like redundancy.









did I mentioned that I like redundancy?



Kelly
2nd Manager of "Redundant Department of Redundancy"

 

[Donald is #1]

Personnally, I use filters for protection. When I buy a new lens, I also buy a filter for it and I leave the filter on it. The only time that the filter is ever taken off is when I want to use a different filter. Once I have finished with the second filter, I put my UV filter back on. I must admit that I rarely use my lens hoods. I know that I have to get better at using them, but so far I haven't used them that much.

 

[handicap18]

I have a hood for 2 of my 3 lenses and a UV filter for 2 of my 3 lenses. Only 1 has both. (Nikkor 18-70mm has both). I use the UV mostly as scratch protection for the glass on the front. The hood mostly for those other unwanted rays of light, though I guess that goes to what Kelly said about being redundant. I don't have a hood for my Nikkor 50mm because the majority of the time I use it indoors. I don't have a UV filter for my 70-300mm only because I've never gotten around to getting one.

The 18-70mm came with a hood so I use it. I bought a hood for the 70-300mm and it is one of those rubber ones that screws onto the lens like a filter does.

I find that I have to remember to take the lens hood off the 18-70mm if I use it indoors in the 18-25mm range with the built-in flash. It will leave a shadow on the bottom of the picture.

 

[jann1033]

I use both. I like redundancy.









did I mentioned that I like redundancy?



Kelly
2nd Manager of "Redundant Department of Redundancy"

could you repeat that?

 

[boBQuincy]

I use lens hoods, that's all.

The glass in the lenses filters UV, the sensor cover (antialias filter) filters UV, and I doubt the sensor is even sensitive to UV anyway. In short, a UV filter doesn't buy us much, except protection.
A UV filter will not prevent flare, like a lens hood will, in fact most UV filters actually produce flare.

I used to use a UV filter (multicoated) and never got a scratch on it so I figured I must be pretty careful and would not scratch my lens either. So I quit using them.
YMMV!

If you must take photos in hazardous conditions the UV filter is pretty cheap protection when you expect things (rocks, sand, beer) to be flying at your lens. In this case I would use them.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

could you repeat that?

 

[0bli0]

UV filters were designed because to reduce haze that is caused by UV light (short wavelength, invisible to the human eye, near the blue/violet end of the spectrum). generally this is not needed around where we live close to sea level, but if you are up in the moutains or in Colorado, you would find there is a lot more measurable UV light. here in Australia, we have an appreciable amount of measurable UV, thanks to a huge hole in the ozone.

they are especially useful for Ectachrome and other highly blue sensitive colour film to eliminate uv haze. it does not protect against flare, nor does it make the sky bluer or anything. digital sensors do not really have an issue with UV haze. many of the skylight or UV filters are 'warming' meaning they are absorbing some of the visible blue spectrum to give a slight colour cast.

a hood is designed to eliminate light aberations that are caused because lenses are made up of groups of elements. the solid metal or plastic bayonet type are great at protecting the front element from drops and scratches. filters are good to prevent scratches (and protect elements from paintballs ), but do not help drops. the rubber hoods are great for flares but don't offer much protection.

have you ever shot through a bus, car, or building window? the images don't look clear like if you took them out in the open, right? that's because windows are not designed to be as optically clear and neutral. a cheap filter will do this to your shots, too. most people who purchase expensive lenses (L, Leica, etc.) will only use a filter when they need and happily buy a filter which costs 4 to 5 times that of a generic one.

 

[DizGeek]

I go commando.

 

[jann1033]

too much information!!!

 

[DizGeek]

too much information!!!

'tis true.....nothing between the world and my glass.

 

[OCSurfCity]

I use the hoods AND filters all the time with my Canon EF24-70/2.8L and EF70-200/2.8L lens. I find it cuts down on the glare and prevents some vignetting I would otherwise see in my images.

Keep at least a skylight or UV Haze filter on your lens at ALL times. The front element of expensive lenses can run anywhere from $100 to $500!

 

[0bli0]

this example shows why should might want to get an expensive filter or leave it unfiltered. btw remember a strong light-source influence isn't necessarily visible as a flare artifact - it can ruin colour or contrast across a portion of the image.

 

[Boss Hogg]

I always have a filter on my lenses. Not owning a hood makes it hard to use one! That having been said, I am getting the Sigma 18-125 lens which comes with a hood, and I shall use the hood on this when I do.

I shall also get a Hoya filter for the Sigma lens.

Personally, I have never really noticed any colour issues with using a filter, more important to take the position of the sun (if outside) into account when framing pics.

 

[jann1033]

this example shows why should might want to get an expensive filter or leave it unfiltered. btw remember a strong light-source influence isn't necessarily visible as a flare artifact - it can ruin colour or contrast across a portion of the image.

wow that is pretty remarkable and since i have a tiffin filter or should i look at it as an excuse ur i mean reason for lousy pictures

so as long as it is a petal hood, plastic ( hard) is ok? amazon has one bundled with the 28-135 for around 430 total which seems ok price wise