Lens Hood Selection

[bisso7]

I would like to buy a lens hood for my Canon T3. I noticed while browsing through my options that there are many from which to choose. I am wondering how to choose which one I need? I only have 2 lenses, the kit lens and a telephoto (55mm-250mm). Thanks in advance for the advice...

[ktuli]

Jeff,

A lens hood is per lens usually. Sometimes you can get away with one that will work on a couple lenses, but very rarely. The reason for this is that the lens hoods are designed to be long enough to block side light, but also short enough to avoid vignetting. That length will change based on your lens' focal length and other factors.

Hope this helps.

- Bill

[krispix]

It's unusual for lenses not to come with lens-hoods these days.
It's unlikely that a 55-250 will be the same size as a kit lens, but I might be wrong.
Go for tulip hoods, they give you maximum protection and minimal vignetting.

[William W]

I would like to buy a lens hood for my Canon T3. I noticed while browsing through my options that there are many from which to choose. I am wondering how to choose which one I need? I only have 2 lenses, the kit lens and a telephoto (55mm-250mm). Thanks in advance for the advice...

The Lens Hood for ALL Lenses in the Series of Lenses which are EF-S 18 to 55F/3.5~5.6 : is the EW-60C.

The Lens Hood for the EF-S 55 to 250F/4~5.6 IS: is the ET-60.

It is usual that all Canon Lenses DO NOT come with Lens Hoods as part of the Lens' purchase: except for the L Series Lenses.

WW

[rpcrowe]

Canon doesn't supply lens hoods with any other than their L lenses (and I think perhaps the 100mm f/2.8 macro lens). Even the vaunted and over one thousand U.S. Dollar 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens doesn't come with a lens hood.

I purchased a Chinese knock-off bayonet lens hood for my 17-55mm lens and it works fine. However, I once purchased a 77mm screw-in Opteka butterfly shaped lens hood and it would not screw into the threads of the lens.

This eBay lens hood will fit both the 18-55mm kit lens and the 55-250mm lens.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/AS24-58mm-Tu...item19d1de01ae

However, if I were you, I would purchase the above lens hood for your 18-55mm lens and then purchase this hood for the 55-250mm...
http://www.ebay.com/itm/ET-60-Lens-H...item56474bb30f

I think that the above hood, being deeper, would provide your 55-250mm lens with better protection from flare while the first hood would prevent vignetting when using the 18-55mm lens at 18mm...

The prices of both hoods are pretty minimal in comparison with other photo equipment...

[William W]

^ Hi Richard . . . The Lens Hood for the EF100F/2.8 Macro is an additional purchase.

The anomalies of which I am aware, are . . .

Non L Lenses supplied with Hoods: TS-E 45 and TS-E 90

Lenses with No Lens Hoods: EF50/2.5 and EF MP-E 65mm f/2.8

Cheers, Bill

[bisso7]

Thank you, everyone, for your help. Pardon my ignorance, but what does "vignetting" mean? I really need to get a glossary of photography terms, since I'm so new to all of this. Thanks...

[Donald]

Jeff

Vignetting is that 'shading' you get at the corners of images. If done to extremes it looks as if someone has held a circular card over the lens and you get a black circle around your image.

It can be a creative element in image-making, applied with post-processing tools and is used extensively by a number of photographers. The idea being that is draws attention in towards the centre area of an image. For many people the best creative use of vignetting is when it is applied with subtlety, so that it is not even obvious that it is there.

However, in this case, what we're talking about is a vignette being caused by an inappropriate lens hood. In other words, the edges of the lens hood will show up in your picture as this blurred dark circle. If you can pretend that it really was a creative artistic choice and that you are creating a new art form, fine. The problem is, we won't believe you! We'll know it was a mistake caused by using the wrong lens hood.

[Dave Humphries]

HI Jeff,

Lens hoods for zooms have to be built for the lens's widest angle of view, so the hood for an 18-55 has to be designed not to vignette at 18mm, where as the hood for the 55-250mm is designed for 55mm. This assumes all other things are equal, especially front element/filter diameter - which they may not be - but I hope you get the idea.

This of course means that the hood is much less effective when you zoom in to the maximum focal length, but I still always use one when I can.

Fortunately Nikon do supply hoods with most lenses included in the price and further; it is usually petal design and bayonet fit.

Screw-on hoods take longer to fit and are very unlikely to be a petal design because when you have finished rotating, the petals will very likely be in the wrong place and cause even more vignetting.

Petal designs often 'reverse' mount for easy stowing, if you lenses will take one, I'd buy that design for convenience - a Canon user should be able to advise on this aspect. (e.g. Bill is bound to know and the ones he suggests may be the best bet)

Cheers,

[Manfred M]

I know photographers that never use them and will use a free hand as a sunshade when they get glare; which I do sometimes. They are a pain to use with any rotating filters (polarizer and grad). In fact, I ususually only use them when it is raining out to protect the front element a bit from water drops.

Others I know use them all the time to add an additional physical layer of protection to the front end of the lens element. I sometimes do that when shooting in a crowd.

[bisso7]

Thanks to all who posted. I really appreciate the input. Thanks, also, Donald, for the explanation on vignetting. I recently ordered a book called "Create Stunning Digital Photography." It actually has a glossary in it. I don't know just how extensive of a glossary, but for me even the smallest one will be quite beneficial. LOL

I took Bill's advice, above, and purchased the ET-60 lens hood for my 55mm-250mm telephoto lens. Canon Direct Store charges $29.00, while Amazon only just under $17.00, so I went with Amazon.

[rpcrowe]

Yes, using many lens hoods can be a PITA when shooting with a polarizing filter, unless you have long skinny fingers like The Grinch Who Stole Christmas. You either have to reach in past the hood or remove the hood to rotate the filter.

Some photographers cut slots in the bottom of their hoods, using a Dremyl-like tool, which allows the rotating of the CPL without reaching in past the hood. I have not done this and if I did, I would want to do it with a cheap Chinese knock-off hood rather than an expensive Canon OEM hood.

There are commercially produced hoods with filter rotation slots but, I cannot find a source. This type of hood incorporates a sliding door. Open the door to access the filter and close the door to shoot. Does anyone know a source for this type of hood?



Some EF lenses, when used on 1.6x crop cameras can accept a round screw-in generic lens hood without vignetting. This hood will provide a fair amount of protection from flare and will also provide excellent physical protection for the lens. I fell with my camera and 70-200mm f/4L IS lens on a strap around my neck. The lens-hood hit the concrete first and was totally demolished. However the lens itself was not damaged. The round lens hood is what I will use on my 70-200mm f/4L IS lens when I am using a polarizing filter. The filter screws into the lens threads and the hood screws into the filter. Rotating the filter is as simple as twisting the lens hood.



Most often, I will carry two cameras on an OPTECH Dual Harness. However, occasionally, I will carry two cameras with the camera wearing the shorter lens around me neck and the camera with the longer lens (usually a 70-200mm f/4L IS) at my side in a holster case. I will use a round screw-in hood when shooting in this configuration because the camera wearing the tele lens will fit in my Tamrac Zoom-19 holster case if I use this type of hood. Sure I could reverse the bayonet hood but, the camera/lens would not be available for instant use as it is with the round screw-in hod.



However, despite the trouble that lens hoods can cause, I consider their value in protecting from flare as well as lens/filter physical damage well worth any problems. This is especially true when using a filter which might be suceptible to flare. I will always use a hood when shooting both indoors and outdoors.

Macro photography is one venue in which I will dispense with the lens hood. However, my 90mm f/2.8 Tamron Macro has a front element seated well back into the lens barrel. The barrel itself acts as a lens hood.

BTW: The Canon 300mm f/4L IS lens and 400mm f/5.6L (as well as a few other large Canon telephoto lenses) incorporate built-in retracting lens hoods which are a joy with which to work. I wish that Canon had incorporated sliding lens hoods like these in their 70-200mm lenses.

[Andrew1]

You can also try the even cheaper rubber lens hoods. Being soft and collapsible you aren't always having to take them off and on when putting them in your case. They work well and protect the lens in the odd bump. An added benefit is they screw into the filter ring so they facilitate the use of a polarizing filter.