Do you shoot with a lens hood?
Always! Without fail. Take no chances.
Never! Why bother?
Sometimes! Depends on the weather and whether I forgot to bring it!
What's a hood? (don't whack me for saying this! Kenna Hood - ah !)
Do you shoot with a lens hood?
24-70 F2.8L extrude too much on the wide end... won't be comfy without the hood, esp in dusty area...
If you shoot without a hood, you are an idiot.
please forgive me for my ignorance..
what's a lens hood?
What is lens hood
I using canon G5 and i dont know whether my camera can use lens hood .
I think I am IDIOT .
Defination of idiot:-
1.a person of subnormal intelligence
2.A person with learning disabilities. The term was part of a standard classification of people with learning disabilities in the nineteenth century which implied that a person had a severe learning difficulty.
Originally Posted by Amfibius
then i'm also an idiot sometimes lor. Yo, some pro photographers also idiot man, never use hood.
me me me! another idiot here sometimesOriginally Posted by Amfibius
me too me too.... well, at least im not perfect enough
3. A person who photographs without the use of a lense hood.Originally Posted by arowana
Idiot here too, . I have no hoods for 2 of my lenses.
Why is not using a hood idiotic?
It depends on the situation. And you got to be flexible! Sometimes there's no space for hood in the bag, sometimes lighting is not critical enough to cause lens flare, sometimes there's no time to fix on a hood cos you need to get the shot in the next 3 seconds, sometimes the lens you're using is standard 50mm prime or telephoto in which lens flare is not as vulnerable as wider angle lenses, etc etc....
Ok how about someone who always insist on using a hood can be termed as 'paranoid'?
Based on my experience... on many occasions, using a hood and not using it makes no difference to the final images. But that's on the many occasions where I know the kind of lighting I'm shooting at. It's good to have the hood on but as reasoned above... may not be necessary always.
A hood may offer limited protection for the front part of the lens though.
I think this debate will not end.. can get quite psychological... as good as asking Do you use a filter in front of your $3000 lens? I'm sure there are different responses to this one.
Originally Posted by Amfibius
Harsh remarks you have! Lot of lenses and proconsumer cameras do not have hood to begin with lor!
you mean attach the hood to camera and shoot, without a lens?
Anyway, then I must be a genius, but only when i shoot cause hood alway attached to my lens, but an idiot when i am not shooting
Btw, i think there is no need to use such a hush word .
photography makes one sees things from all angles.
I really don't understand sometimes....simple poll, simple questions and what do you get?
Maybe we are all idiots to bother replying to idiotic remarks.
Well, too bad - you're all idiots then.
Why spend so much money buying the best camera you can afford, the best film you can afford, the best lens you can afford, and then skimp on a $10 accessory which will demonstrably help your lens perform better?
Even your megabuck L lenses will look worse than a P&S if you start getting lens flare. You pay extra to get extra performance, and then you throw it away by not putting on the lens hood - which comes included with some lenses.
Yeah good one!
The only time I don't use a hood is if I forget to bring it along (idiotic mistake!) or if I'm shooting in low light conditions.
I think your remarks are unnecessarily harsh and offensive, which is in violation of CS terms and conditions. Please refrain from name calling in your future posts.Originally Posted by Amfibius
As complexity rises, precise statements lose meaning and meaningful statements lose precision.
Amfibius' point is taken. But choice of words unnecessarily provocative.
As a RULE, use a lens hood, both for reducing flare and for lens protection.
However there are situations as mentioned by someone else where not using any lens hood do not lead to image degradation. An example is shooting in a flat light with the light behind the photographer.
I shoot with 35 mm, medium format, and large format. For the 35 mm and medium format, I almost always have the hood on, except for situations where I forget to one on. In situations of harsh lighting, especially when the light comes almost from the front, even the manufacturer's hoods are often not up to the task, and I resort to even bigger hoods such as those made by Lee and Cokin, making sure there is no vignetting.
With the large format when everything is slower, using a compendium hood such as the Lee's, it can be a hassle to put on the hood. Under these circumstances, I very often shoot without a hood, but first looking at the lens front element to make sure stray light is not falling on the lens. If I have any doubt, out comes the Lee compendium hood!
I must be an idiot!
Before i bought my flashlite, using the built-in flash with hood on always results in irritating shadows on my photos.
After i bought my flashlite, there's no worries. I always shoot with my hood on.
The problem with the hood is that it is extremely cumbersome to bring along. Sometimes it's the difference between being able to carry one lens or three lenses in a small bag. Between carrying one lens with hood and three lenses w/o hood, i'd take the three lenses any day. Esp since i shoot primes.Originally Posted by Amfibius
If you cover events/weddings, you'd also realise how difficult/troublesome it can be to use the hood. The time it takes to change a lens is easily doubled with dismounting and remounting hoods.
BTW, Amfibius, you should always bring the hood along for low-light shooting. Low light conditions usually have some point light sources around which give more flare problems than normal lighting. That's about the only time when i (quite) religiously use the hood. You're a person of subnormal intelligence if you don't.