Conical and Petal lens hood

[Golagislow]

Hi, I'm a newbie to photography but am really interested in it. Like the way i hooked up with golf! Just that I believe it is going to be more costly than golf! Hahaha...

I know I shouldn't get myself into all the accessories out there yet.... But I just wanted to get the things right..

I got confused about the conical and petal shaped lens hood. I read somewhere that the conical suits better for fix apeture prime lens / wide angle lens while the petal is better for zooms lens. But on other articles, they mentioned the other way round. Wide angle --> petal and zoom --> conical. Which is which now? The latter also make sense because my original lens came with conical lens hood too. What is the range of the lens are considered wide angle?

Basically, I'm using Nikon 18-55mm/f3.5-5.6 and 55-200mm/f4-6.3. They come with original conical HB-45 and HB-37. Do I need to change to petal type instead? How about those attached-on wide angle lens (X0.45)?

Hope the experts here can help me out.. Thanks in adv.

 

[rhino123]

Hi, I'm a newbie to photography but am really interested in it. Like the way i hooked up with golf! Just that I believe it is going to be more costly than golf! Hahaha...

I know I shouldn't get myself into all the accessories out there yet.... But I just wanted to get the things right..

I got confused about the conical and petal shaped lens hood. I read somewhere that the conical suits better for fix apeture prime lens / wide angle lens while the petal is better for zooms lens. But on other articles, they mentioned the other way round. Wide angle --> petal and zoom --> conical. Which is which now? The latter also make sense because my original lens came with conical lens hood too. What is the range of the lens are considered wide angle?

Basically, I'm using Nikon 18-55mm/f3.5-5.6 and 55-200mm/f4-6.3. They come with original conical HB-45 and HB-37. Do I need to change to petal type instead? How about those attached-on wide angle lens (X0.45)?

Hope the experts here can help me out.. Thanks in adv.

From what I know, petal hood are normally for wide angle lenses, because of the wide angle view. If a conical hood is use, you would tend to see vignetting at the corners to the edges, thus they uses the petal hood, whereby some of the area are shy away. For longer lenses (or telelenses) they have a smaller view angle, thus they can use a conical hood with no problem (the theory is there, but for some lenses like the 70-200mm f2.8, they still use the petal hood, although I doubt this is for practical reason, rather it is more cosmetic reasons).

 

[rhino123]

Oh.. and TS... if you are to get a lens hood, make sure you get the right one and not just any third party lens hood, because if the wrong one is being used, you might find very bad vignetting at the corners and edge of your shots, especially at wide angle.

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

Hi, I'm a newbie to photography but am really interested in it. Like the way i hooked up with golf! Just that I believe it is going to be more costly than golf! Hahaha...

I know I shouldn't get myself into all the accessories out there yet.... But I just wanted to get the things right..

I got confused about the conical and petal shaped lens hood. I read somewhere that the conical suits better for fix apeture prime lens / wide angle lens while the petal is better for zooms lens. But on other articles, they mentioned the other way round. Wide angle --> petal and zoom --> conical. Which is which now? The latter also make sense because my original lens came with conical lens hood too. What is the range of the lens are considered wide angle?

Basically, I'm using Nikon 18-55mm/f3.5-5.6 and 55-200mm/f4-6.3. They come with original conical HB-45 and HB-37. Do I need to change to petal type instead? How about those attached-on wide angle lens (X0.45)?

Hope the experts here can help me out.. Thanks in adv.

Just use the hood that is supplied with your lens Those (presumably) have been field-tested with the lens that they are supplied with, so as not to affect the performance.

why do you have the thought that the supplied hood is in some way inferior, and that you should replace it with another?

 

[rhino123]

Btw... don't get those attach on wide angle converter. They are a waste of money... they degrade your pic sharpness and they distort your pic terribly. All these thing are good for... is as a cool looking paper weigh (oh... they are not that cool looking too.)

 

[Golagislow]

Just use the hood that is supplied with your lens Those (presumably) have been field-tested with the lens that they are supplied with, so as not to affect the performance.

why do you have the thought that the supplied hood is in some way inferior, and that you should replace it with another?

Not that I doubt the supplied / maker recommended hood are inferior. Just wondering after some reading (that's the problem for not reading ENOUGH! Hahaha...) why it come with conical hood instead of petal and whether I need to change.

 

[Golagislow]

Btw... don't get those attach on wide angle converter. They are a waste of money... they degrade your pic sharpness and they distort your pic terribly. All these thing are good for... is as a cool looking paper weigh (oh... they are not that cool looking too.)

Thanks for your adv. I guess there is no need for me to change the hood... About the wide angle converter, a friend pass it to me. Didn't even know what is it at 1st! Hahahaha...

 

[Octarine]

Thanks for your adv. I guess there is no need for me to change the hood... About the wide angle converter, a friend pass it to me. Didn't even know what is it at 1st! Hahahaha...

It's a nice paper weight .. or a fun filter you can screw on your kit lens (58mm thread mostly). Nothing to be taken for serious in any way.

 

[learned art]

Very nice topic indeed. I missed the square hoods!

 

[detritus]

Very nice topic indeed. I missed the square hoods!

they are quite common still was surfing on ebay once and found quite a lot that screws into the filter thread.

the Ricoh GXR A12 28mm can also be fitted with one (LH-1) that slots into the bayonet mount.

i like it a lot in addition to blocking out stray light and protecting the lens from accidental bumps, it enhances the "cool factor" of the entire package.

only complaint is that its not reversible and it adds to the overall size of the camera... but this is just me asking for too much :bsmilie:

 

[learned art]

Hi, indeed, the square hood of film days is already an unusual sight these days. I like metal hood. Tough and hardy on the run. But these are kinda rare on local piles of dig boxes. Junk of yesteryears are gems to me still. I have a few boxes of old filters. Some were built like a rock. I used the odd ones as a crystal shine through for sparkle effects for LED lamps on assignment shoots. Oh well, just for the fun of it.

they are quite common still was surfing on ebay once and found quite a lot that screws into the filter thread.

the Ricoh GXR A12 28mm can also be fitted with one (LH-1) that slots into the bayonet mount.

i like it a lot in addition to blocking out stray light and protecting the lens from accidental bumps, it enhances the "cool factor" of the entire package.

only complaint is that its not reversible and it adds to the overall size of the camera... but this is just me asking for too much :bsmilie:

 

[Dream Merchant]

Fixed conicals and petals are a compromise, at best. At worst, they hardly offer much protection for extraneous light/flare.

If you want maximum efficiency (but not necessarily adaptability or ease of use) look towards what Cinematographers use - a frame-ratio multiple focal length bellows lend hood.

Most, won't even bother.

hasselblad lens hood - Google Search