Camera Labs

Been searching the internet for a lens hood for the above mentioned lens. There seems to be so many options, and Im not sure which to get and how long the hood should be.

Has anyone bought a hood yet? if so what brand? does it work well? pics of it on the lens would be very helpful please.


Thanks

Sorry I can't help with this one, but am interested to hear what others suggest.

Thanks again for your reply Gordon.

Ill just take a punt and get one off ebay, its not like they cost a fortune anyways.

Sud

While I have that lens, I've never felt a need to put a hood on it as it would detract from its small size. I do have a filter on it for protection as I find myself accidently touching the lens front area much more on the small body than on DSLR. Only on one occasion I used my hand as a temporary shield to reduce veiling glare from the sun.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.

Thanks for the tip, Ill try that

I agree with popo, I've been testing a GF1 with the 20mm for a few weeks now and have never had a problem with flare.

The reason I was looking at using a hood is because in later afternoon light or indoors and in the evening for me the lens and camera combo takes amazing pics.

Then the other day in Hervey Bay I took some pics during mid day and they came out terrible, both on ai and aperture priority... and thought that it could be due to the bright light or perhaps the type of light.

So Im thinking that perhaps a hood would have helped.

Thoughts anyone?

I can post some pics if you want?

Yep, show us some examples....

These were all taken in bright sun light, they all appear under exposed to me.

By the way the jetty is 884m long

1.

2.

3.
[/img]

For shots with a lot of sky in it the camera tends to expose for that sky giving good definition of the clouds without/with little blown highlights but with an underexposed foreground. Especially when the foreground object are not lit by the sun behind you but are in shadows because the sun is more towards the front of you and behind the objects in the foreground.

Using a live histogram is very useful in such situations allowing you to adjust exposure compensation/bias (EV) to achieve a better dynamic range while preventing clipping on the light or dark end of the scale. In-camera dynamic range expansion features can be helpful too.

This is most pronounced in the first shot and less in the second. The third one is not really underexposed.

Tweaking the histogram (luminance channel) in PP can usually rescue most of these shots. Increasing the Gamma value can do a lot for such underexposed pictures. I tried it on the first one with PSP and cranked the gamma slider in the histogram to about 1.60-1.75 which action alone made it a perfectly acceptable picture.

Ben
_________________
When in doubt..... Press the shutter.

What you are saying makes a lot of sense! Obviously in this situation a hood would not have made a difference.

I should start to familiarise myself with the histogram perhaps Ill get some better shots.

Sud

This is my solution:



Bought it on eBay and use it without any filter or other protection (just the lens cap).

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ... K:MEWNX:IT

_________________
Kjell
........................................................
Panasonic Lumix G1, Lumix GF1, Sigma DP1, Fuji F31fd and others. Sold my DSLRs
because the best camera is the one you have with you.
Mac user editing in Lightroom