Just removed all my lens hoods and (play a magic chime in your head) my gear feels so much lighter and more compact! I am finally able to carry a Sony 70-350, Sigma 56 1.4, Sigma 18-50 2.8, Sony 11 1.8, and a a6400 in a 6l PD sling bag! Thank you for the inspiration!
One word to describe your set of choices: coherence. Everything falls into place, and the more you talk about them, the more logical they strike me. The most revealing point is how you negotiate with difficulties arising from your set of choices, e.g. maintaining bokeh in a smaller (e.g. M43) format. Bravo!
For me, I use them mainly so I don't have to use lens caps. I buy the metal screw-on lens hoods that also have filter ring threads on the end, so I can still attach filters without removing the lens hood. On some lenses, I buy the shorter lens hoods or rubber collapsible hoods to save space. Flare and lack of contrast is a constant problem for me in my photo walks when shooting near golden hour, or when using the flash near the lens for macro shots.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Rob. I don't get flare problems often and in the cases that I do, they are rarely any issue to the image. Also, I use longer lenses most of the time (I should probably have said this in the video), wide angle lenses have more issues with flare.
4 ปีที่แล้ว +4
I have the same reason as Rob. I use lens hood to protect the lens because I don't use lens caps. Like you mentioned in the end of the video it's also for protecting lenses from water... and boy we have it a lot here in Finland this time of the year. Tiny droplet on the lens and minor flare will have really major problems when shooting in the urban wilderness of Finland. Next we should see Matti's response to this video right? :)
same here.. lens hood is just thr to protect the front glass once i discovered the joy and convenience of going "cap-less".. i am more inclined and motivated to take out my cam and shoot more pic without the cap on..
Hi! Can I ask you a question? Is it possible to use a lens hood at the same time than a filter? Or do they use the same thread and you need a special adapter? Thank you!!
@@brianlarrazabal Usually a screw-in filter has the same thread on the front side so you can put another filter on it - or a lens hood. I think lens hoods that screw into the filter thread might often also have that but it's more difficult to get to the thread to put a filter in there. The same may be true with a clip-on lens hood. It can get in the way of your fingers and if you are going to use a square filter system like the COKIN ones then you basically can't use a hood with those.
Finally! Thanks for the encouragement and inspiration Robin! I subscribed a few videos ago, so to speak. Finally, somebody (and not just somebody dare I say, but the very Robin Wong himself) who doesn’t like lens hoods, just like me. I can live without lens hoods perfectly well, because I cannot live without polarising filters. Your videos are to the point, very informative, and always a pleasure to watch! Keep it up; with love from The Netherlands. 🇳🇱❤️🇲🇾
I understand your approach. I use a lenshood on all my lenses being a plane spotter. Not much of a changing scenario nor hurry spending hours alongside the same runway. Also my EOS with Sigma 150-600 rests well on the hood while checking the app for the next aircraft. Big advantage to use a hood during rain and snowfall. Greetings from Frankfurt, Germany
I got into photography back in the 80's, and at that time, using a lens hood was highly recommended to guard against flare. I got so much in the habit of using them, that I've never really used a lens without a hood. All of the lenses I've owned were able to store the hood on the lens in reverse position, and therefore no additional space in the bag was needed. The main conflict I've run into was when using a square filter system, which prevents the use of the standard lens hood, although the system I purchased had it's own hood. A good strap will do a better job protecting the camera and lens from drops, so I've never felt a need to use a hood for this purpose. Having said all that, I'm happy to hear that modern lenses are better protected against flare and the hood isn't as important as it used to be.
It hasn’t stopped raining in the UK for weeks, so I use a lens hood on most of my lenses....I like to use them most of the time as I keep lenses in my jacket pocket rather than carry a bag, the hoods help protect the front elements...🌈😎🇬🇧
It is good to hear your arguments against lens hoods, because most reports out there are the opposite. My Panasonic 42.5mm F1.7 suffers much from flare, and since it comes with a reversible lens hood that stores compactly on the lens, I use it customarily. Even using my hand as a lens cap is not satisfactory for this lens, which BTW, is excellent in all other aspects. Your thoughts on the Olympus 60mm F2.8 macro lens are much appreciated. Like you I sometimes shoot insects, and it will definitely help me if I remove the lens hood on my next insect shoot. Finally, speed of changing lenses is not such an issue for me, since I am not a professional, and this is very personal, but I see where you get from. Anyway, thanks for the thoughtful video!
No worries, if you find the hood working for you, keeping using them! Yes, I hope I made it clear the reasons were quite personal and may not be applicable for every one. I just hate it when people look at me like an alien with three heads when I don't use a lens hood!
I have always use hoods.. Along with the reasons listed, rain, flare and protection, the main reason I use them is because it makes the lens look sooooo cool !! LOL..
Very good points Robin--I agree with you. Lens hoods do slow me down. They're fiddly and they hog up a lot of space in my bag (especially the huge hood on the 40-150 f/2.8 PRO). Yet I keep them on out of habit. Since I don't use protective filters, I rely on them as "protectors" in case I bump or drop my lenses. My lenses do feel a bit naked when I take the hood off. I'll have to try to break this habit gradually.
If I hadn't seen the contrast improvement a lens hood makes on an image taken with a standard DSLR kit 50-200mm, or a 80-200mm back in the film days, I would not use them either. Shooting for the 1st time with my new M.Zuiko Premium 30mm f/3.5, I must say that the ZERO coating is exceptional against flares, but I still use a small metal hood which I find extremely useful. Unlike filters, I cannot think of a situation that a hood would deteriorate image quality.
While I do use a lens hood, I can understand the sentiment of not needing one. There is another TH-cam photography channel that did an experiment in which they intentionally mishandled the front lens element. It wasn’t until they used a crab claw found on a beach, that they finally inflicted superficial damage. And even at that, it was just a small scratch. They then took test shots and found it caused no harm to the image quality once they were viewing it in Lightroom. Goes to show how resilient the lens glass can be. So preach on, Robin! 👍
Very enjoyable, as always. Modern multi-coated lenses don’t need protection from sunlight entering that is outside the frame. The internal black coatings inside the modern camera do a great job stopping internal reflections as well. I shoot older film cameras and lenses and the use of a lens hood is important when shooting into the light. The lens coatings are not as effective at suppressing flare and the camera internal black surfaces are quite reflective. Smaller rangefinder cameras need a lot of handling to focus while viewfinding, and stray fingers get onto the lens very easily without a hood. I also use Uv filters with old lenses, they actually often need them, and the older soft lens coatings suck oil from your fingertips if you give them the chance, and won’t clean up so easily.
(1) Flare control, (2) rain protection, and (3) physical-damage protection -- in fact, you mentioned all the reasons why I am and always have been using lens hoods in my photography. I readily agree that lens coatings and designs have become so good at reducing flare that this is no longer much of an issue, but I do a lot of backlit and sidelit shooting, and there a lens hood can really make a discernable difference. On occasion, I have left hoods off or have not fully extended them, when speed was an issue, or in close-to-the-lens macro work. However, I want this to be my decision as a photographer, not the lens manufacturer's when they decide they can squeeze a ridiculously-high amount of money out of me for a hood that has to be bought extra.
8:20 - the beautiful background blur - this is why i like your videos so much. You are enthusiastic, and it is real fun to watch you. and how you express your emotions. Nobody else can top your way of saying "babye" at the end or "let's do this" in the beginning. This is unique ;-)
Well Robin, i suffered myself from a broken lens hood when i stumbled down a step while searching for a picturesque scene (my wife would say, this happens all the time ;-). Don't know what would have happened if i didn't mount it but i am not eager to experience. So i am happy with my lens hood mounted and i am not even suffering by additional load as a lens hood is not much weight and almost no volume when you mount it reverse. It even protects the lens in my bag. Another point is: with lens hood mounted the lens appears to be bigger, more impressive that makes me appear a more important photographer (just kidding - in fact i feel embarrassed when carrying big gear ;-)
Yes. The coolest pictures of cameras and lenses in the old Olympus brochures of the 80s were the ones with lens hoodd. Motordrive and lens hoods were essential to look like a pro.🤣
same, protect front element from bumping into stuff, sometimes from rain drops. On tele the hood is must. Looks so professional and dope. But I do like sun flares, they give a character to the image.
I was on the fence about lens hoods until on a hike my Olympus slipped off my shoulder and hit a rock lens first. After a moment of shocked silence I picked it up to discover the lens hood on the 12-100 pro had taken the impact and cracked but all else was undamaged. A little super glue on the hood and all is good to go. Lesson learned!
Seems like it's always hot and humid where you are? I'm guessing it's Malaysia some place? As for the lens hood thing, Murphy's law states that the first time I leave home without it I'll bump my front element cheers 👍👍
So I am not a pro, and when I go out to photograph, I usually pick one lens that I will leave on the entire day. A lens hood will protect the lens, so I do use them about half of the time, depending on what lens I use on that particular day. Being slowed down is not only a non-issue for me, it is a blessing. Jan.
I use a lot of vintage lenses. One of my favourites is a 90mm Leitz Elmar from 1938 which has no coating. These lenses (& later single coated optics) are capable of giving exquisite & distinct results. As I tend to shoot into the light more often than not I find a lens hood is an absolute necessity. BTW, love your macro compositions! ;-)
Thanks for the kind words! Yes, I sometimes do want more flare in my images to add character, I should look into vintage lenses for those special effects. Olympus lenses are too resistant to flare!
I use it 99% of the time. Mostly to protect the front element and for some contrast/ flare control etc... I have a bait of bumping my camera into walls, trees, etc and lenshood has been a boon for me so far. Only when I have to use the PL or ND filter I take it off.
"Some like it hot while some prefer it cold." For whatever decision that we take, we should base on good reasons without looking down at others. Its okay to be difference as long as we know what we are doing. We should be more open minded so that we can learn from others too. Great explanation 👍🏻
Thanks Robin. After 2yrs of shooting professionally I find myself at this crossroads. I cannot help feel that lens hoods are from a bygone era where coating and modern technology for managing flare and ghosting isn't up to the challenge. I, like you, do event work. I have bought into the Manfrotto Xume magnetic filter system and really enjoy the quick change of filters depending on the shot. Maybe Pro Mist, CPL or ND for additional shutter/aperture control, it makes it easy, but factoring in the hood is a PIA! I think I too will abandon the hood, except for those instances like rain that seem logical to keep one around. Thanks again.
Lens flare and the accompanying contrast reductions are pretty peculiar in that, even with modern coatings, they sometimes show themselves at some very inconvenient times. Most times I don’t have problems, but just that one backlit portrait or a very specific angle could be enough to get flaring.
Like others have mentioned, my hoods for protection, since I loose the cap within minutes lol. Also the hood has saved me more than a couple times when I've dropped a lens. Two of my hoods are cracked from taking the fall but the lens keeps on going :-)
All my lens hoods revers & cover the lens barrel. I do get your comments about M zuko lens re flare & ghosting etc.. For outdoor photography in an unstable environment lens hoods are a layer of protection that's saved my lens once or twice. For macro totally agree the 60mm & 90mm dont need more out the front.
Thanks for this Robin. I looked back on 3+ years of Olympus OM-D photography and it's true - it really is hard to get flare even when shooting direct into the sun, even the humble and cheap 8mm pancake fisheye is pretty good in that respect. I do wonder about the filters I always fit to protect the front element - they might not be up to Oly standards but mostly they are OK too. Like you I rarely pack the lens hoods I have due to limited space in my small kit bag. I did buy a hood for my 60mm f2.8 macro but not the 30mm - you're right, they get in the way when up close. keep the helps and advice coming.
Robin, I agree with your comments regarding the flare resistance of the Oly pro lenses. Most recently I covered a Christmas carols event and took photos where stage lighting was shining directly into the lens (12-40mm 2.8 Pro). Clear beautiful photos of the performers and not one indicator of flare or loss of contrast.
I do a lot of landscape shooting in Oregon. Between the drizzle, fog, mist from waterfalls and winds, I usually use a hood. We also have sandy areas with dust in the air, and in some areas I like to shoot that fine grit in the air is pumice dust from volcano calderas. I wont even lens swap if I am dealing with pumice in the air.
I always tend to use a lenshoods for one simple reason: I'm clumsy and my dirty fingers always seems to find their way to the front glass element so that, by the time I get aware of the problem I might have taken several pictures... v__v
Your videos are always good! For most of my lenses I don't even have any hood. It varies whether I use one or not. However I have one lens which I have always used with lens hood: Samyang 300mm F6.3 Reflex. It's closest focus distance is about 90cm. I won't scare insects away because of lens hood. In camera bag the hood won't take much space because it can be turned around. Taking a photo with that lens is slow anyway. I always need some time to adjust it's focus precisely. Maybe a lens hood also gives somewhat better contrast to the images with reflex lenses. And with lens hood I won't so easily touch the front element with my fingers accidently or smudge it in other ways.
I totally understand why you don't use lens hoods and have the same issues with them that you do. However I shoot mostly landscapes and find that a lens hood does help in certain situations. I've recently started using collapsible rubber screw in hoods. They solved the filter issues and mostly the storage issues for me and are relatively inexpensive. Really enjoy your videos.
I totally agree with you Robin. One reason that i can add is to have ad Rubber lens hood that can flex ... just in case i have to photograph thru a window ...or a an object placed in a glass display i.e. in a museum.. in low light... avoiding the using a polerising filter.
I do use lens hoods most of the time, especially when I have filters attached - in this case it is a metal hood screwed onto the filter, and then I can still easily rotate a polarizer if I need to. I'm accustomed to old lenses (I'm not talking Olympus MFT here), and there flare was (and even with some newer lenses is) an issue. And with the small Olympus primes I can have the hood on the lens all the time, because it is still comparatively small and fits into my (small) bags. But I get your point, and I don't care if other photographers don't use it. That said, I should do some tests myself to find out which of my lenses are actually prone to flare!
Thanks for sharing your opinion! I am ok with or without hood, it just irks me that so many times other people looked at me like some kind of alien when I don't use lens hood!
I use lens hood on smaller focal length lenses because they are small and for lens hood reasons. I reverse fit the hoods to keep the size down in the bag. On big lens focal length nine times out of ten I do not use, but again I still reverse fit just in case! It suits my style of photography. I use zoom lenses to avoid changing lenses. There ya go my view!
No worries, if it works for you then use the hood.I use zoom lenses too but for my job I still need to change lenses, sometimes more than 10 times in 30 minutes. Switching most frequently between 12-40mm and 40-150mm PRO, if I keep attaching and removing the hood, I have too many extra steps, it slows me down considerably.
Lenses don’t come cheap and so I use lens hoods primarily for protection incase I drop my camera or hit an object with my lens while carrying gear over my shoulders.
If you're shooting directly or almost directly into the sun the lens hood won't help anyway. If the hood is small & light (like on the lumix 25mm f1.7) I just leave it on for protection otherwise I don't think about it.
It helps to prevent stray lights coming from an angle. Nonetheless, I don't need them and I don't get flare a lot in my shots. In the few that I do I don't mind.
One more reason to use a lens hood: a nice silver metal one looks very retro cool on a classic style camera (omd, pen-f) with e.g. a silver 17mm f/1.8 lens. While on the subject of fashion conscious photography: what's more classy than an old Leica M rangefinder with a rectangular hood? 😏
As I come from the "film camera (Olympus) I am used to use lens hoods all the time. But I understand that the way light gets into the camera is different in the old fashioned film cameras than the newer OMD cameras and M43 lenses. The angle of light in the older film camera lenses has been much wider than in the new OMD or digital lenses. So I think it's worthy to try without the lenshood .. Thanks a lot Robin for this tutorial again! Jan
I use lens hoods almost all the time. Only time I do not have it on is when using a variable ND filter. It does not slow me down, it is always on and no problem with changing lenses.
I change lens more than 10 times in a span of 30 minutes shooting an event or wedding, so removing and attaching lens hoods between lenses can be quite troublesome and time consuming. Removing that step keeps me agile and more efficient. Some people say leave the hood on, then the bag must be gigantic! I use 40-150mm PRO, 12-40mm PRO, 25mm PRO, imagine if the hoods are attached on thee lenses, and stored in the bag, I don't think I can even zip the bag. I know the 40-150mm has quick mechanism but it is still one extra step to do before shooting a photo.
@@robinwong I do have the lens hoods on all the time. I never use the lens cap, except when the lens is stored away in my cabinet. The lens hood protects the front element in my bag. With the 40-150mm f2.8 I just slide it "on" when grabbing it from my bag. On the other hand, I do not change lenses that often. If I know that I need to use quickly to different lenses I just have two camera bodies ready for action. I have two to three bodies anyways, just in case something goes wrong with one of the cameras. Actually, another time I do not use the lens hood is when using a tripod in windy conditions. The lens hood might catch the windy and cause unwanted blurriness to the photo.
Lens hood makes sense when using long zoom/prime lenses so you don't bang them. But for daily/street photography only a UV filter should give enough protection.
Everyone is entitled to their own point of view. What works for one person may not work for another. And workstyle and environment affects this. Some additional points. Pros for hoods - It helps to keep fingers away from the front of the lens. - - Small children tend to have dirty/greasy hands, and that can get on the front element or filter when they grab at the lens. - - At the high school that I advise at, I was cleaning fingerprints and finger grease off the filter EVERY WEEK. Students do NOT handle the equipment as carefully as we do. - When I shoot in the rain, with a camera rain cover, it gives me a place to attach the cover to the lens. I tighten the velcro strap around the hood. Cons against hoods - On a wide range zoom like a 12-40, or worse the 12-100, the hood has to be designed for the widest focal length, 12mm. This makes it less useful at 40mm and practically useless 100mm, where you want a LONGER hood. Other - Some of the Olympus hoods are excessively complex. WHY do you need the complex hood locks, as on the 12-40 and 12-100. KISS. A simple detent lock, is just as effective, cheaper, and will NOT break. It is probably the marketing dept that wanted the complex hoods for the expensive pro lenses. Another dumb form over function decision. - When I use all of my m43 lenses, I LEAVE the hood on, and the lens gets put into my belt pouch with the hood ON the lens. Yes, a lens with a long hood attached, does take up more space in the pouch, but I also don't have to bother reversing the hood to put it in the pouch or when I pull it out of the pouch. Back in my film days, that is how I used the hoods. In fact I think I had only one reversible hood, all the others were screw on.
There is another reason we like lens hoods. We think size matters. With the 150 to 400 Pro, the hood adds another 4 inches to the length of the “lens.“ It’s simply more impressive to passersby.
Reason #4: A lens hood LOOKS COOL! lol Superficial I know, but to me a lens hood looks cool on a lens. However, the main reason I have a lens hood is it HAS protected my lenses from dings and scratches. Rock on Robin!!!! Love your vids.
Hi Robin, I used the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 and 14mm f2.5 on my Olympus m43 cameras frequently and with retractable rubber lens hoods on them which eliminates most of the irritants that you talked about.
Ha! I went to the beach yesterday to film some retro footage for a promo video on the em 5ii. I had to put a $20 UV filter on the KIT LENS to get the flaring I wanted ;-) Tx Robin, and I hope it's not too hot over there!
@@robinwong Use cheap filters in front of them! I think $20 is even too expensive, I bought some (small) UV filters for less then €5 (around $5), and it look as if they don't have any coating, so they should flare "like hell". (To be clear: I bought them to remove the glass itself and to be used as pinhole holders - I wouldn't normally use them to "protect" my lenses. ;-))
@@rodmehta5356 Sorry, didn't think about that (sounds as if your estimation of "your" dollar is similar to Canadians ;-)) … so we are basically talking about similar stuff. I should definitely try those cheap filters to intentionally create flare … but having lots of old manual focus lenses lying around, I guess I don't need additional filters for that … ;-)
I agree about it kind of being in the way when doing most (but not all) macro photography, but other that that the lens hood is always on when I take pictures. (Unless I forget it or similar, which is very difficult with my 40-150mm lens.) Not saying it's the best choice for everyone and every situation (it obviously isn't since you prefer to not use it most of the time), but that's what I prefer anyway.
Didn't use a lens hood for over a ten year stretch. Used a UV/haze filter to protect the front element, which is something professionals are apparently vehemently against. As a DoD photographer, it wasn't my gear that I signed for (read: financially liable for it) so I used a filter. With my personal gear, I did the same (filter), and used a hood when shooting without, which allowed for walking around without a lens cap (another thing professionals apparently never use). Would have to say that "preventing lens flare" is probably the last reason I have for using a hood, unless shooting at longer focal lengths, covering sports or action events outdoors in bright sunlight. With the current generation of lenses, the coatings and overall optics have evolved to the degree that they aren't necessary in most instances, but careful arrangement of a small lens selection in a smaller 3 lens bag still allows for keeping the hoods on their respective lenses.
Hey Robin... Here are TWO ADDITIONAL REASONS FOR THE USE OF A LENS HOOD: 1. ASSISTS FILTER ADJUSTMENT: I use a screw-on Roolad 46mm Vented Lens Hood attached to my circular polarizer filter... My reasoning is that it facilitates the ease in which I can adjust the filter whilst keeping my fingers away from the front of the lens... 2. COSMETIC: On my Pana-Leica 15mm lens I use the lens hood for that vintage "Leica" look - I think it looks awesome on my camera especially when I am doing street photography... And so another reason for a lens hood is the cosmetic effect... I agree with you in that I don't think a lens hood is "essential" and just like you with the Olympus lenses - I too have found that lens flare is quite minimal with the Panasonic lenses as well...
Cosmetic is not a good reason. Attaching lens hood does not make the lens look nicer. I think it makes it look uglier. But of course, beauty is different for everyone.
Great channel Robin! I think a collapsible rubber lens hood is a middle ground for those that want a compromise between protection and limitations. Greetings from Spain.
Thanks. I think collapsible rubber hood is useless. If you are using the hood as protection against accidental knocks and fall the rubber is like having no protection at all.
Yes i like using mine but i'd didn't know about all the work that has gone into making the lenes so thanks Robin & who knows maybe one day i won't use it ever. As for seeing others use one it's up to them i don't mind.
I do generally use the lens hood outdoors so I always bring it with me. I sometime will thread the lens hoods through the strap on my camera bag (unclip my strap and string them through) so the look like little bangles... but don't take up space.
I'm confused when people complain about space of lens hood. Do they not know you can mount them backwards so they do not extend the footprint of the lens? Mount backwards when storing, mount forward when in use.
Solid points--especially for Olympus lenses--a feature I did not know. So, I learned something---good way to start the day. Also, I appreciate your sharing what lenses you rely on. Helpful.
Great video. My 60/2.8 lens hood is in the lens box. I don’t even remember if I had to buy that one separately, but I never use it for the reason you mentioned. I do use lens hoods sometimes, mainly for protection and sometimes for weather; reasons you’ve mentioned. I don’t mind using my hand to shield the lens when I want to avoid a strong light source like the sun, and can see how it impacts the exposure in real time with the viewfinder (although agreed that modern Olympus lenses are nicely flare resistant). I dislike lens hoods when I want to switch lenses quickly and I don’t use them with circular polarizers. Certainly the worst thing about them is how much bigger they make lenses. All the more so on larger lenses like a full frame 70-200/2.8.
Interesting video. My Nikon lenses are 10 years old & I've used lens hoods as standard to get better contrast in my photos. I had no idea this may no longer be necessary if/when I make my intended switch to EM5iii.
I use lens hoods when shooting landscapes and other scenery. I have had flair ruin shots I thought were good and it was very hard to get rid of. I also use some Panasonic lens with come with lens hoods. Indoors or any place I might use flash or fill flash, I do not use lens hoods because they cast a bigger shadow which usually does not make a difference, but the few times it does, you do not know until after the photo. I do not always have an off camera flash with me. I stack my lens hoods under my shortest lens so they do not take up much space. In the middle of them is usually my spare batteries. All of them are then put in a bag so I have them if I need them. I do not care what other people do. If I got upset at them for shooting the way I do, it may close a door to learning from them.
Until Covid-19, most of my shooting was in cities - architecture or street shots - so I use the hood for protection from damage and I don't tend to change lenses very often. With social distancing maybe I don't need the hoods any more - but I feel safer using a hood as it can also act to protect from damage if I drop the camera. I don't mind if other photographers use lens hoods or not, it's up to them.
Lens hoods to protect from infection! Hoods are now compulsory! And at least three UV filters on every lens to stop those droplets and particles infecting the lens.🤣 I'm surprosed noone has mentioned that. I hope you are back to city photography as of 2022.👍
I have lens hoods in my bag, but not even sure which one goes with which lens. If I see flare, I put my hand out to shade the front of the lens, but sunshine in Cologne is a rare thing. If it is raining, I shoot from under some cover. The advantage of city shooting.
4. Lenshood give more contrast on photos. BUT I DO NOT USE LENSHOOD because I gain place in my bag. I use only uv filter to protect. You can use your hand put a bit in the front of the lens if the sun is there
Nice photos and nice philosophy on how you manage your gear. I do Pentax which also has a long history of high quality lens coatings and flair control. I see Olympus is no slouch in this area.
I use lens hood only for protection. I don't like the bulkiness, but I think it has less side effects than using UV filters for protection of the front element. I tried UV filters at first and got weird flares in some photos. This doesn't happen with hoods. I usually shoot busy events with two bodies and the cameras get hit a lot by people around me. So the hoods give me a little peace of mind. But other than that, I totally agree you don't need lens hoods. I wish lenses were impossible to scratch and were grease repelant so we wouldn't even need lens caps, hehe.
While using a rangefinder you are not getting a true representation of the image while using the viewfinder. It is possible to get flair/glare that is not noticed while shooting that could show up later on in development (for film). I think for film rangefinders lens hoods are a good idea.
I use my camera most of the time on hiking tours and have it also hanging on a strap outside the backpack in front of my chest. The Lens Hood is used to protect against branches and the like, as well as from my fingerprints, as well as as sun and rain protection of the lens.
I use them because my clients don't think I'm a professional photographer when i show up without it and don't want me to do the job! Now I know its good for light rain I will now use it for my cyberpunk photography
Interesting point of view Robin, one against my thinking. But I accept your point of view. The main reason I use hoods is for the protection against knocks and finger prints. I seldom use lens caps preferring the speed of use this way than to use no hood but lens caps. I'm willing to give it a go and good to hear a different point of view. keep up the good work, it is appreciated.
Now if I owned a FenF I think I would get one of those vented hoods just for the looks :) I ended up getting JJC hood for my 12-40 pro as it has a door to use the polariser, but hardly ever use it as it is inconvenient to use. On another note could you do a macro tutorial one day. I notice you do not get much shine on your subjects so I would like to see your rig especially the diffuser setup you use
Yes I do use lens hoods but find them a pain if they are the bayonet type that comes with the lens, I do prefer the screw type that screw in the filter, but as you imply, each to their own. What I hate most are they way some people carry hoods inverted on their lenses which obstruct the lens focus/telephoto rings and do not understand why they insist on doing this. Thanks for your video and sharing, regards
@@robinwong agree if you change a lot of filters but I mainly use an adjustable ND filter or polariser and screw the lens to it making it easy to adjust. Other filters can be emulated in post.
I'm very pro for lens hood. If I'm out with other photographers that don't use a lens hood I usually put it for them. :) The truth is that lens hoods on different lenses have saved me countless times, dropping lenses, camera and lens, hitting different stuff with the camera on the shoulder, hitting branches etc. I don't see a reason not to use it as it helps in every situation. I carry my gear in a bag with hoods reversed and additional space used is very little, before shooting I take the body out, remove front lens caps and reverse the lens hoods and I'm ready for shooting, this way the lens change isn't slower. The only situation that lens hood is not necessary for me is studio work or macro as yours.
I'm shooting a lot old vintage lenses which has no (multi) or bad coatings and old cameras. So...for me is the best option. But there are also situations where you need all the light and there for i wouldn't them. And if the lens has a good coating, i'll not use them. Every lens has his character and speciality.
I have the same approach. I use a lens hood with small lenses, because it makes no difference. With big lenses I use a lens hood if I must (rain, strong light).
Yep, main reason I use a lens hood... Protecting the lens.
As long as the hood does not cause other limitations to you, then it is fine.
Same here, dropped camera once and luckily it fell on lenshood
So I can't call you Robin Hood anymore...? 😁
Call me Batman.
Just add an o. Robi no hood!
Yes, it is really necessary.
Just removed all my lens hoods and (play a magic chime in your head) my gear feels so much lighter and more compact! I am finally able to carry a Sony 70-350, Sigma 56 1.4, Sigma 18-50 2.8, Sony 11 1.8, and a a6400 in a 6l PD sling bag! Thank you for the inspiration!
One word to describe your set of choices: coherence. Everything falls into place, and the more you talk about them, the more logical they strike me. The most revealing point is how you negotiate with difficulties arising from your set of choices, e.g. maintaining bokeh in a smaller (e.g. M43) format. Bravo!
Thanks for the kind words! Though I think this comment belongs somewhere, I don't remember mentioning anything about bokeh in this video.
@@robinwong Your fifth point, i.e. the need to use ND filters to keep the aperture wide, etc., or specifically circa 8:20. ;-)
@@jeromechiu I forgot about that, heh!
@@robinwong Not just bokeh but wonderful, smooth and buttery bokeh!🤣👍
i definitely agree with the purpose of lens hood protection & to minimize lens flare
if we cherish both our hardware
and our photo qualitity
lens hoods are essential.
For me, I use them mainly so I don't have to use lens caps. I buy the metal screw-on lens hoods that also have filter ring threads on the end, so I can still attach filters without removing the lens hood. On some lenses, I buy the shorter lens hoods or rubber collapsible hoods to save space. Flare and lack of contrast is a constant problem for me in my photo walks when shooting near golden hour, or when using the flash near the lens for macro shots.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Rob. I don't get flare problems often and in the cases that I do, they are rarely any issue to the image. Also, I use longer lenses most of the time (I should probably have said this in the video), wide angle lenses have more issues with flare.
I have the same reason as Rob. I use lens hood to protect the lens because I don't use lens caps. Like you mentioned in the end of the video it's also for protecting lenses from water... and boy we have it a lot here in Finland this time of the year. Tiny droplet on the lens and minor flare will have really major problems when shooting in the urban wilderness of Finland. Next we should see Matti's response to this video right? :)
same here.. lens hood is just thr to protect the front glass once i discovered the joy and convenience of going "cap-less".. i am more inclined and motivated to take out my cam and shoot more pic without the cap on..
Hi! Can I ask you a question? Is it possible to use a lens hood at the same time than a filter? Or do they use the same thread and you need a special adapter? Thank you!!
@@brianlarrazabal Usually a screw-in filter has the same thread on the front side so you can put another filter on it - or a lens hood. I think lens hoods that screw into the filter thread might often also have that but it's more difficult to get to the thread to put a filter in there. The same may be true with a clip-on lens hood. It can get in the way of your fingers and if you are going to use a square filter system like the COKIN ones then you basically can't use a hood with those.
Finally! Thanks for the encouragement and inspiration Robin! I subscribed a few videos ago, so to speak. Finally, somebody (and not just somebody dare I say, but the very Robin Wong himself) who doesn’t like lens hoods, just like me. I can live without lens hoods perfectly well, because I cannot live without polarising filters.
Your videos are to the point, very informative, and always a pleasure to watch! Keep it up; with love from The Netherlands. 🇳🇱❤️🇲🇾
Great video, Robin, as always. I think I have to make a video on why I use lens hood😀
Go make it!!!!
@Paul Rodden I sort of want to see what Matti has to say. I believe this will turn out rather interesting
I like how you two go back and forth about the same subject. Go for it.
Love these head to head challenges!
I understand your approach. I use a lenshood on all my lenses being a plane spotter. Not much of a changing scenario nor hurry spending hours alongside the same runway. Also my EOS with Sigma 150-600 rests well on the hood while checking the app for the next aircraft. Big advantage to use a hood during rain and snowfall. Greetings from Frankfurt, Germany
Yeah if you don't need to change lenses and you don't need to keep everything smaller in the bag, the hood makes sense.
I got into photography back in the 80's, and at that time, using a lens hood was highly recommended to guard against flare. I got so much in the habit of using them, that I've never really used a lens without a hood. All of the lenses I've owned were able to store the hood on the lens in reverse position, and therefore no additional space in the bag was needed. The main conflict I've run into was when using a square filter system, which prevents the use of the standard lens hood, although the system I purchased had it's own hood. A good strap will do a better job protecting the camera and lens from drops, so I've never felt a need to use a hood for this purpose. Having said all that, I'm happy to hear that modern lenses are better protected against flare and the hood isn't as important as it used to be.
It hasn’t stopped raining in the UK for weeks, so I use a lens hood on most of my lenses....I like to use them most of the time as I keep lenses in my jacket pocket rather than carry a bag, the hoods help protect the front elements...🌈😎🇬🇧
Yeap that is the only time I use the hood, during rain.
It is good to hear your arguments against lens hoods, because most reports out there are the opposite. My Panasonic 42.5mm F1.7 suffers much from flare, and since it comes with a reversible lens hood that stores compactly on the lens, I use it customarily. Even using my hand as a lens cap is not satisfactory for this lens, which BTW, is excellent in all other aspects. Your thoughts on the Olympus 60mm F2.8 macro lens are much appreciated. Like you I sometimes shoot insects, and it will definitely help me if I remove the lens hood on my next insect shoot. Finally, speed of changing lenses is not such an issue for me, since I am not a professional, and this is very personal, but I see where you get from. Anyway, thanks for the thoughtful video!
No worries, if you find the hood working for you, keeping using them! Yes, I hope I made it clear the reasons were quite personal and may not be applicable for every one. I just hate it when people look at me like an alien with three heads when I don't use a lens hood!
I have always use hoods.. Along with the reasons listed, rain, flare and protection, the main reason I use them is because it makes the lens look sooooo cool !! LOL..
Cool, keep using them if the hoods work for you.
I agree, I rarely ever use lens hoods. They get in the way more than anything else
Very good points Robin--I agree with you. Lens hoods do slow me down. They're fiddly and they hog up a lot of space in my bag (especially the huge hood on the 40-150 f/2.8 PRO). Yet I keep them on out of habit. Since I don't use protective filters, I rely on them as "protectors" in case I bump or drop my lenses. My lenses do feel a bit naked when I take the hood off. I'll have to try to break this habit gradually.
If I hadn't seen the contrast improvement a lens hood makes on an image taken with a standard DSLR kit 50-200mm, or a 80-200mm back in the film days, I would not use them either. Shooting for the 1st time with my new M.Zuiko Premium 30mm f/3.5, I must say that the ZERO coating is exceptional against flares, but I still use a small metal hood which I find extremely useful. Unlike filters, I cannot think of a situation that a hood would deteriorate image quality.
indeed, Olympus does a fantastic job with their coatings on the lenses.
Some lens hood can cause vignette.
While I do use a lens hood, I can understand the sentiment of not needing one. There is another TH-cam photography channel that did an experiment in which they intentionally mishandled the front lens element. It wasn’t until they used a crab claw found on a beach, that they finally inflicted superficial damage. And even at that, it was just a small scratch. They then took test shots and found it caused no harm to the image quality once they were viewing it in Lightroom. Goes to show how resilient the lens glass can be. So preach on, Robin! 👍
Indeed, the lenses are tough! The glass used to make up the optics are not cheap ones, people forget that.
Very enjoyable, as always. Modern multi-coated lenses don’t need protection from sunlight entering that is outside the frame. The internal black coatings inside the modern camera do a great job stopping internal reflections as well. I shoot older film cameras and lenses and the use of a lens hood is important when shooting into the light. The lens coatings are not as effective at suppressing flare and the camera internal black surfaces are quite reflective. Smaller rangefinder cameras need a lot of handling to focus while viewfinding, and stray fingers get onto the lens very easily without a hood. I also use Uv filters with old lenses, they actually often need them, and the older soft lens coatings suck oil from your fingertips if you give them the chance, and won’t clean up so easily.
You’re totally correct, newbies will not be told, but will learn for themselves.
(1) Flare control, (2) rain protection, and (3) physical-damage protection -- in fact, you mentioned all the reasons why I am and always have been using lens hoods in my photography. I readily agree that lens coatings and designs have become so good at reducing flare that this is no longer much of an issue, but I do a lot of backlit and sidelit shooting, and there a lens hood can really make a discernable difference. On occasion, I have left hoods off or have not fully extended them, when speed was an issue, or in close-to-the-lens macro work. However, I want this to be my decision as a photographer, not the lens manufacturer's when they decide they can squeeze a ridiculously-high amount of money out of me for a hood that has to be bought extra.
If you find that the hood works for you then use it, no worries.
One word: JJC.😅😂🤣 Saves you $$$.
8:20 - the beautiful background blur - this is why i like your videos so much. You are enthusiastic, and it is real fun to watch you. and how you express your emotions. Nobody else can top your way of saying "babye" at the end or "let's do this" in the beginning. This is unique ;-)
Well Robin, i suffered myself from a broken lens hood when i stumbled down a step while searching for a picturesque scene (my wife would say, this happens all the time ;-). Don't know what would have happened if i didn't mount it but i am not eager to experience. So i am happy with my lens hood mounted and i am not even suffering by additional load as a lens hood is not much weight and almost no volume when you mount it reverse. It even protects the lens in my bag.
Another point is: with lens hood mounted the lens appears to be bigger, more impressive that makes me appear a more important photographer (just kidding - in fact i feel embarrassed when carrying big gear ;-)
Yes. The coolest pictures of cameras and lenses in the old Olympus brochures of the 80s were the ones with lens hoodd. Motordrive and lens hoods were essential to look like a pro.🤣
Yes they are they protect the front element and help to avoid flares
same, protect front element from bumping into stuff, sometimes from rain drops. On tele the hood is must. Looks so professional and dope. But I do like sun flares, they give a character to the image.
I want to keep the lens smaller, so I can be stealthy and agile. Hood works against my shooting approach. But if it works for you, then go and use it!
I was on the fence about lens hoods until on a hike my Olympus slipped off my shoulder and hit a rock lens first. After a moment of shocked silence I picked it up to discover the lens hood on the 12-100 pro had taken the impact and cracked but all else was undamaged. A little super glue on the hood and all is good to go. Lesson learned!
No worries, if you feel safer with hood, then use it.
Seems like it's always hot and humid where you are? I'm guessing it's Malaysia some place?
As for the lens hood thing, Murphy's law states that the first time I leave home without it I'll bump my front element
cheers 👍👍
So I am not a pro, and when I go out to photograph, I usually pick one lens that I will leave on the entire day. A lens hood will protect the lens, so I do use them about half of the time, depending on what lens I use on that particular day. Being slowed down is not only a non-issue for me, it is a blessing. Jan.
I use a lot of vintage lenses. One of my favourites is a 90mm Leitz Elmar from 1938 which has no coating. These lenses (& later single coated optics) are capable of giving exquisite & distinct results. As I tend to shoot into the light more often than not I find a lens hood is an absolute necessity.
BTW, love your macro compositions! ;-)
Thanks for the kind words! Yes, I sometimes do want more flare in my images to add character, I should look into vintage lenses for those special effects. Olympus lenses are too resistant to flare!
I use it 99% of the time. Mostly to protect the front element and for some contrast/ flare control etc... I have a bait of bumping my camera into walls, trees, etc and lenshood has been a boon for me so far. Only when I have to use the PL or ND filter I take it off.
"Some like it hot while some prefer it cold." For whatever decision that we take, we should base on good reasons without looking down at others. Its okay to be difference as long as we know what we are doing. We should be more open minded so that we can learn from others too. Great explanation 👍🏻
Exactly, keeping an open mind is important. Tell that to those who look at me like an alien with 9 eye when they see me not using hood on my lens.
Thanks Robin. After 2yrs of shooting professionally I find myself at this crossroads. I cannot help feel that lens hoods are from a bygone era where coating and modern technology for managing flare and ghosting isn't up to the challenge.
I, like you, do event work. I have bought into the Manfrotto Xume magnetic filter system and really enjoy the quick change of filters depending on the shot. Maybe Pro Mist, CPL or ND for additional shutter/aperture control, it makes it easy, but factoring in the hood is a PIA!
I think I too will abandon the hood, except for those instances like rain that seem logical to keep one around.
Thanks again.
Lens flare and the accompanying contrast reductions are pretty peculiar in that, even with modern coatings, they sometimes show themselves at some very inconvenient times. Most times I don’t have problems, but just that one backlit portrait or a very specific angle could be enough to get flaring.
Great topic. Never questioned this accessory since getting back into the hobby. Loved how comprehensive this video was. Well done!
Like others have mentioned, my hoods for protection, since I loose the cap within minutes lol. Also the hood has saved me more than a couple times when I've dropped a lens. Two of my hoods are cracked from taking the fall but the lens keeps on going :-)
If you find that the hood works for you, then go ahead!
All my lens hoods revers & cover the lens barrel. I do get your comments about M zuko lens re flare & ghosting etc.. For outdoor photography in an unstable environment lens hoods are a layer of protection that's saved my lens once or twice. For macro totally agree the 60mm & 90mm dont need more out the front.
Thanks for this Robin. I looked back on 3+ years of Olympus OM-D photography and it's true - it really is hard to get flare even when shooting direct into the sun, even the humble and cheap 8mm pancake fisheye is pretty good in that respect. I do wonder about the filters I always fit to protect the front element - they might not be up to Oly standards but mostly they are OK too. Like you I rarely pack the lens hoods I have due to limited space in my small kit bag. I did buy a hood for my 60mm f2.8 macro but not the 30mm - you're right, they get in the way when up close. keep the helps and advice coming.
Ever had a £450 lens get scratched ? My lens hood and clear filter are staying ON my friend.
I agree...
Robin, I agree with your comments regarding the flare resistance of the Oly pro lenses. Most recently I covered a Christmas carols event and took photos where stage lighting was shining directly into the lens (12-40mm 2.8 Pro). Clear beautiful photos of the performers and not one indicator of flare or loss of contrast.
I know right? These lenses are incredible!
I do a lot of landscape shooting in Oregon. Between the drizzle, fog, mist from waterfalls and winds, I usually use a hood. We also have sandy areas with dust in the air, and in some areas I like to shoot that fine grit in the air is pumice dust from volcano calderas. I wont even lens swap if I am dealing with pumice in the air.
We obviously shoot in very different scenarios. If the hood works for you, continue to use it.
I also don't change lenses when there's dust or other stuff in the air
I always tend to use a lenshoods for one simple reason: I'm clumsy and my dirty fingers always seems to find their way to the front glass element so that, by the time I get aware of the problem I might have taken several pictures... v__v
Your videos are always good! For most of my lenses I don't even have any hood. It varies whether I use one or not. However I have one lens which I have always used with lens hood: Samyang 300mm F6.3 Reflex. It's closest focus distance is about 90cm. I won't scare insects away because of lens hood. In camera bag the hood won't take much space because it can be turned around. Taking a photo with that lens is slow anyway. I always need some time to adjust it's focus precisely. Maybe a lens hood also gives somewhat better contrast to the images with reflex lenses. And with lens hood I won't so easily touch the front element with my fingers accidently or smudge it in other ways.
I totally understand why you don't use lens hoods and have the same issues with them that you do. However I shoot mostly landscapes and find that a lens hood does help in certain situations. I've recently started using collapsible rubber screw in hoods. They solved the filter issues and mostly the storage issues for me and are relatively inexpensive. Really enjoy your videos.
I totally agree with you Robin. One reason that i can add is to have ad Rubber lens hood that can flex ... just in case i have to photograph thru a window ...or a an object placed in a glass display i.e. in a museum.. in low light... avoiding the using a polerising filter.
Thanks for sharing. I hadn't considered not using the hoods. I will try some shots without, always willing to try something different.
No worries, glad I can inspire alternative approaches
I do use lens hoods most of the time, especially when I have filters attached - in this case it is a metal hood screwed onto the filter, and then I can still easily rotate a polarizer if I need to. I'm accustomed to old lenses (I'm not talking Olympus MFT here), and there flare was (and even with some newer lenses is) an issue. And with the small Olympus primes I can have the hood on the lens all the time, because it is still comparatively small and fits into my (small) bags. But I get your point, and I don't care if other photographers don't use it. That said, I should do some tests myself to find out which of my lenses are actually prone to flare!
Thanks for sharing your opinion! I am ok with or without hood, it just irks me that so many times other people looked at me like some kind of alien when I don't use lens hood!
I use lens hood on smaller focal length lenses because they are small and for lens hood reasons. I reverse fit the hoods to keep the size down in the bag. On big lens focal length nine times out of ten I do not use, but again I still reverse fit just in case! It suits my style of photography. I use zoom lenses to avoid changing lenses. There ya go my view!
No worries, if it works for you then use the hood.I use zoom lenses too but for my job I still need to change lenses, sometimes more than 10 times in 30 minutes. Switching most frequently between 12-40mm and 40-150mm PRO, if I keep attaching and removing the hood, I have too many extra steps, it slows me down considerably.
Thanks Robin, always nice to watch your videos.
Glad you like the video.
Lenses don’t come cheap and so I use lens hoods primarily for protection incase I drop my camera or hit an object with my lens while carrying gear over my shoulders.
Good reason, keep using it if you think it helps.
If you're shooting directly or almost directly into the sun the lens hood won't help anyway. If the hood is small & light (like on the lumix 25mm f1.7) I just leave it on for protection otherwise I don't think about it.
It helps to prevent stray lights coming from an angle. Nonetheless, I don't need them and I don't get flare a lot in my shots. In the few that I do I don't mind.
One more reason to use a lens hood: a nice silver metal one looks very retro cool on a classic style camera (omd, pen-f) with e.g. a silver 17mm f/1.8 lens.
While on the subject of fashion conscious photography: what's more classy than an old Leica M rangefinder with a rectangular hood?
😏
I'd rather remain small and agile, instead of adding bulk just to look nice!
As I come from the "film camera (Olympus) I am used to use lens hoods all the time. But I understand that the way light gets into the camera is different in the old fashioned film cameras than the newer OMD cameras and M43 lenses. The angle of light in the older film camera lenses has been much wider than in the new OMD or digital lenses. So I think it's worthy to try without the lenshood ..
Thanks a lot Robin for this tutorial again!
Jan
I use lens hoods almost all the time. Only time I do not have it on is when using a variable ND filter. It does not slow me down, it is always on and no problem with changing lenses.
I change lens more than 10 times in a span of 30 minutes shooting an event or wedding, so removing and attaching lens hoods between lenses can be quite troublesome and time consuming. Removing that step keeps me agile and more efficient.
Some people say leave the hood on, then the bag must be gigantic! I use 40-150mm PRO, 12-40mm PRO, 25mm PRO, imagine if the hoods are attached on thee lenses, and stored in the bag, I don't think I can even zip the bag. I know the 40-150mm has quick mechanism but it is still one extra step to do before shooting a photo.
@@robinwong I do have the lens hoods on all the time. I never use the lens cap, except when the lens is stored away in my cabinet. The lens hood protects the front element in my bag. With the 40-150mm f2.8 I just slide it "on" when grabbing it from my bag. On the other hand, I do not change lenses that often. If I know that I need to use quickly to different lenses I just have two camera bodies ready for action. I have two to three bodies anyways, just in case something goes wrong with one of the cameras.
Actually, another time I do not use the lens hood is when using a tripod in windy conditions. The lens hood might catch the windy and cause unwanted blurriness to the photo.
Lens hood makes sense when using long zoom/prime lenses so you don't bang them. But for daily/street photography only a UV filter should give enough protection.
Thank You Robin, this makes true sense!
Everyone is entitled to their own point of view. What works for one person may not work for another. And workstyle and environment affects this.
Some additional points.
Pros for hoods
- It helps to keep fingers away from the front of the lens.
- - Small children tend to have dirty/greasy hands, and that can get on the front element or filter when they grab at the lens.
- - At the high school that I advise at, I was cleaning fingerprints and finger grease off the filter EVERY WEEK. Students do NOT handle the equipment as carefully as we do.
- When I shoot in the rain, with a camera rain cover, it gives me a place to attach the cover to the lens. I tighten the velcro strap around the hood.
Cons against hoods
- On a wide range zoom like a 12-40, or worse the 12-100, the hood has to be designed for the widest focal length, 12mm. This makes it less useful at 40mm and practically useless 100mm, where you want a LONGER hood.
Other
- Some of the Olympus hoods are excessively complex. WHY do you need the complex hood locks, as on the 12-40 and 12-100. KISS. A simple detent lock, is just as effective, cheaper, and will NOT break. It is probably the marketing dept that wanted the complex hoods for the expensive pro lenses. Another dumb form over function decision.
- When I use all of my m43 lenses, I LEAVE the hood on, and the lens gets put into my belt pouch with the hood ON the lens. Yes, a lens with a long hood attached, does take up more space in the pouch, but I also don't have to bother reversing the hood to put it in the pouch or when I pull it out of the pouch.
Back in my film days, that is how I used the hoods. In fact I think I had only one reversible hood, all the others were screw on.
There is another reason we like lens hoods. We think size matters. With the 150 to 400 Pro, the hood adds another 4 inches to the length of the “lens.“ It’s simply more impressive to passersby.
Reason #4: A lens hood LOOKS COOL! lol Superficial I know, but to me a lens hood looks cool on a lens. However, the main reason I have a lens hood is it HAS protected my lenses from dings and scratches. Rock on Robin!!!! Love your vids.
Thanks, but I think Olympus lenses look sexier without hoods.
Hi Robin, I used the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 and 14mm f2.5 on my Olympus m43 cameras frequently and with retractable rubber lens hoods on them which eliminates most of the irritants that you talked about.
I tried those before, didn't quite like how they look and feel though
Thanks Robin, solid philosophy of travel light and be flexible. I'm going to leave the hood at home now, it's often bugged (haha) me.
Landscape and wildlife photographers sweating seeing this video
Ha! I went to the beach yesterday to film some retro footage for a promo video on the em 5ii. I had to put a $20 UV filter on the KIT LENS to get the flaring I wanted ;-)
Tx Robin, and I hope it's not too hot over there!
Sometimes it is frustrating that Olympus lenses have no flare, I do want flare too!
@@robinwong Use cheap filters in front of them! I think $20 is even too expensive, I bought some (small) UV filters for less then €5 (around $5), and it look as if they don't have any coating, so they should flare "like hell". (To be clear: I bought them to remove the glass itself and to be used as pinhole holders - I wouldn't normally use them to "protect" my lenses. ;-))
@@c.augustin Living in rural Western Australia, $20 is worth about $5 😉
@@rodmehta5356 Sorry, didn't think about that (sounds as if your estimation of "your" dollar is similar to Canadians ;-)) … so we are basically talking about similar stuff. I should definitely try those cheap filters to intentionally create flare … but having lots of old manual focus lenses lying around, I guess I don't need additional filters for that … ;-)
I agree about it kind of being in the way when doing most (but not all) macro photography, but other that that the lens hood is always on when I take pictures. (Unless I forget it or similar, which is very difficult with my 40-150mm lens.)
Not saying it's the best choice for everyone and every situation (it obviously isn't since you prefer to not use it most of the time), but that's what I prefer anyway.
Not a problem, we all do what we believe is right and fits our needs.
Hi Robin I tend to use a lens hood mainly to protect the lens from knocks. I had also heard it can Improve contrast.
Regards
For older lenses in harsh lighting yes, it can help reduce flare and ghosting
Didn't use a lens hood for over a ten year stretch. Used a UV/haze filter to protect the front element, which is something professionals are apparently vehemently against. As a DoD photographer, it wasn't my gear that I signed for (read: financially liable for it) so I used a filter.
With my personal gear, I did the same (filter), and used a hood when shooting without, which allowed for walking around without a lens cap (another thing professionals apparently never use).
Would have to say that "preventing lens flare" is probably the last reason I have for using a hood, unless shooting at longer focal lengths, covering sports or action events outdoors in bright sunlight. With the current generation of lenses, the coatings and overall optics have evolved to the degree that they aren't necessary in most instances, but careful arrangement of a small lens selection in a smaller 3 lens bag still allows for keeping the hoods on their respective lenses.
Exactly, the lens coating has improved so much they are effectively resistant toward flare and other related issues.
Hey Robin... Here are TWO ADDITIONAL REASONS FOR THE USE OF A LENS HOOD:
1. ASSISTS FILTER ADJUSTMENT: I use a screw-on Roolad 46mm Vented Lens Hood attached to my circular polarizer filter... My reasoning is that it facilitates the ease in which I can adjust the filter whilst keeping my fingers away from the front of the lens...
2. COSMETIC: On my Pana-Leica 15mm lens I use the lens hood for that vintage "Leica" look - I think it looks awesome on my camera especially when I am doing street photography... And so another reason for a lens hood is the cosmetic effect...
I agree with you in that I don't think a lens hood is "essential" and just like you with the Olympus lenses - I too have found that lens flare is quite minimal with the Panasonic lenses as well...
Cosmetic is not a good reason. Attaching lens hood does not make the lens look nicer. I think it makes it look uglier. But of course, beauty is different for everyone.
Great channel Robin! I think a collapsible rubber lens hood is a middle ground for those that want a compromise between protection and limitations.
Greetings from Spain.
Thanks. I think collapsible rubber hood is useless. If you are using the hood as protection against accidental knocks and fall the rubber is like having no protection at all.
Yes i like using mine but i'd didn't know about all the work that has gone into making the lenes so thanks Robin & who knows maybe one day i won't use it ever. As for seeing others use one it's up to them i don't mind.
Amen on that. Old metal screw in lens hoods are ok cuz they look cool but that is it.
the metal screw on types take even more time to attach!
I do generally use the lens hood outdoors so I always bring it with me. I sometime will thread the lens hoods through the strap on my camera bag (unclip my strap and string them through) so the look like little bangles... but don't take up space.
I'm confused when people complain about space of lens hood. Do they not know you can mount them backwards so they do not extend the footprint of the lens?
Mount backwards when storing, mount forward when in use.
Fully agree. More versatile, artistic and no brainer when magnetic 82mm Kase filters on all of my lenses…
Solid points--especially for Olympus lenses--a feature I did not know. So, I learned something---good way to start the day. Also, I appreciate your sharing what lenses you rely on. Helpful.
No worries, glad you found the sharing useful!
Great video. My 60/2.8 lens hood is in the lens box. I don’t even remember if I had to buy that one separately, but I never use it for the reason you mentioned.
I do use lens hoods sometimes, mainly for protection and sometimes for weather; reasons you’ve mentioned. I don’t mind using my hand to shield the lens when I want to avoid a strong light source like the sun, and can see how it impacts the exposure in real time with the viewfinder (although agreed that modern Olympus lenses are nicely flare resistant). I dislike lens hoods when I want to switch lenses quickly and I don’t use them with circular polarizers.
Certainly the worst thing about them is how much bigger they make lenses. All the more so on larger lenses like a full frame 70-200/2.8.
I frequently use a polarizing filter and must first remove the hood to turn the filter element and then replace the hood, which takes too much time.
Interesting video. My Nikon lenses are 10 years old & I've used lens hoods as standard to get better contrast in my photos. I had no idea this may no longer be necessary if/when I make my intended switch to EM5iii.
Just do a quick test with and without the hood, trust me you won't see a difference
Lens hood are good for protecting the lens, but its awful when you try to slap on a filter, suddenly your lens hood is useless LOL
I am an amateur photographer at birthday partys and orchestra workshops, and it just looks more professional when i am using a lens hood :)
I use lens hoods when shooting landscapes and other scenery. I have had flair ruin shots I thought were good and it was very hard to get rid of. I also use some Panasonic lens with come with lens hoods. Indoors or any place I might use flash or fill flash, I do not use lens hoods because they cast a bigger shadow which usually does not make a difference, but the few times it does, you do not know until after the photo. I do not always have an off camera flash with me. I stack my lens hoods under my shortest lens so they do not take up much space. In the middle of them is usually my spare batteries. All of them are then put in a bag so I have them if I need them. I do not care what other people do. If I got upset at them for shooting the way I do, it may close a door to learning from them.
Those are small lenses you talked about. When it comes to large lenses, say Olympus 40-150mm PRO, there is no way to minimize storage space for it.
Until Covid-19, most of my shooting was in cities - architecture or street shots - so I use the hood for protection from damage and I don't tend to change lenses very often. With social distancing maybe I don't need the hoods any more - but I feel safer using a hood as it can also act to protect from damage if I drop the camera. I don't mind if other photographers use lens hoods or not, it's up to them.
Lens hoods to protect from infection! Hoods are now compulsory! And at least three UV filters on every lens to stop those droplets and particles infecting the lens.🤣 I'm surprosed noone has mentioned that.
I hope you are back to city photography as of 2022.👍
I have lens hoods in my bag, but not even sure which one goes with which lens. If I see flare, I put my hand out to shade the front of the lens, but sunshine in Cologne is a rare thing. If it is raining, I shoot from under some cover. The advantage of city shooting.
Likewise, glad I am not alone in this.
4. Lenshood give more contrast on photos.
BUT I DO NOT USE LENSHOOD because I gain place in my bag. I use only uv filter to protect.
You can use your hand put a bit in the front of the lens if the sun is there
Nah, flare is nice and II like them. No need to prevent that.
@ I don't need lenshood. I have my hand and uv filters for life!
Nice photos and nice philosophy on how you manage your gear. I do Pentax which also has a long history of high quality lens coatings and flair control. I see Olympus is no slouch in this area.
Not just Olympus, most modern lenses have good coating that resist flare.
I use lens hood only for protection. I don't like the bulkiness, but I think it has less side effects than using UV filters for protection of the front element. I tried UV filters at first and got weird flares in some photos. This doesn't happen with hoods.
I usually shoot busy events with two bodies and the cameras get hit a lot by people around me. So the hoods give me a little peace of mind.
But other than that, I totally agree you don't need lens hoods. I wish lenses were impossible to scratch and were grease repelant so we wouldn't even need lens caps, hehe.
Filters generally can degrade image quality, every piece of glass in front of the lens cuts some light that goes into it.
Yes, its absolute must !!
I use vintage hood because looks cool in my rollei 35 😂
While using a rangefinder you are not getting a true representation of the image while using the viewfinder. It is possible to get flair/glare that is not noticed while shooting that could show up later on in development (for film). I think for film rangefinders lens hoods are a good idea.
Keep the videos coming Robin! I do prefer the design of the 60mm lens hood- all lens hoods should be designed like that !
I use my camera most of the time on hiking tours and have it also hanging on a strap outside the backpack in front of my chest. The Lens Hood is used to protect against branches and the like, as well as from my fingerprints, as well as as sun and rain protection of the lens.
I use them because my clients don't think I'm a professional photographer when i show up without it and don't want me to do the job! Now I know its good for light rain I will now use it for my cyberpunk photography
Yep. I hate lens hoods. I use my hand to block sunlight if I need to.
Likewise!
The moral of the story is to have an awesome camera and lens...BTW, love how sharp your images are!
Interesting point of view Robin, one against my thinking. But I accept your point of view. The main reason I use hoods is for the protection against knocks and finger prints. I seldom use lens caps preferring the speed of use this way than to use no hood but lens caps. I'm willing to give it a go and good to hear a different point of view. keep up the good work, it is appreciated.
Good reasons, and there is no right and wrong, if it works for you, use it!
Now if I owned a FenF I think I would get one of those vented hoods just for the looks :)
I ended up getting JJC hood for my 12-40 pro as it has a door to use the polariser, but hardly ever use it as it is inconvenient to use.
On another note could you do a macro tutorial one day. I notice you do not get much shine on your subjects so I would like to see your rig especially the diffuser setup you use
I already did a macro photography video, do hit the search on this channel, or scroll back to older videos.
Yes I do use lens hoods but find them a pain if they are the bayonet type that comes with the lens, I do prefer the screw type that screw in the filter, but as you imply, each to their own. What I hate most are they way some people carry hoods inverted on their lenses which obstruct the lens focus/telephoto rings and do not understand why they insist on doing this. Thanks for your video and sharing, regards
the screw on type is worse for me, because they take more time to attach and remove.
@@robinwong agree if you change a lot of filters but I mainly use an adjustable ND filter or polariser and screw the lens to it making it easy to adjust. Other filters can be emulated in post.
I'm very pro for lens hood. If I'm out with other photographers that don't use a lens hood I usually put it for them. :)
The truth is that lens hoods on different lenses have saved me countless times, dropping lenses, camera and lens, hitting different stuff with the camera on the shoulder, hitting branches etc.
I don't see a reason not to use it as it helps in every situation. I carry my gear in a bag with hoods reversed and additional space used is very little, before shooting I take the body out, remove front lens caps and reverse the lens hoods and I'm ready for shooting, this way the lens change isn't slower.
The only situation that lens hood is not necessary for me is studio work or macro as yours.
I'm shooting a lot old vintage lenses which has no (multi) or bad coatings and old cameras. So...for me is the best option. But there are also situations where you need all the light and there for i wouldn't them. And if the lens has a good coating, i'll not use them. Every lens has his character and speciality.
Great video, Robin. Thank you, it was very helpful. I will follow in your footsteps!
I have the same approach. I use a lens hood with small lenses, because it makes no difference. With big lenses I use a lens hood if I must (rain, strong light).
I only use a lens hood very rarely...mainly if I think there may be rain.
Likewise