One may really have cause for wonder. At a camera show here today in
Baltimore I purchased two lens hoods. These hoods were both Olympus
rubber clamp-on hoods labeled for the 35-70mm lens and have the same
clamp diameter. What gave me pause was that the first was the "normal"
conical design and about 1" tall. The other is a straight cylinder and
about 1 7/8" tall. It's as if they made one hood for the 35mm end of
the range and another for the 70mm end.
Gary! wake up! This sounds like one for you.
<><><><><><><><><><><><>
>John A. Prosper wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2 Oct 1998, lion1 wrote:
>
> |<<One wonders whether Olympus takes the hood thing seriously if they label
> |the same hood for an 85 or 40. If it does not vignette the 40 it certainly
> |does not provide much protection for the 85.>>
> |
> |<Winsor>>
> |
> |>Winsor Crosby>
> |<Long Beach, California>
> |<mailto:wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
> |
> |Exactly my point in asking the question.
> |There is obviously a proper limit for shading the lens with a hood, or there
> |would not be so many hoods on the market.
> |I always wondered if the tulip shaped hoods were really any good at the
> |corners. This is usually where the light flares from.
> |Of course a hood ( or a shade as I prefer) Is a valuable tool, but why the
> |emphasize
> |on the 85mm hood as opposed to the 100mm hood etc...?
> |By the way ...I use the finger in the corner method to test a shade.
>
> The best (as in most flexible) lens hoods are the compendium style
> hoods with bellows which are rectangular (2 x 3 aspect ratio) and
> adjustable. Although the circular hoods have their uses, it has
> always struck me as curious why the photo industry never made
> rectangular hoods in great quantities.
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|