The MH-774 is a screw-on metal lens hood...At least the one for my 80-200
(OM mount) was. There were no bayonet lugs on the front of that lens.
Later AF 80-200s use the bayonet mount, but did the MF models ever get there
before they were discontinued? (Early AF models were also screw-thread for
the shades and the MH-774 was at one time shared by both the AF 80-200 and
100-300.)
As for plastic vs. metal...Up to the point of physical failure, plastic
hoods are probably going to maintain their shape (fewer dings and dents),
not get scratched, or get loose paint on the inside. In most cases I'd
prefer that the hood fail first...Failure of the hood probably means that a
lot of the energy will get absorbed by that hood failure. If I get a really
strong metal hood it will certainly transfer a lot of the energy to the lens
body. This is the argument for energy absorbing bumpers and crumple zones
on automobiles.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of dreammoose
> Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2002 11:44 PM
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: AW: [OM] Lenshood #s for Tokina AT-X 90mm & 28-85mm lenses?
>
>
> Wow! That's a pretty outrageous price for a somewhat flimsy seeming
> plastic hood. The way is clips on to a little groove on the outside of
> the lens is clever and it's nice and light. Maybe it's tougher than it
> looks and feels, but I'm not going to test that, at least not
> intentionally.
> The hood on the Tamron equivalent lens is a solid, heavy metal thing
> with a solid bayonet mount that could stand some serious abuse.
> Looks like I got a better deal on mine than I realized since it came
> with the hood.
< 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 >
|