View Full Version : ? re. hood for canon 50/1.2
back alley
05-04-2006, 15:05
i've been using a series 7 hood (with an adapter series 7 > 55 mm) with good results except that occasionally it vignettes.
why or how that happens i do not know.
i just bought & received a wide angle hood in 55 mm and it is waaaay too wide and blocks almost half of the finder.
so, unless i buy a dremal tool and cut out a large vent, this hood is no good to me.
i doubt that i will be getting the canon hood for this lens anytime soon - just way too much money.
my question to those with this lens...what are you using for a hood?
joe
Gabriel M.A.
05-04-2006, 15:12
None, I'm afraid. They did warn me that the hood would be just about as much as the lens :o
I don't shoot it outside, though, so that's been my only solution so far...
Mackinaw
05-04-2006, 16:17
While I have an official Canon 50/1.2 hood that I picked up years back on eBay, I never use it. I shoot this lens (my favorite 50mm) in all type of conditions, inside and outside, and have never had any problems with flare (though I purposely don't shoot with the lens pointed toward the sun).
I should put the hood up for sale, but the collector in me won't let me.
Jim Bielecki
Just a generic over the counter $7 55mm metal hood.
I use the official hood, but I have two of them that I acquired in an eBay package deal with a Canon VT and 4 lenses. One hood has seen a lot of use, and the other was brand new in the original case. The funny thing was that neither hood was mentioned in the auction, but was included in the package that I received. I also have a hideously ugly black and aluminum 55mm hood made by Ednalite, but don't use it because it vignettes when the lens is wide open.
my question to those with this lens...what are you using for a hood?
joe
Joe
I use the 'heavystar' - see 55mm 'normal' hood (http://snipurl.com/q1q9) - nice quality, not too big on the outside diameter and cheap but of course it's a screw in, so with it in situ you're knackered for filters, lenscaps, etc :-(
The wide angle (http://snipurl.com/q1qw) equivalent - approx same diameter but shorter has been used here successfully too.
But it's the hood or a filter, depending on conditions .....
cheers
back alley
05-04-2006, 16:43
my series 7 hood needs that adapter so maybe that's why it vignettes at times.
it's about 2 and a 1/4 inches wide.
the wide 55mm hood is nearly 3 and 3/4 inches wide.
maybe i'll look locally on the weekend and if unsuccessful, i'll order a heavystar hood.
filters be damned i guess!
thanks guys!
joe
The original hood looks very impressive with the 50/1.2 lens.
back alley
05-04-2006, 16:59
yes, it does.
but i think i can feed my dog for at least a year for the same money;)
joe
yes, it does.
but i think i can feed my dog for at least a year for the same money;)
joe
I am there too, but I can't justify it. It was hard for me to buy my IROOA and I think I got a great deal on that for $70 or whatever I paid.
In my case, the 1.2 lens hood came with a VI-L and a 28mm/2.8, a 50mm/2.8, and a 50mm/1.2, along with a 135mm/3.5. I sold the 28mm/2.8 but I kept the rest. The package deal included several beautiful Canon lens cases and Canon lens hood with adapters. Actually, I recently traded away the 135/3.5 plus the VI-L for a Leica Standard with two Leitz viewfinders.
back alley
05-04-2006, 17:49
Even the step-up adapter alone might cause the vignetting at f5.6 or f8.
This is why the filters for this lens were extra thin.
I am using a thin UIV filter and a 55/1.2 Olympus push-on hood now.
Wasn't cheap either, but cheaper than the original.
Roland.
i think you're right.
never could get comfortable with a push on hood, even the clamp on's seem more secure.
but any port in the storm i guess.
joe
laptoprob
05-04-2006, 22:14
Here is my solution: a Minolta clamp-on metal hood belonging to the hi-matic series. From the clamp ring it is about a cm deep. Even with a regular filter on it I never had any vignetting.
This is the CLE with my first grip and the 1,2. I know, wide open is too much and the lens is relatively too big for the camera, but it does work.
Mackinaw
05-05-2006, 09:56
Who needs a stinking lens hood? This was taken this past Monday, outside, with the sun off to my left.
Leica MP w/Canon 50/1.2 @ f2.0 (or thereabouts) , Ilford HP5+ EI 1600, in xtol 1:1 for 18 minutes @ 20C.
Jim Bielecki
trittium
05-05-2006, 10:05
flare can be good with this lens
http://static.flickr.com/53/107443221_0cace175a8_o.jpg
The CLE may be challenging for use with a 50/1.2 lens due to its short rangefinder base.
flare can be good with this lens
Agreed, here's 2 new scanned pics from my gallery, with some flare - and flair?
Canon 50mm f1.2 lens flare (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=33909&cat=5289&ppuser=1244) (vertical) & another (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=33908&cat=5289&ppuser=1244) (landscape format)
- both without a hood Joe :-)
back alley
05-05-2006, 18:14
well, certainly something to think about...shooting w/o a hood.
i have hoods on almost all my lenses and feel a bit safer because of it. i don't normally use uv filters.
and all that glass w/o a hood just seems so nekkid!
but i might try it.
joe
Two thoughts on the "original" Canon 50mm f1.2 hood:
-1) the set screw is a very poor way to attach a hood that big. It is often my inclination to grap the camera and lens by the hood and I have yet to find one that doesn't slide off the lens(even with a filter on the lens) and cause me to almost (so far) drop the whole rig.
-2) there are way way too many of these hoods with cases in "like new" condition on the market. At about $150 a pop I am sure that someone-somewhere (India? Russia?) is "remanufacturing" something for a couple of bucks that they can sell for a good price on a regular basis. Or else-no one ever bought hoods when they bought 50mm f1.2 lenses..As a fairly active collector/shooter of Canon rf cameras-I know of no other accessory that is available with such regularity in such amazing condition.
back alley
05-05-2006, 20:04
i love a good conspiracy theory...;)
Maybe the reason for having as many good looking lens hoods is the lack of usefulness since they seem to slide off, as mentioned above.
back alley
05-08-2006, 07:17
thanks roland.
joe
Joe
I use the 'heavystar' - see 55mm 'normal' hood (http://snipurl.com/q1q9) - nice quality, not too big on the outside diameter and cheap but of course it's a screw in, so with it in situ you're knackered for filters, lenscaps, etc :-(
The wide angle (http://snipurl.com/q1qw) equivalent - approx same diameter but shorter has been used here successfully too.
Joe
Quick pic showing relative sizes of heavystar's 55mm diameter hoods.
back alley
05-09-2006, 05:13
thanks airds.
i was on ebay and found quite a few like this click here (http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7615768352&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1) , i wonder if they would work? anyone tried one of these flower/petal hoods?
joe
Off Topic, but here is something I use for my big lens.
(forgive my shaking hands and phone-cam)
back alley
05-09-2006, 09:37
that hood looks enormous!
You could grow flowers in that :-)
Hey, now there's an idea !
John Shriver
05-09-2006, 16:08
Will, that hood is so big in diameter that it looks like it goes through the middle of the rangefinder spot!
I've got the real thing, a specimen that even looks used! Too bad they didn't make it rectangular, it would have been smaller. The camera would even be able to sit level on a flat surface. It's not like it's hard to put it on right, I have no trouble with all my other rectangular hoods (Canon 50/1.8, Summar, Summitar, Summicron).
Of course, making a rectangular hood isn't that tough a bit of metalwork, if you can find the right clamp base to start from.
that hood looks enormous!
Yeah, it's 118mm in diameter, 55mm in height, in 2 piece, 72mm screw-in.
Will, that hood is so big in diameter that it looks like it goes through the middle of the rangefinder spot!
I've got the real thing, a specimen that even looks used! Too bad they didn't make it rectangular, it would have been smaller. The camera would even be able to sit level on a flat surface. It's not like it's hard to put it on right, I have no trouble with all my other rectangular hoods (Canon 50/1.8, Summar, Summitar, Summicron).
Of course, making a rectangular hood isn't that tough a bit of metalwork, if you can find the right clamp base to start from.
I was stupid enough to want to use the 0.95 seriously. :D
Tried one of those 72mm wide angle hood, and that blocked the RF Spot.
The rangefinder spot acturally go inside the opening of the hood, I had no problem using it.
My machinist's turn around time was bad (like 6 weeks for this one), but the cost to me was cheap, certainly cheaper than a canon hood.
If I get a Leica Noct or Canon f1.2 (someday), I will do something similar.
Kim Coxon
05-10-2006, 06:34
And there I was thinking that one of the plus points of RF's was that they were unobtrusive!!!!!!!!! :D
Kim
The main plus point of a rangefinder camera is its simplicity for usage. A huge lens hood makes the use of the rangefinder rather clumsy, doesn't it.
The main plus point of a rangefinder camera is its simplicity for usage. A huge lens hood makes the use of the rangefinder rather clumsy, doesn't it.
Raid,
It is very clumsy as you say.
When I take out my 7s, I only take one lens, one camera, one hood; and I take it out for a purpose. It is certainly not a street shooting combo.
Like the Nikon f1.1, they are specialised tools (or toy), with 1950 technology, would you trust it without a hood?
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.