How important are lens hoods?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Photography exhibit
Next: 26 GP pano
From: Peter on 16 Mar 2010 20:08 "tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:i4kqp5hmlenlbjd33d2r257g6lc3781k9e(a)4ax.com... > On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 13:01:11 -0400, "Peter" > <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: > >>"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >>news:3odop5psql3infkb5mebi7grheonf10thu(a)4ax.com... >>> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:07:00 -0500, "Neil Harrington" <never(a)home.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>>news:3gmnp5l0j8g43s7o9ikeflf4al1p75uble(a)4ax.com... >>>>> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 13:27:23 -0500, "Neil Harrington" <never(a)home.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>I'm sure Rockwell doesn't always use a tripod, no. The photo of him at >>>>>>the >>>>>>front of his site shows him using a Nikon with some monster lens on a >>>>>>monopod, one hand on the camera and the other steadying the lens and >>>>>>monopod. So that leaves him all out of hands and nothing to shade the >>>>>>lens >>>>>>as he says he does. (The image is flipped you'll notice, which gave >>>>>>rise >>>>>>to >>>>>>Rockwell's b.s. story about a "special left-handed Nikon." He is not >>>>>>always >>>>>>absolutely believable, which he admits himself.) >>>>>> >>>>> Left-handed camera? I'm left-handed, and I've never felt that the >>>>> ergonomics of a camera were left- or right-hand favored. The only >>>>> left-handed device that I own is a circular saw. I've tried >>>>> left-handed scissors, but I don't find them much of an advantage. >>>> >>>>Rockwell's "special left-handed Nikon" was a gag, a flipped image that >>>>he >>>>made up a story to go with. >>>> >>>>But I would say most SLRs and other cameras are right-handed, i.e. >>>>shutter >>>>release and film advance lever (when we still had film advance levers) >>>>were >>>>on the right. The obvious exception was the old Exakta, which I would >>>>call >>>>a >>>>left-handed camera. >>>> >>>>If you're left-handed you have just adapted to a right-handed world, as >>>>most >>>>lefties do, and I suppose that's why you don't notice the handedness of >>>>such >>>>things. >>> >>> There are certain things that I can only do with my left hand >>> (writing, using shop tools, using a spoon or fork), but depressing a >>> shutter release is not a matter of handedness. On a film camera, I >>> never felt it was awkward to advance the film with my right thumb. >>> >>> When on manual focus, focusing is easier with my left hand so holding >>> the camera in right hand is natural. >>> >>> The most difficult thing for a leftie to do? Pour anything out of a >>> punchbowl dipper or a pitcher with the spout on the side. The worst >>> place to be? In a restaurant booth seated next to the wall and next >>> to a fat rightie with flying elbows. >>> >>> >> >> >>I know the feeling. I am a natural leftie who was forced to write as a >>righty. I bowl, shoot pool, play darts and fire a rifle leftie, but play >>golf both ways. > > I play golf one way: badly. > my golf shots should be in the military. left, right, left, right. -- Peter
From: tony cooper on 16 Mar 2010 22:20 On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:14:53 -0400, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >Considering my several bouts with skin cancer, including a malignant >melanoma, I will take stupid looking if it provides safety. I will wear >whatever I need to allow me to enjoy my outdoor photography. I really >couldn't care less what people think. (I freely admit that there have been >times my wife refused to be seen with me, unless I changed something. She >will stay in the car if I put on my photo vest.) Most of what I've been shooting lately has been candid street photography. You have to dress for the course. The idea is to fade into the background and shoot people who are unaware they are being photographed. The wrong hat - and God knows, a photo vest - and my subjects would be pointing and laughing. I don't do all street, though. Basically, I photograph what's in front of me if it looks interesting. I might wear my boonie if I go off looking for old barns go for auto junkyards. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: Neil Harrington on 17 Mar 2010 19:27 "Robert Spanjaard" <spamtrap(a)arumes.com> wrote in message news:329$4b9c66ed$546accd9$1832(a)cache60.multikabel.net... > On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:12:43 -0500, Neil Harrington wrote: > >> "Robert Spanjaard" <spamtrap(a)arumes.com> wrote in message >> news:15182$4b9beeca$546accd9$30770(a)cache50.multikabel.net... >>> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 11:35:17 -0500, Neil Harrington wrote: >>> >>>> Ken Rockwell (www.kenrockwell.com) on the other hand has said he never >>>> uses a lens hood. But he does use his hand to shade the lens, which to >>>> me seems more of a bother than using a hood -- and is probably less >>>> effective besides, unless he paints that hand matte black. >>> >>> Why would you need to paint it black? If our hand is between a >>> lightsource and the lens, light from the source reflecting off your >>> hand never reaches the lens. >> >> But there's other light bouncing around, and the flesh-colored inside of >> your hand would tend to reflect some of it into your lens. Why do they >> make the insides of lens hoods non-reflecting black? > > Because lens hoods are not directional. Well, the bayonet-attached petal-shaped ones are at least semi-directional (only because you can usually put 'em on upside down). > When the upper side is blocking > light from the lens, the lower side is reflecting light at the lens. Extraneous light can and often does come from any direction, not just the sky. > That's why ribbed lens hoods (and ribbed plastic or metal around the front > lens element in general) are designed to reflect light away from the lens. > It has nothing to do with "other light bouncing around". Other light does, though. Cup your hand outdoors and position it as if using it as a lens hood and you can still easily see (or photograph) the palm side, can't you?
From: Robert Coe on 3 Apr 2010 17:10 On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 21:05:36 -0500, sligoNoSPAMjoe(a)hotmail.com wrote: : On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 08:55:15 -0600, Tom Hise <nc0o(a)yahoo.com> wrote: : : >I'm trying to reduce the volume of camera related stuff that I haul around : >with me when traveling. I use a Nikon D80 with three different lenses : >(30mm f1.4, 18-135mm F3.5, and 70-300mm f4.5). Each lens has a different : >hood to go with it. : > : >My question is, just how important are lens hoods? Would I be likely to : >miss any 'great' shots if I stopped carrying the hoods. : > : >I am not a pro, just an amateur who takes photos for fun, to show friends : >and family and occasionally post on the web. : > : >Thanks in advance, : > : >Tom Hise : : : It won't stop you from taking a photo, but it may help you get : a better photo. It also well help protect the lens while not : interfering with the results, other than to prevent problems like : flair that may degrade the resulting image. I think you're slightly off on that. Flair *enhances* an image. *Flare* degrades it. ;^) Bob
From: brian on 3 Apr 2010 18:06
On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 17:10:27 -0400, Robert Coe <bob(a)1776.COM> wrote: >I'm trying to reduce the volume of camera related stuff that I haul around >: >with me when traveling. I use a Nikon D80 with three different lenses >: >(30mm f1.4, 18-135mm F3.5, and 70-300mm f4.5). Each lens has a different >: >hood to go with it. >: > >: >My question is, just how important are lens hoods? Would I be likely to >: >miss any 'great' shots if I stopped carrying the hoods. >: > >: >I am not a pro, just an amateur who takes photos for fun, to show friends >: >and family and occasionally post on the web. >: > >: >Thanks in advance, >: > >: >Tom Hise Just reverse the hood over the lens when you want to pack it away. brian |