Lense hood quality

[HGPhotos]

I am pricing lense hoods for a 50mm and a 70-200 canon lens. Is it ok to go with cheaper hood, or would the more expensive ones be worth the extra money? I guess what I'm wondering is this one area where it's ok to cheat on price and still get same use out of hood?
All comments helpful and appreciated!!!!
Hannah

 

[996GT2]

It doesn't really matter...most hoods you will find from reputable sellers on eBay will work just as well as the Canon/Nikon ones. Maybe they'll be a little looser or lack the velvet flocking on the inside, but you're paying $5 instead of $25 so you can't really complain there...

And FYI the non-ancient spelling is "lens", not "lense"

 

[ghostman]

Agreed. I would never buy a genuine Canon hood. I have hoods that came with the lenses and I hardly ever use them.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

other than making sure that they will fit your specific focal length and lens, there is not much to lens hoods. HOWEVER, higher quality lenses have higher quality hoods - my nikon lenses have hoods with spring mechanisms for locking in the hood. most lens hoods simply rely on a plastic nub to sort of friction lock the lens in place. this nub can wear down over time, on both the lens and the hood. My Sigma 10-20mm had this problem, and the hood would ALWAYS fall off. so in the case of my nikon lenses with the spring mechanism, i would buy nikon hoods unless there was some other brand that also offered a spring mechanism hood.

 

[AndrewR]

I'd point out, for those advocating cheap or no hoods, that the hood can go a LONG way toward protecting your front element in the event of a dropped lens. Spoken from experience. The hood also protects against inadvertent bumps when the camera is swinging from the strap.

I don't use UV filters so the hood is my only protection when the cap is off. Hasn't failed me yet -- just something to consider.

 

[PurdueRy]

FYI the 70-200mm comes with a hood. You don't have to purchase one. If you are talking the 50mm L lens then the same statement applies.

 

[HGPhotos]

LOL, you're right about the spelling!! I always catch myself doing that. Thank you

 

[HGPhotos]

I am talking about the 70-200mm IS 2.8L and the 50mm 1.4L USM, both Canon. They both come with hoodS?

 

[PurdueRy]

Originally posted by: HGPhotos
I am talking about the 70-200mm IS 2.8L and the 50mm 1.4L USM, both Canon. They both come with hoodS?

All L lenses do. But the 50mm 1.4 is not an L lens. The 70-200 is.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Originally posted by: HGPhotos
I am talking about the 70-200mm IS 2.8L and the 50mm 1.4L USM, both Canon. They both come with hoodS?

All L lenses do. But the 50mm 1.4 is not an L lens. The 70-200 is.

I was rather surprised to learn awhile ago that all Canon lenses do not come with hoods -- is Nikon the same way? All Sony (and previously, all Minolta) lenses comes with hoods, which is something that's pointed out when doing price comparison by some people on other sites (higher end Sony lenses include carrying bags, too -- does Canon/Nikon?).

What about Pentax and Oly? Just curious about what the different brands include, not trying to pimp Sony here.

 

[PurdueRy]

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Originally posted by: HGPhotos
I am talking about the 70-200mm IS 2.8L and the 50mm 1.4L USM, both Canon. They both come with hoodS?

All L lenses do. But the 50mm 1.4 is not an L lens. The 70-200 is.

I was rather surprised to learn awhile ago that all Canon lenses do not come with hoods -- is Nikon the same way? All Sony (and previously, all Minolta) lenses comes with hoods, which is something that's pointed out when doing price comparison by some people on other sites (higher end Sony lenses include carrying bags, too -- does Canon/Nikon?).

What about Pentax and Oly? Just curious about what the different brands include, not trying to pimp Sony here.

I BELIEVE Canon is the only holdout here. And yes, it's cheap and I don't know why they don't change their policies.