:thumbsup:JediForce4ever said:I keep my hood on all the time, so to prevent any accidents to the front element or any itchy fingers from straying there.
for a hood?niki said:guess i'll save up this $50+ then.. :thumbsup:
Wahahaha... useless... I'm very amused... :bsmilie:roti_prata said:usually its useless, use it when u see flairing
user111 said:its mainly used to show off. serious. the show off effect will be more significant if u paste stickers on it
It's meant to put on your head and say you are KING... len hood is useless and show off one ma... :bsmilie:markccm said:oic.
so lots of photographers here r show offs here.
OT, how come i saw u using a lens hood the other time ah? :think:
niki said:guess i'll save up this $50+ then.. :thumbsup:
yeah...stingy Canon always make you buy everything seperately....expensive....LittleWolf said:$50 is definitely a ripoff. The "C" brand is known for milking its customers this way, not sure about the "N" brand. Most third party lenses come with hoods, and some lenses (in particular mid-range tele lenses), even in the low-cost segment, used to have slideable hoods built-in.
If you have a lens whose front element is already deeply recessed, an additional lens hood won't gain that much. Also, fixed hoods for zoom lenses are problematic - unless the lens uses additional mechanics to adjust the hood, they may cause vignetting at the wide end or may be not very effective at the tele end.
If you have the choice of spending $50 for a lens hood or a "UV filter for protection", there's little doubt that the hood is by far the better investment for image quality.
user111 said:its mainly used to show off. serious. the show off effect will be more significant if u paste stickers on it
sORe-EyEz said:ttz wad i do, i pasted reflectors!
so if got vehicles, can c me w/ their lamps if coming from sideways. kiasi eh... :sweatsm:
haven't tot if they come from behind... :embrass: