OK to use 24 Elmar without lens hood on M9?

[andalus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I want to oput my 46mm B&W linera polarizer on this 24 Elmar, but that's inpossible given the design of the new lens hood that come with the camera. Any issues in NOT using the lens hood to take photos with the pol on??

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[bill]

This is a joke, right?

[andalus]

No joke unless it's on you.

 

On my 50 lux and 135 I can use a B&W pol filter and the hood works.

 

On my 24 Elmar it has the new screw on hood. if I put the pol on that lens, there's no way I can use the hood. no way to screw it on.

 

so the question remains, how critical is using the hood for outdoor, sunlit shots?

 

is this question too hard to understand?

[bill]

...not considered finding out for yourself by just trying it then?

 

Not every answer is on the internet. Your "critical" may well be someone else's "acceptable", and vice versa.

[andalus]

I have never used a Leica lens without the hood attached. Why would they make it if it were not at some times essential? So...who has experience NOT using a hood. Has nit mattered in their shots?

 

Is that simple enough for you?

[bill]

Tell you what.

 

Be a devil.

 

Go on.

 

Just give it a whirl.

 

If you like the results, you're away. If not, try something else. Nobody's going to die. Hoods are not required by law.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[250swb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I want to oput my 46mm B&W linera polarizer on this 24 Elmar, but that's inpossible given the design of the new lens hood that come with the camera. Any issues in NOT using the lens hood to take photos with the pol on??

 

Given that with a polarizer you won't be facing towards the sun (supposing it is for typical 'landscapes') then you should have no problem using the lens without a lens hood.

 

Steve

[jbgeach]

 

Given that with a polarizer you won't be facing towards the sun (supposing it is for typical 'landscapes') then you should have no problem using the lens without a lens hood.

 

Steve

I don't routinly use a filter and hood. If a filter is on it protects the lens and I can shade the sun with my free hand if I see a flare or loss of contrast

[andalus]

thanks for the replies. now i have my answer.

[250swb]

I don't routinly use a filter and hood. If a filter is on it protects the lens and I can shade the sun with my free hand if I see a flare or loss of contrast

 

Thats easy to do using a DSLR, but is a considerable skill using a rangefinder.

 

 

Steve

[jaapv]

There is a solution for that problem:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[250swb]

:D:D

 

Steve

[stunsworth]

Thats easy to do using a DSLR, but is a considerable skill using a rangefinder.

 

All I do is to make sure my hand is well out of the viewfinder and that its shadow is falling on the end of the lens barrel.

[glacierparkmagazine]

I don't use hoods on ANY of my lenses. If you have a problem with flare, take the filter off or like others have suggested, use your hand or your hat to block the sun.

 

Hoods

 

There's quite a few examples of a 28 elmarit shot into the sun on my blog at: http://www.glacierparkmagazine/blog

[lars_bergquist]

I use hoods on ALL my lenses, even when shading is not necessary or even possible (as with extreme wide angle lenses). Hoods create a protective 'deformation zone' like the one in your car, that means that a dent in the metalwork is not invariably accompanied by a broken rib case. In other words, a safety margin. Even a dinged filter thread is a p.i.t.a.

 

The old man from the Age of the FIKUS

[250swb]

Yes, its good protection, at least for the first bounce, and guards against minor knocks.

 

I'm not sure what is 'bad' about using a hood, I've never been privy to knowing the downsides, but I'd rather concentrate on making the photograph than performing hand shadows.

 

Steve

[lct]

Spending a lot to get flare-free lenses and using filters w/o shade sounds a bit curious IMHO. Why not using the Leica polarizer if i may ask?

[adan]

My take would be "Spending a lot to get very compact lenses and then putting a womping big shade on them sounds a bit curious IMHO."

 

But we'll still be having the shade/no shade debate 100 years from now (well, "we" the forum, not "we' the individuals posting on this thread today). There are good reasons supporting both sides.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lct]

The hood of the Elmar 24 does not look that big does it?

[andalus]

It's not the bigness of the hood that's a bother, but rather, while I can mount a Leica UVA filter on the lens and use the hood, I cannot mount a B&W polarizer and also attach hood. The new design of these hoods makes this impossible. Pain the the arse.