kikouyou Posted August 5, 2016 Share #1  Posted August 5, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have tried to check if the vary elmar was subject to flare or contrast issues depending on the light and I had some great difficulty to fault the lens without the hood. I am tempted to travel without the hood as the additional bulk is forcing me into a larger bag. Indeed the hood is a great protection to the front element, but I am often using filters so I am not too concerned. I never damaged a front element even not then Canon Ts 17mm... What is your experience with the hood? Needed or not needed?  Thank you Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 Hi kikouyou, Take a look here Vario Elmar 24-90 does not seem to need the hood?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sillbeers15 Posted August 5, 2016 Share #2  Posted August 5, 2016 You have mentioned all the legitimate reasons to have a lens hood on the lens. In my opinion, it is there for cosmetic reasons most of the time and for impact (protection sometimes).  I'm fine for the hood on the 24-90mm and kind of like it's 'square hood' design as I do not think it is too obstructive. Rather for the 90-280mm, I find the Hood too bulky. I've replaced it with a 24-90mm square hood.  So both my SL VE zooms have the 'square hood' on them. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted August 5, 2016 Share #3  Posted August 5, 2016 (edited) Hello Kikouyou,  Welcome to the Forum.  There are times when: You only have to have 1 inadvertant impact or 1 slip of a camera/lens out of your hand to make carrying a lens with a RIGID lens hood worth it*.  Think of it as inexpensive (In terms of "bother".) insurance that it is better to pay for & even better to never collect from.  Best Regards,  Michael  * Flare suppression is usually secondary in importance to inadvertant impact/ damage protection. Edited August 5, 2016 by Michael Geschlecht 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted August 5, 2016 Share #4 Â Posted August 5, 2016 (edited) I was for a while thinking about buying a 24-90 and so tried to understand the hood shape. At the end my impression is that the hood is just a gimmick. The square shape looks interesting, but is no additional protection to a simple round shade. The hood is also very wide, and offers very little protection against flare. And it behaves like a round shade, because at the top and bottom it is of circular shape. (So it is bigger but not better than the equivalent circular shade). It is a bit like the square hood of my M 28, that also offers very little "shade". Just a minimal protection against bumping into a corner. So I could probably very well do without. Edited August 5, 2016 by steppenw0lf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted August 5, 2016 Share #5 Â Posted August 5, 2016 The hood is bulky and works well. Whether better or worse than some other design is not my concern. I have not seen a great propensity to flare without it, but I always use it anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted August 5, 2016 Share #6  Posted August 5, 2016 I have tried to check if the vary elmar was subject to flare or contrast issues depending on the light and I had some great difficulty to fault the lens without the hood. I am tempted to travel without the hood as the additional bulk is forcing me into a larger bag. Indeed the hood is a great protection to the front element, but I am often using filters so I am not too concerned. I never damaged a front element even not then Canon Ts 17mm... What is your experience with the hood? Needed or not needed?  Thank you  Mine is still in the original box. Ditto with the 90-280.  Not necessary for physical or flare protection ..... for the occasional photo into the sun a judicious hand for shielding is just as good.  In 9 months of use I have not one single image affected with flare and the lens front element is pristine ....... just a puff of air needed once in a while. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted August 5, 2016 Share #7 Â Posted August 5, 2016 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) It doesn't disturb me so I keep it on, and it is reversed for travel. I am sure it is square because a round hood that avoids encroaching on the view at the wide end would be too large. I suspect the need to cope with such a big range zoom means that it has little effect at the long end. I find both zooms are pretty bullet-proof when it comes to flare control: I don't use them without hoods, but they seem pretty unfazed by pointing towards the sun or bright indoor lights. However, I keep the hoods on both zooms so that I don't have to worry about knocks and sticky fingers, both my own and those of grandchildren. Â And for those who say that hoods are not needed for protection: I chipped (microscopically) the front element of my Apo-Summicron-M 90mm Asph on a rock with the hood collapsed. It doesn't have a visible impact on image quality, but I know its there and I know I'm going to spend good money to get it repaired some day. I could have had a protective filter on it, but the hood comes free. Â I like hoods. Edited August 5, 2016 by LocalHero1953 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicaiste Posted August 5, 2016 Share #8  Posted August 5, 2016 (edited) A comparison of the SL Vario-Elmarit 2,8-4/24-90 vs the R Vario-Elmarit 2,8-4,5/28-90 ASPH. 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! Edited August 5, 2016 by Leicaiste 1 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/263210-vario-elmar-24-90-does-not-seem-to-need-the-hood/?do=findComment&comment=3091381'>More sharing options...
Leicaiste Posted August 5, 2016 Share #9  Posted August 5, 2016 (edited) 28 mm 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! Edited August 5, 2016 by Leicaiste 1 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/263210-vario-elmar-24-90-does-not-seem-to-need-the-hood/?do=findComment&comment=3091382'>More sharing options...
Leicaiste Posted August 5, 2016 Share #10  Posted August 5, 2016 90 mm 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/263210-vario-elmar-24-90-does-not-seem-to-need-the-hood/?do=findComment&comment=3091384'>More sharing options...
Leicaiste Posted August 5, 2016 Share #11  Posted August 5, 2016 (edited) 90 mm without hood 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! Edited August 5, 2016 by Leicaiste Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/263210-vario-elmar-24-90-does-not-seem-to-need-the-hood/?do=findComment&comment=3091389'>More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted August 5, 2016 Share #12 Â Posted August 5, 2016 I don't use filters unless necessary. I have damaged a front element before so I am careful to always we a hood. It's also useful for keeping the front element dry in a downpour. Â Just because t haven't had a serious car accident doesn't mean I don't need my seat belt. I'd rather be safe than sorry. Â Gordon 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGodParticle/Hari Posted August 9, 2016 Share #13  Posted August 9, 2016 No hood, no filter, no problems so far  The hood attracts way too much attention for my style of shooting  The camera + lens is obvious enough already, the batman hood takes it over the edge   Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petrus61 Posted November 28, 2016 Share #14  Posted November 28, 2016 Had the misfortune of having my SL & 24-90 knocked off a table onto a stone floor - with hindsight I think the hood would have protected it from damage. Pretty sure the lens is not repairable  ( dented front rim, fissures on the front lens and the barrel now wobbles when fully extended ) and the body wont release the battery with a wiggle. Think will be a new lens and possibly body....... Hasn't been my year....Leica Q & M6, summicron F2 stolen and now this having never  had a single bit of damage or loss......   Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted November 28, 2016 Share #15  Posted November 28, 2016 (edited) Had the misfortune of having my SL & 24-90 knocked off a table onto a stone floor - with hindsight I think the hood would have protected it from damage. Pretty sure the lens is not repairable  ( dented front rim, fissures on the front lens and the barrel now wobbles when fully extended ) and the body wont release the battery with a wiggle. Think will be a new lens and possibly body....... Hasn't been my year....Leica Q & M6, summicron F2 stolen and now this having never  had a single bit of damage or loss...... I feel for you...... I threw my Apo-Summicron-M 75 onto the cobbles in Parma. Leica rebuilt it for 15-20% of the cost of new, but it was afterwards like new. It's worth asking them. Edited November 28, 2016 by LocalHero1953 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
J S H Posted November 28, 2016 Share #16 Â Posted November 28, 2016 90 mm without hood The hood on the 28-90 is pretty much worthless/ineffective in all cases, so I never use it. To be fair, the lens seems to do fine without it most of the time. However, I would prefer a well made removable hood like the one on the 24-90...at least it seems to work when you need it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicaiste Posted November 29, 2016 Share #17 Â Posted November 29, 2016 The best lens is the lens you have with you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snap Happy Posted April 30, 2024 Share #18  Posted April 30, 2024 I'm late to this thread, but I'd like to add another "yes" vote for the hood. Recently I dropped my SL2 with the 24-90 on concrete. The hood took all the impact and broke into many pieces, but saved both the lens and camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
abakan Posted April 30, 2024 Share #19 Â Posted April 30, 2024 Lens Hood for SL 24-70/2,8 (12309) = 24-90/2,,8-4 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
abakan Posted April 30, 2024 Share #20  Posted April 30, 2024 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/263210-vario-elmar-24-90-does-not-seem-to-need-the-hood/?do=findComment&comment=5232707'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now