Lens hood problems, aftermarket solutions?

[SoCalLeicanator]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have noticed that the lens hoods Leica supplies with the TL mount 23 and 55-135 are odd to say the least.  My first 55-135 had a lens hood with a missing piece.  I exchanged the whole lens, but even when it's "right" it doesn't seem to be fully engaged.  Neither does the hood for the f2 23 summilux.

1)Anyone else experience similar issues

2)How do I know which aftermarket Lens hoods will mount on the 18,23 and 55-135?

Thanks! and

[Gregm61]

The hood for the 55-135 is a one-piece bayonet affair like pretty much most any lens like that I have owned. What was "missing"? It snaps on and make a pretty obvious "click" assuming you line up the dots when mounting it when engaged.

These lenses cost too much to be fooling around with after-market hoods. You've got to be one of the unluckiest folks around to not have either be working right when there's not much there to go wrong but again, if you bought them new, send them back until you get something that works like it should.

[Advertisement]

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

[Le Chef]

The hoods connect with a very Germanic “click”. It requires quite deliberate pressure to get them to engage and disengage. Be more forceful!

[frame-it]

2 hours ago, SoCalLeicanator said:

for the f2 23 summilux.

 

where did you buy a f2 23 summilux ?

[SoCalLeicanator]

*corrected summiCRON

[SoCalLeicanator]

2 hours ago, Le Chef said:

The hoods connect with a very Germanic “click”. It requires quite deliberate pressure to get them to engage and disengage. Be more forceful!

Le Chef, my hometown came through for me!  You were absolutely right.  I was being too ginger with the installation.  Germanic click duly noted.  However, my first 55-135 hood was confirmed to be defective, which likely biased me to distrust the second.  That said, Leica doesn't make a hood for the 18mm and it's a low profile enough lens that I think the benefits of the hood could outweigh any aftermarket shame. . . 

[Jake]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm going to be contrarian (again).

Who uses a lens hood when conditions don't warrant it? Lens hoods work for shooting into the sun or light source when the angle produces newton rings or haze (newton rings are a thing, as far as I remember?). What percentage of shots require a lens hood? Sometimes my hand works fine in a pinch to block the sun from refracting. I hardly ever use it unless the conditions warrant it. I can't count how many times I've seen people use hoods when it's not necessary, or have them permanently attached because some website told them to. 

[Le Chef]

Does leaving a lens hood in place when "conditions don't warrant it" negatively impact the quality of the shot you are taking? 

[Jake]

No. It just looks stupid; shows ineptitude spawned by social media. Go ahead and wear sunglasses on an overcast, cloudy day -  or at night. But who gives a sh*t what some internet guy thinks, right? We are in agreement there. 

I just think it's a pain in the a$$ to store and reserve space for a lens hood when it isn't used often at all. And then having to reverse it to store in a bag, in which case the zoom isn't accessible unless you remove it. 

But I apologize for derailing the thread. . . 

Edited January 23, 2020 by Jake

[Le Chef]

So a subjective point of view, not one based on fact - thank you for the clarification.

[jaapv]

I do wear sunglasses on some overcast and cloudy days - they increase contrast.

Anyway, like the OP, I find the 55-135 hood badly designed, the hood is difficult to fit reversed for storage - and not very  smooth when fitted normally either, especially when using a filter:  Not Leica quality. The 18-56 one is an ugly, overdone design. The lens is quite flare-resistant and does not need such a Sony clone. |I replaced it by a few stacked step-up rings. Small and neat - and effective, I have yet to experience flare.

[nicci78]

What happens to M or R build-in hood ? They were genius. 

TL and SL lens hoods are so japanese designs. And so inconvenient. 

Please bring build-in hood back. I don't mind a larger barrel. 

[Jake]

Well, there is the fact that lens hoods aren't necessary for 100% of shots, contrasted with your subjective point of view that leaving it on when unnecessary is a personal decision, and not based on facts. There is also the fact that it's inefficient when not being used - taking up space and rendering the zoom useless when installed backwards. That's not subjective, that's fact. You're welcome for the clarification. 

Quote

I do wear sunglasses on some overcast and cloudy days - they increase contrast.

@jaapvTrue, but it depends on the brightness/haze of the day, right? Special glasses covers are made to increase brightness in the evenings while driving, but you don't necessarily wear them for driving in bright, direct sunlight. 

Edited January 24, 2020 by Jake

[jaapv]

They are not just for flare. They do protect the front of the lens... From impact, from rain and snow, from greasy fingers, etc.

[lct]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

They are not just for flare. They do protect the front of the lens... From impact, from rain and snow, from greasy fingers, etc.

+1

[hoppyman]

With the 23 I normally travelled with the original hood reversed for the camera to fit in a slimmer satchel. I found that it was inconvenient to see the red alignment bump to fit the lens if I had done a change. While it doesn’t seem very robust, I think it does an excellent job for its primary function..  it’s just too bulky for my satchel styled bag when left mounted. I ended up getting a conventional (for wide angle) screw in metal hood . Were I brave I might have been able to “modify” the original as it looks as though the front half was a separate piece originally. Doesn’t seem sensible to damage the expensive original though. The price of an aftermarket one is trivial.

[Jake]

7 hours ago, jaapv said:

They are not just for flare. They do protect the front of the lens... From impact, from rain and snow, from greasy fingers, etc.

May as well wrap your camera in bubble wrap and a clear plastic film.

[jaapv]

That is nonsense. A lens hood is a normal lens accessory, your idea is simply silly. You may use your cameras only in clement conditions and pamper them, I use them for the tool they are, like many of us.

[Jake]

On 1/24/2020 at 8:49 PM, jaapv said:

That is nonsense. A lens hood is a normal lens accessory, your idea is simply silly. You may use your cameras only in clement conditions and pamper them, I use them for the tool they are, like many of us.

This makes no sense. When did I suggest I only use cameras in clement conditions? I've even complimented you on the scratches and dings on your camera, calling it trail dust. 

I’ve been peripherally involved in photography for over 45 years, and I’ve never heard of a lens hood to be a protective device (it can, but it wasn't invented for that). Or to shield the lens from snow or sleet, or a driving rainstorm. A lens hood is’t going to prevent a stray raindrop from landing on your AV filter even in a misting. It’s not going to prevent your glass from shifting from a 6 -10 foot drop. It won’t protect against a flying projectile. If it does, the probability of any of that happening is probably less than 1%. Why handicap yourself for that 1%? 

I’ve heard of collapsable lens hoods. Hoods that are retractable - contained in the lens barrel itself. Lens hoods, by definition, are to prevent flare, and newtons rings, if so desired. Yet here, lens hoods are identified as necessary and required. At all times. I’ll repeat. Over 45 years and this is the first time I’ve been told a lens hood has more usefulness than protecting against flare - it’s primary function - and should be on the lens at all times. I realize it is a personal decision, but I don’t understand why the points I bring up are being argued as though they have no merit. 

Carry on. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[jaapv]

A lens hood will have no detrimental effect when it is not needed to prevent flare and it will still protect the front of the lens against mechanical damage and rain. So there’s no reason to remove it. I prefer my hood looking like this over the lens looking like this.

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!