Thread Protector Rings and The Leica Achilles Heel

[pippy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 hours ago, lct said:

You're referring to the SOOFM hood i guess. Funny to imagine the 50/2 apo with this thing. A question to ask Mr Karbe perhaps ...

Ha! Ha! Yes! The more I think about it the better the idea sounds! And why not reintroduce the collapsible Summitar when they are at it? Mr. Karbe?.......

I can't remember if mine looked exactly the same as that one (pictured) as I seem to remember there was a cinch-clip / clamping screw to attach it to the lens. My hood is now with my brother who has out father's camera and lens so I will try to remember to ask him to have a look when next we speak.

Philip.

[pippy]

43 minutes ago, pgk said:

...Modern lenses do still benefit from good, efficient hoods, but on earlier lenses they can make a huge difference. I find that uncoated lenses become quite usable if a carefully produced hood can be made to fit them...

Agree completely. As mentioned earlier I always use a hood whether the lens is ancient or modern. My own first ever Leica was a very beaten-up 1930 black-paint I (Model A) to III conversion. I picked up a FISON hood for the uncoated Elmar and, so equipped, that lens could produce superb results!

The only lens for which I have yet to acquire a hood is the 50mm f1.5 Summarit which arrived at the start of February. It has an unusual 41mm filter-size and the correct hood, the XOONS, is priced firmly in Collector's Territory. It is a coated lens so all is not lost but, even so, when using the lens on a sunny day my usual practice (Heaven Forfend!) is to use a 40.5 screw-in hood and stick it on the lens using a small amount of Blu-Tack(!) in the filter threads............

Philip.

Edited July 8, 2021 by pippy

[pgk]

23 minutes ago, pippy said:

..... stick it on the lens using a small amount of Blu-Tack(!) in the filter threads............

I find that the cardboard tubes inside toilet rolls are very handy and along with a bit of blackboard paint and sticky tape they can make pretty efficient hoods. Not good in the rain though. (I'm starting to regress to Blue Peter days I think😉).

[pippy]

9 minutes ago, pgk said:

I find that the cardboard tubes inside toilet rolls are very handy and along with a bit of blackboard paint and sticky tape they can make pretty efficient hoods. Not good in the rain though. (I'm starting to regress to Blue Peter days I think😉).

You think you are kidding?!...

For my studio work my main lenses are Canon EOS primes. The hoods for these lenses are too short to be properly efficient and so, in an effort to improve matters, I have formed lens-hood extensions simply by using strips of black background paper which circle the ends of these hoods and which are stuck on with Sellotape....and I'm being absolutely serious. No Domestos bottles nor sticky-back plastic to be seen but I suspect that even John Noakes would have been impressed!

Pics on request!

Philip.

[pgk]

22 minutes ago, pippy said:

Pics on request!

Early Hasselblad Bellows Hoods are cheap these days. I bought one for ~£25 and just need to make some adapters up to use them one old brass lenses.

[Danner]

2 hours ago, pippy said:

Ha! Ha! Yes! The more I think about it the better the idea sounds! And why not reintroduce the collapsible Summitar when they are at it? Mr. Karbe?.......

I can't remember if mine looked exactly the same as that one (pictured) as I seem to remember there was a cinch-clip / clamping screw to attach it to the lens. My hood is now with my brother who has out father's camera and lens so I will try to remember to ask him to have a look when next we speak.

Philip.

I totally agree about a reissue Summitar!  In M mount, that is a lens I would buy new (by pre-order).

Edited July 8, 2021 by Danner

[pippy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, pgk said:

Early Hasselblad Bellows Hoods are cheap these days. I bought one for ~£25 and just need to make some adapters up to use them one old brass lenses.

Yes; I've been considering getting that sort of thing.

In an ideal world I'd be able to find a s/h Sinar Bellows Hood 2. I've only ever known one photographer own a set and it was / is the most fantastic piece of kit. It clips into a normal Sinar 'Standard' and it has four rotary knobs - one situated at each corner - which control what are, in effect, roller-blinds which can be adjusted independently from each other from the very edge of the frame to the very centre. As a means of masking-out light-sources it cannot be bettered (the majority of my studio snaps require back-lighting from at least one side and often both).

There don't seem to be many kicking around(!) and this tiny thing is one of the clearest images I can find;

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!

Philip.

Edited July 8, 2021 by pippy

[Herr Barnack]

JMHO but I think the screw on aluminum lens hoods are a vast improvement over the chintzy plastic hoods. 

If you leave the hood on, the threads are protected.  if you don't want to use the hood, put the protective ring on the threads.  Problem solved.

I still cannot figure out why a person would not want to use a well made lens hood like the current generation of M lens hoods.  YMMV.

[Guest]

On 7/7/2021 at 8:45 PM, hdmesa said:

Oh yeah. I forgot the CV 21 3.5 I tried had one, too, and it aligned just fine. Maybe it's just my copy of the 21 1.4 that is little "off" with its giant hood.

Since you brought it up i have been staring constantly at my vm 21mm f1.4 nokton and its without doubt perfectly aligned.

[hdmesa]

2 minutes ago, steve 1959 said:

Since you brought it up i have been staring constantly at my vm 21mm f1.4 nokton and its without doubt perfectly aligned.

It’s probably my head that’s not screwed on straight.

[rramesh]

All camera parts will scratch and show wear over time. 

As far as hood go, the bayonet type hoods are best because they offer you greater flexibility in using filters. You never need to remove them.

On my Leica lenses.

• The 50 Summilux and the 90 Elmarit-M have wonderful built-in hoods that you just pull-out when needed. Best design, I think.
• The 21 SEM has a great bayonet mount hood. Compact.
• The 28 Summicron V1 has a bulky hood that I don't use. Instead I use a Contax GG1 screw in hood in black. It's discrete, but I do need to remove it to use two filters to avoid vignetting. (Rarely though).

[junix]

On 7/7/2021 at 6:35 PM, evikne said:

The protector ring looks nice when mounted, but it's a little cumbersome to have so many separate parts to keep track of. For my 35 FLE I have a lens hood, filter, protector ring and two different caps.

It is a bit cumbersome but everything that is not in use fits neatly in the leather lens pouch "secret compartment"  + when you remove the lens from the camera you can store absolutely everything in that same pouch. 

I personally like a lot this newer design.

[RMF]

+1 vote here for the newer screw-on hood designs. I also really like the new twist & pull out hood design for the 28 Cron Safari. Thanks to this thread I went through all my lens cases to see which ones came with the thread protectors that I might not have been aware of; I didn’t realize that my FLE came with a lens hood thread protector ring and an extra lens cap inside the carrying case, so that was a nice find.  I just wish that the Leica 28 Lux  would have included a thread protector for the ‘hood threads’  vs the ‘filter threads’ only.

[rtai]

The 21mm and 24mm Summilux take series filters held in place with the screw in hood. I wish there’s an accessory ring to serve the same purpose without the hood. 

[LeicaS2]

I love the current design. Just received a replacement protector ring for a used lens I just bought (24mm  3.8)

 

[Theory033]

11 hours ago, LeicaS2 said:

I love the current design. Just received a replacement protector ring for a used lens I just bought (24mm  3.8)

 

I'm curious to know which replacement ring you purchased for the Leica Elmar M 24mm F/3.8. I also picked up a replacement ring for that lens, the one listed for the Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 FLE and 21mm f/3.4 Super Elmar. However, on the Elmar 24mm it has quite a bit of room in front of the ring -- in fact, enough space to screw in a B+W filter between the ring and the front of the lens. I'm wondering if there is a replacement ring that better fits this lens?

[lct]

7 minutes ago, Theory033 said:

I'm curious to know which replacement ring you purchased for the Leica Elmar M 24mm F/3.8. I also picked up a replacement ring for that lens, the one listed for the Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 FLE and 21mm f/3.4 Super Elmar. However, on the Elmar 24mm it has quite a bit of room in front of the ring -- in fact, enough space to screw in a B+W filter between the ring and the front of the lens. I'm wondering if there is a replacement ring that better fits this lens?

I prefer the ring of the Summicron 28/2 v2 for the Elmar 24/3.8

[Theory033]

On 7/16/2021 at 10:54 AM, lct said:

I prefer the ring of the Summicron 28/2 v2 for the Elmar 24/3.8

Thanks, I'll try that one.