The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

That is one big lens hood on the Panny 25/1.4. Is it needed?

Diane B

New member
You can shoot without, you may end up with a little flare if you're shooting into a light source. I wish it was reversable as well, I can't figure out why they made it square.
Don't know. Wish it was reversible but I think this has something to do with the "Leica" thing--the Panny Leica 45/2.8 has the same style hood.

I feel sure it would flare without and I do like the protection. To say a hood separates the amateurs from the pros is silly. I shot commercial for a good while for furniture and textile industries and I guarantee you that flare was always a possbility. Guess I could have used my hands to shield while camera was on tripod LOLOL.

Diane
 
I need a little time to ponder whether tripods are pro or amateur, Diane.

:banghead:

Have a good evening.

Yours, a not too serious, Tony.
 

KurtKamka

Subscriber Member
Diane, it's one of those things that just ends up being a personal preference. So many of these photography things end up being that way.
 

Diane B

New member
I need a little time to ponder whether tripods are pro or amateur, Diane.

:banghead:

Have a good evening.

Yours, a not too serious, Tony.
Me either. We all have our quirks......:facesmack:

An aside. A number of years ago I was doing some personal shooting and had the big honking 24-70L with hood on the 5D. I fell--embarrassingly in my brother's driveway after carrying same camera, lens all over the place--up and down mts., boating, etc. LOL--and without the hood I would have had a smashed lens (I carry camera in hand with Canon wriststrap). As it was, only a broken hood (much as I hated, HATED I SAY, that zoom's hood). It made me consider the hood for more than reducing glare.
 

clay stewart

New member
I've had the lens, since release and never used the hood. It's more than big enough without it. I really haven't noticed any serious flare issues with it and I just use my hand as a shade if I need to. I suppose if I was shooting an outdoor wedding in sunny Sedona, I would put it on and leave it on, but for just everyday carrying it with me, I don't need it.
 

Hosermage

Active member
I think I will start shooting it without the hood to give it a try because the increase in size has had me pondering about the 20mm f1.7.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Hoods are like adding silencers to pistols, they look cool.... I mean why else do you keep the hood on?
- Protect the front of the lens.
- Reduce flare and improve micro-contrast.

A lens hood is the cheapest technical improvement to image quality you can buy. But it seems many would rather spend money on more expensive toys to play with.

BTW: if you think I'm being derisive, well, in this case I am. Don't take it personally ... There are very few situations where not using a lens hood makes any sense at all, and the trouble with most manufacturer supplied lens hoods is only that they often make them too shallow to be as effective as they should be, bowing to convenience and compactness. :)

I have and use an effective lens hood on almost every lens I own. The ones I don't are the ones where a) a hood can't be fitted at all or b) the camera and its intended use preclude fitting a lens hood for practical reasons (for example, a pocketable camera with a servo retraction mechanism on the lens is impractical to always use with a hood).
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Don't know. Wish it was reversible but I think this has something to do with the "Leica" thing--the Panny Leica 45/2.8 has the same style hood.
....
A rectangular hood formed to the same proportions as the format is simply more efficient and can be smaller than a round hood for the same efficiency. The round one for the SLR version of this lens is enormous but it definitely does the job it was intended to do.

"Pro vs amateur"... A silly fence to construct and debate over. :)
 

tom in mpls

Active member
OK. I like and use hoods. Still I look for more convenient options when the OEM hood seems to be just too big.

Has anyone tried other options? The rubber hood is already noted earlier in this post.
 

JMaher

New member
Tom,

It's really not that large in real life. Compared to the hood for some of my L lenses it is a toy. Well made but not really that large.

Jim
 
Last edited:

Jonas

Active member
Hood or no hood, filter or no filter... some topics never die.
I'm in the hood camp here, it's a personal thing as I like the feeling of added security and it certainly lessens the number of situations where I would be left with one hand holding the camera while the other hand provided some shade for the lens.

I usually don't use the impractical and, to my taste, over-sized original hoods. There are nice small screw-on hoods available for little money.

That's me. I have been walking in the woods having front elements scratched against twigs and such. That was me but hopefully not anymore.

Here is an example from 2009, I use a similar solution with the E-M5 and the micro version of the 25/1.4:
 

Diane B

New member
A rectangular hood formed to the same proportions as the format is simply more efficient and can be smaller than a round hood for the same efficiency. The round one for the SLR version of this lens is enormous but it definitely does the job it was intended to do.
)
Ah, okay, didn't know that and interesting to know. Its also interesting that only these two Panny lenses have this shape hood---and I have both LOL. (I use a metal round hood for my FD and Nikkor 24/2.8 which seem to work well too). I just leave the hoods on and in truth the combo doesn't take all that much room in either of the two bags I use for m4/3.
 

jonoslack

Active member
What are hoods? Since I seem to be someone that is always swimming upstream, I'll say that manuals and hoods are two things that are certain to stay in any box I open.
You are not alone Kurt.
If there is no sun then the hood is pointless. If you're shooting into the sun then a judiciously placed hand is a much better bet-especially with an EVF.

The 25 1.4 is a lovely little lens, and it certainly doesn't need that horrid excrescence stuck on its front!

All the best

PS what is this manual thing of which you speak?
 
Just a quickie to say that my 25mm arrived this morning and the rubber lens cap I got on eBay for my 20mm fits fine.

The hood that came with the lens will remain in the box.

Tonu
 

Jonas

Active member
The hood that came with the lens will remain in the box.
Of course it will. It's an absurd design, just as the one they made for the 4/3 version of the lens. I don't know what's best or worse.... too big and clumsy hoods, or the Olympus way; no hood included.
 
Top