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!

Hoods on Tech Cams

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
A question about hoods and lenses came up in another thread, and instead of taking that particular thread more off topic, I decided to start a new thread for this discussion. (See: http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?p=343630#post343630)

In that thread, Jurgen asked,

Jack

This is exactly the reason , why I believe , that the ARCA 6x9 hood is too small in width . Not in length .
I still doubt , that this hood is sufficient enough to be used with the DIGARON-W 4/40 lens when shifted , say about 10-12 mm . Don't forget , the image angle of that lens is 94 degrees .
So I took the time today to test it at lunch. The camera is my Arca RM3D with Phase IQ180 back, lens is the 40HR-W Digiron, and the hood is the Arca 6x9 #111000 bellows hood. (Special thanks to Rod Klukas on this forum for the speedy delivery of his demo hood for me to test.)

My goal was to create the worst possible scenario for a hood over a wide lens on a tech cam. To accomplish this I shifted to the very corner of the 40's IC. This required 10mm R shift and 15mm Rise, and was confirmed by the very upper RH corner being clipped black from loss of IC. Next I positioned the Sun just outside the frame at top center. It was Noon, so in order to achieve that positioning, I needed to angle the camera up about 20 degrees in addition to the already added rise. The exposure is about 1/3 stop below having a clipped blue channel in the sky -- I think it was 1/60th at f8 at ISO 35. I then took a few frames and adjusted the hood so the top and RH edges just showed in the frame. Of course I could have adjusted it so the edges did not show, but my goal is to show that this hood can be adjusted finely enough to just shade the extreme margins of the frame.

Here is that frame. Obviously the image is only for demonstration, not art, so it has not been corrected at all, including no LCC:



I have inspected this frame thoroughly and there is no evidence of flare anywhere in it.

Here is the uncorrected LCC, captured by placing the LCC panel directly in front of the hood as it was for the above capture. You can easily see the hood margins as well as the lens falloff approaching max in the very corner:



Note that because it's pointing directly at the Sun, I had to UNDER expose the LCC by 2 stops to get a decent histo where we usually have to OVER expose by 2 for the LCC.

Here is the set-up on the camera:



From front, and no I did not blow the dust off before shooting!:



In conclusion, I would have to say this hood works (remarkably) well, at least for the 40HR-w and longer lenses. I realize some photographers may have more dextrous hands than I do and can probably form and them well enough and hold them accurately enough to get away without a hood. But unfortunately I am not one of them, so Rod you are not getting this hood back, send me a bill!

PS: Note that if needed I could make a slat out of black card stock to fit in the filter slots on the hood, insert it from camera left and effectively flag off the LH edge of this frame too. If I made it "L" shaped at the proper aspect ratio to convert the hood from square to 4:3, I could probably flag right to the limits at all 4 edges...

Cheers,
 

cs750

Member
Jack, do you have any information on whether this hood will work with the Rodenstock 23mm, 32mm, 120mm or 150mm? Charles
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Jack, do you have any information on whether this hood will work with the Rodenstock 23mm, 32mm, 120mm or 150mm? Charles
It should work fine on any lens longer as long as it can fit over the front. The 23 has basically no added IC to shift or tilt, so I suspect it will work for it as well. Christopher who has the 32 and the Arca says the small hood will not work, and so I believe him, but honestly cannot see why this won't work on that combo. However, *IF* you're using a center filter, then the front element of the 32 is so large that I am certain the larger hood would be the way to go.

On the upside, there is no real downside to getting the larger hood other than it's size --- :D ! The fact is they both will work the same way and offer the same net shading effect on any lens they fit over.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
It should work fine on any lens longer a long as it can fit over the front. The 23 has basically no added IC to shift or tilt, so I suspect it will work for it as well. Christopher who has the 32 and the Arca says the small hood will not work, and so I believe him, but honestly cannot see why this won't work on that combo. However, *IF* you're using a center filter, then the front element of the 32 is so large that I am certain the larger hood would be the way to go.

On the upside, there is no real downside to getting the larger hood other than it's size --- :D ! The fact is they both will work the same way and offer the same net shading effect on any lens they fit over.
Agree I would buy the big one out of the two as it would just be more versatile . I would think also you could extend it out further which would offer better light blocking. Besides all that my bet is you could get your hands in easier to operate the lens better.
 
How about, for a very low tech and cheapo solution (when the wind isn't blowing) a customised cardboard or plastic sheet held by a $29 "Flare Buster".
 

Christopher

Active member
Just for clarification. I thought it would fit. I just got out my 6x9 hood and the 32mm. It does NOT fit at all. I thought it did, but I can't get it over the lens at all. It is to small.

So one needs the 4x5'' version. (111001)
 

Christopher

Active member
What Guy said is correct and works great. With the larger one, you just have more space to get to the shutter and other settings.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Christopher,

By how much won't it fit over the front barrel? Meaning, could enough of the excess overlap material be removed from the rear frame to allow it to fit?
 

Christopher

Active member
Not by much. I would say around 1,5mm on each side. However, I would say, if one spends so much on a lens, I would always get the center filter as well. With that you could remove as you want and it wouldn't fit. So I went with the larger hood and I am perfectly happy. Jack were you able to test the thing I wrote you about, a few weeks ago?
 

jotloob

Subscriber Member
There is no real shading system for any technical camera system which satisfies my imagination for quality and stability .

In front of me on my table , I have four shading hoods which can be used or eventually be modified for MFD technical cameras .

LEE universal , LEE wide angle , ARCA SWISS 6x9 , HASSELBLAD Pro Shade .

Both LEE shades are attached to the lens by a screw-in adapter .
The ARCA SWISS 6x9 shade is attached by means of a rod to the camera body .
The HASSELBLAD Pro Shade is attached to the lens via Bajonet .

Most of the forum members surely know that .

But here some figures :

The LEE universal is 190 gramms including the screw in adapter . The front width is 11cm .
The LEE wide angle beast has a width of 13,5x17,5 cm and weighs 250 gramms .
The ARCA shade is 195 gramms (including the rod) and has a widths of
only 9 cm . I don't have any figures for the bigger shade .
(Christopher might be able to give these figures)

The HASSELBLAD compendium , just as a comparison , is 260 gramms and has a width of 10,5 cm .

I don't like the idea of the screw-in adapted shades , because all the shade's weight is on the front thread of the lens . Additional the fiddling around , when screwing in the adapter .
I don't like the "rod solution" very much , as the whole thing waggles around . I have used that shade many years in my LF days with the ARCA 6x9/4x5 . Focal length of the lenses all above 90mm .

Therefore I have the idea of a slip-on solution plus a rod to stabilize the whole monster .
There will be the need to make an attachment for a rod to camera for the LEE hoods or a slip-on gear for the ARCA hood .
IMO , both can be easily done by a good mechanic .

Any better ideas ? ? ?
No baseball caps or umbrellas , please .

Stephengilbert (Steve) has given me an interesting link .

http://www.skgrimes.com/products/slip-on-filter-adapter

This genious man could possibly supply an adapter made to given specifications .
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I don't like the "rod solution" very much , as the whole thing waggles around . I have used that shade many years in my LF days with the ARCA 6x9/4x5 .
Hmmm. Mine doesn't wiggle at all and is very stable. Maybe yours is worn and needs to be replaced?
 

stephengilbert

Active member
Jurgen,

If you're interested in weight, my SKGrimes slip on adapter to use a 67 mm filter or hood on a 35 or 47mm Digitar weighs 17 grams.

Steve
 

Christopher

Active member
Mine does not wiggle at all. What I like about it is that I can have it very stable or when I don't tighten the screws to much i can move it around more easily.
 

jotloob

Subscriber Member
Hmmm. Mine doesn't wiggle at all and is very stable. Maybe yours is worn and needs to be replaced?
Jack

No , its not worn . This hood already existed long before the Rm3d was born . The rod is attached to the front frame of the 6x9 ARCA by means of a plugin clamp which has a little play . The leverage of the rod then shows a play of about 2mm in horizontal and vertical direction at the point , where the hood is mounted .
The Rm3d has a different and very stable attachment to the camerabody as I can see from your shown image .

This fact makes it even much easier to make a similar attachment for the ALPA body .:clap:
@ Christopher .
Please can you give the size of your hood as I have given above ?
 

rupho

New member
Jürgen
Would you happen to know if the Lee Wide angle shades work on the Rodenstock 32 HR with a regular 86mm lens adapter?unfortunately Lee does not have a dedicated 86 wide angle lens adapter so I am wondering if there is vignetting caused by the regular adapter.
I assume the regular Lee compendium shade is not wide enough for the 32HR
Any info on that.
Thanks

Grischa
There is no real shading system for any technical camera system which satisfies my imagination for quality and stability .

In front of me on my table , I have four shading hoods which can be used or eventually be modified for MFD technical cameras .

LEE universal , LEE wide angle , ARCA SWISS 6x9 , HASSELBLAD Pro Shade .

Both LEE shades are attached to the lens by a screw-in adapter .
The ARCA SWISS 6x9 shade is attached by means of a rod to the camera body .
The HASSELBLAD Pro Shade is attached to the lens via Bajonet .

Most of the forum members surely know that .

But here some figures :

The LEE universal is 190 gramms including the screw in adapter . The front width is 11cm .
The LEE wide angle beast has a width of 13,5x17,5 cm and weighs 250 gramms .
The ARCA shade is 195 gramms (including the rod) and has a widths of
only 9 cm . I don't have any figures for the bigger shade .
(Christopher might be able to give these figures)

The HASSELBLAD compendium , just as a comparison , is 260 gramms and has a width of 10,5 cm .

I don't like the idea of the screw-in adapted shades , because all the shade's weight is on the front thread of the lens . Additional the fiddling around , when screwing in the adapter .
I don't like the "rod solution" very much , as the whole thing waggles around . I have used that shade many years in my LF days with the ARCA 6x9/4x5 . Focal length of the lenses all above 90mm .

Therefore I have the idea of a slip-on solution plus a rod to stabilize the whole monster .
There will be the need to make an attachment for a rod to camera for the LEE hoods or a slip-on gear for the ARCA hood .
IMO , both can be easily done by a good mechanic .

Any better ideas ? ? ?
No baseball caps or umbrellas , please .

Stephengilbert (Steve) has given me an interesting link .

http://www.skgrimes.com/products/slip-on-filter-adapter

This genious man could possibly supply an adapter made to given specifications .
 

jotloob

Subscriber Member
Jürgen
Would you happen to know if the Lee Wide angle shades work on the Rodenstock 32 HR with a regular 86mm lens adapter?unfortunately Lee does not have a dedicated 86 wide angle lens adapter so I am wondering if there is vignetting caused by the regular adapter.
I assume the regular Lee compendium shade is not wide enough for the 32HR
Any info on that.
Thanks

Grischa

Grischa

Yes it is true , there is no WA adapter ring 86 (and bigger) .
I use the M86 adapter ring with the WA shade on my DIGARON-S 28mm
and have not experienced any vignetting so far .
As the image circle of that lens is only 70mm , I do not use that lens with shifting . The HASSELBLAD CFV-50 back , which I use , has no FF sensor . So vignetting is only a minor issue for me .
Hope this helps .
 

rupho

New member
Danke Jürgen
I contacted a sales and tech rep from Lee in the UK and he said the Wide Angle lens hood is designed to cover lenses up to 95 degree viewing angle.
My 32 got 107 degrees and your 28mm is probably around 115 degrees.
I am surprised that you have not experienced vignetting even on your CFV 50.
Best Grischa


Grischa

Yes it is true , there is no WA adapter ring 86 (and bigger) .
I use the M86 adapter ring with the WA shade on my DIGARON-S 28mm
and have not experienced any vignetting so far .
As the image circle of that lens is only 70mm , I do not use that lens with shifting . The HASSELBLAD CFV-50 back , which I use , has no FF sensor . So vignetting is only a minor issue for me .
Hope this helps .
 
Top