Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] 24/2 lenshood

Subject: Re: [OM] 24/2 lenshood
From: "John A. Lind" <jlind@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 10:18:27 +0000
At 05:28 4/7/01, Michael Kopp wrote:

No, the lens hood for the 24 mmm f/2 is useless. I threw mine away 27 years ago.

My philosophy is _a_ lens hood is better than no lens hood . . . conceding that some are more useful than others . . . and they can be a PITA to put on and take off. I've gotten more disciplined in using them because they have saved my hind end from off-axis flare. However, at 28mm focal lengths and wider effectiveness goes down . . . more from the wide angle of view taking in more possible sources of flare . . . not from whether the hood itself is a better or worse design. Probably something you already know. Just one man's opine on it.

There's nothing magical about one have Oly's name on it with the focal length. An ideal hood would be at least as long as the focal length, have a rectangular shape in the same aspect ratio as the film gate, and only be wide enough to keep from vignetting the image on it. Most are much less than this ideal.

Two situations where lens hoods are often dispensed with where they ought to be used! One is night photography, especially with long timed photographs. The other is with flash strobes, especially indoors, where you can get reflectance from off-axis objects from all the light bouncing around.

Question: what about the lens.

In fact, what about all of Oly's great lenses (the "pro" lenses, the ones that go beyond consumer specs?).

My experience with the "MC" prime lenses overall (some marked "MC" and some after Oly stopped marking them) is they are better than average . . . and significantly better than the current offerings of "consumer priced" AF lenses for Nikon, Canon and Minolta AF SLR bodies. Picked up a couple of them and handled them at a store last night . . . BLECCCCHHHH! I'll stay with the "Brass, Glass and Steel," Thank You). When I consistently get very positive remarks about "image clarity" (I interpret this as perceived acuity by the viewer) it tells me the OM Zuiko's are delivering more . . . with smaller size and lower weight.

They're the reason (well, so was the OM1 body's lightweight and quiet shutter and mirror) I dumped my Nikons after 15 years of professional use, including a war.

The only other system I might consider is Nikon's manual focus with the AIS lenses . . . an F3 or possibly an FM-2n . . . but the weight and size of the system has always drawn me back to the OM's.

I still love them.

So do I.

-- John


< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz