Do you use lens hoods while travelling?

I've never gotten into the habit of using a lens hood (even when I probably should) because of the extra bulk, but I'll be going away to Australia/NZ soon and am considering doing so because I want to maximize my chances of taking spectacular shots. I'll be bringing a D80 with the 18-200 VR and the Sigma 10-20 with UV and CP filters. Would using the lens hoods for these lenses make a significant difference, or would it just be more to carry and get in the way? Thanks.

Yes, they can make a significant difference, though a superzoom's hood is by necessity very shallow.

It depends whether or not the hood throws some shade on the lens. You could see the affect it could have by shooting toward the sun, with sunlight falling on the lens. Raise your hand to throw a shadow, and I have no doubt you'll see an obvious difference in what you see.

The lens hood also helps protect the lens somewhat.

You can reverse the hood on the lens with the bayonet type of hoods. Makes it a lot easier to carry, though the width is still there.

Personally, I never shoot outdoors without the hoods, with some exceptions for night.

... will never do anything bad for your photos.

I never shoot without, I ven have one that goes on the my square filter holder.
Shooting without, increase the risk of flare and reduced contrast.

Worst case is vignette from a poorly designed hood, but it is a very rare thing to see happen if you use the hood shipped with the lens

To me it is quite simple, I just never shoots without lens hoods.
--
Thomas

Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool
http://main.duplophotography.com/

Yes, Yes, Yes, always carry and use the hoods, less flare, better contrast and some degree of protection if you drop the lens

Using a lens hood will do more for protecting your lens and improving your image quality than your UV filter will.

• Seyil

Thanks all, for your advice. If I could only bring one lens hood (I know I know...I should bring both), which one would be more important, the 18-200 or the 10-20? I've read that lens hoods are not as effective on wider lenses. Any truth to that?

You really should bring both.

If you really need to choose, then just bring the one for the lens you use the most.

But honestly, how much space would a lens hood make up for in a daypack? let alone suitcase?

Gigi said:

Thanks all, for your advice. If I could only bring one lens hood (I
know I know...I should bring both), which one would be more
important, the 18-200 or the 10-20? I've read that lens hoods are
not as effective on wider lenses. Any truth to that?

Click to expand...

--
Thomas

Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool
http://main.duplophotography.com/

If you look at the geometry involved, you'll quickly see why lens hoods are 'less effective' for wide angle than telephoto.

What you want is the lens to be deep in shadow. That's possible with a telephoto. But a wide angle would vignette with a deep lens hood, since the hood would cut into the image. So you see shallow hoods on wide angle lenses.

That also means that there is a narrow range of sun angles that would be outside the image, yet shaded by a lens hood. In those situations, a lens hood works great.

My 10.5 fisheye is so wide, in spite of built-in hood, that it often has the sun in the image. If not, it often has my shadow in the image!

At least it cuts some reflected glare in general.

The 18-200 hood is very much a compromise. It really is a hood designed for an 18mm lens. If you look at hoods for lenses like the 105vr macro, you will see how long/deep they can be. But the 18-200 hood is still better than not having one.

Besides increasing contrast, I find a hood helps keep stray fingers off the lens. I do have to be careful when using a circular polarizer, as you have to reach inside the hood to turn it with a finger.

If you want to see an interesting and effective lens/hood design, check out the hood on the Nikon 24-70f2.8. That lens zooms out at 24mm (lens gets longer). The hood is mounted to the body, so the front element actually moves forward significantly inside the hood when zoomed wide. This allows for a deeper hood design for the longer focal lengths.

3 weeks ago I dropped my D300 with 70-300 on the pavement, ON MY LENS. The lens hood, on the opposite way, took some of the fall and crunched a bit. The lens is still toast and my D300 is in the shop with problems (price tag unknown as of yet), but it probably spared even more damage.
--

Nikon D300, D40x; Nikkor AF-S 18-55 mm, AF-S 70-300 mmVR; Canon Powershot A620 & underwater housing

I took a dive today. Went down hard, and on the way, the 70-300VR that I had mounted on the D300 hit first.

Fortunately, I had the hood on, and it took all the damage. Well, my knee took more damage, but I was more concerned about the camera.

In any case, ever since I quit using UV filters, I've made it a point to always put the hood on. Today, it paid off.

Thanks for everyone's input.

Duplo said:

You really should bring both.

If you really need to choose, then just bring the one for the lens
you use the most.

But honestly, how much space would a lens hood make up for in a
daypack? let alone suitcase?

Click to expand...

I am rather reluctant to bring the lens hoods because my camera case JUST fits my D80 with the two lenses. I know I can just toss the lens hoods in my backback, etc. but it's just so much easier to keep everything together. However, if they really make that much of a difference and can protect my lenses in the case of accidents, etc., then bringing them will definitely be worth the hassle.

PHXAZCRAIG wrote:
[snip]

PHXAZCRAIG said:

If you want to see an interesting and effective lens/hood design,
check out the hood on the Nikon 24-70f2.8. That lens zooms out at
24mm (lens gets longer). The hood is mounted to the body, so the
front element actually moves forward significantly inside the hood
when zoomed wide. This allows for a deeper hood design for the
longer focal lengths.

Click to expand...

FWIW, the 17-55/2.8 is designed the same way. Very clever.

larsbc