Reading mode: Light Dark

Hood for Panasonic 20mm?

Go to last post
I have tried two different third party hoods:

A 46mm screw in hood designed for the Leica Summilux. It is vented, metal, and somewhat large compared with the lens. But it works good, and no vignetting. Cost around US$12:

http://m43photo.blogspot.com/2010/03/third-party-hood-for-lumix-20mm-f17.html

To get a more low profile hood, I have also tried to paint a step down ring black, for use on the lens. This works quite well, I think, and gives a good much like the one for the Pentax 40mm f/2.8 pancake, one of the slimmest lenses there is. Cost around US$10:

http://m43photo.blogspot.com/2010/05/home-made-hood-for-lumix-20mm-f17.html
 
Fredrik Glckner said:
To get a more low profile hood, I have also tried to paint a step down ring black, for use on the lens. This works quite well, I think, and gives a good much like the one for the Pentax 40mm f/2.8 pancake, one of the slimmest lenses there is. Cost around US$10:

http://m43photo.blogspot.com/2010/05/home-made-hood-for-lumix-20mm-f17.html
Click to expand...
That´s to complicated. Just buy a black stepdown-ring from ebay, I payed 1,94 Euro (about 2,50 US$) for a black 46-37mm, delivery included.

Like this one, but it will cost you 3,86 US$:

http://cgi.ebay.com/46-37-Step-down-filter-ring-black-Adapter-46mm-37mm-/320419861581?cmd=ViewItem&pt=Lens_Accessories&hash=item4a9a83144d
 
I used a non-vented screw-in metal hood (I want to say I got it from Heavystar on eBay) that was suggested earlier on in this forum. No vignetting at all. Venting is a non-issue since there's no rangefinder and you're looking through the lens (via EVF) at all times. The little rubber ones should be just fine too.

--
'Nice pen, bet you write good stories with it.'
 
Nikonparrothead said:
The little rubber ones should be just fine too.
Click to expand...
Just be careful with these rubberhoods.

The diameter at the base of the hood is a little larger than on the metalhoods. The frontelement of the 20mm with the thread is moving inwards after switching the camera off, even out of infinity-position. If you screw the rubberhood tight with a switched-on camera, this movement will become impossible for the lens, thus damaging the mechanism.

If you want to use a rubberhood, make sure you don´t use the last half turn to screw it in.
 
I got this one from ebay: 46mm vented hood with 55mm lens cup



--
Regards,

Juan
 
I have a rubber hood and it works fine.

Be warned!!! Never fold the hood all the way back over the lens. It fights the auto focus on the camera and the lcd keeps oscillating in and out of focus. Before I realized this was the problem, I was ready to send the GF1 to Panasonic and wondering why I had to be the one with the defective camera.
 
This Pancake is one of the rare lenses that need no hood.
I never had any flare issues with it.

And please think of the strange screw thread of that lens - any part you screw in may hinder the focus mechanism.

Plus most hoods which are shown here are far to big (because the screw thread is so much bigger than the front lens) - they are inefficient at least.

Regards, Karsten
 
Fredrik Glckner said:
I absolutely agree with you. On the other hand, I think that using a hood is good, because it gives some basic protection against touching the front element accidentally.
Click to expand...
Please keep that in mind what will happen when you bump the lens hood with your

hand or any object? It might help you from getting finger prints but it may casuse
more damage to the mechanism of the lens when you are not carefull enough.
For most of the lenses out there, the hoods are mounted on the outer rim of the

lenses and not directly on the moving lens barrel. You will only get the most protection of the lens using hoods mounted on the outer of the lens. Because of
that, I'd not suggest to use any hoods on the 20mm f.17 lens. :)
 
Forgot to add this - using a rubber hoods should be safer than those solid/metal
hoods I think.
 
This has been covered before on several threads. The 20mm lens entire front element, including the threaded section on which a screw-in hood would mount, moves during focussing. This means that anything screwed into the lens threads can transmit shock to the focussing mechanism.

There's really no need to use a hood with this lens unless one wants to make a fashion statement of some sort. But, why expose the lens to potential damage and make the whole package bigger if there is no functional reason to do so?

The 20mm is quite resistant to flare, as DPReview states:

"The 20mm F1.7, despite its fast maximum aperture, excels in its handling of flare. It's possible to shoot directly into the sun with little ill-effect, and during extended use in bright late summer sun we saw little evidence for any images being adversely affected by flare, no matter how hard we tried to stress the lens."...

..."Normally we're concerned when a lens isn't supplied with a hood, but in this case it doesn't seem to be a major cause for complaint."

Sunlight shining directly into the 20mm f/1.7:

 
Bought on fleabay..
As was the leather half case :)

I use the hood because I always have a Nd filter on it in summer,it flares like crazy without it.

original.jpg
'] http://www.pbase.com/walshy/image/125732585/original.jpg[/img] [/URL]

--
Cheers Guy...
(originally joined 1999) Lost my password :(
 
everythingsablur said:
Looks nice!

And this doesn't have any problems when you shut off the camera as the lens retracts ever so slightly as noted?
Click to expand...
No problems so far.

--
Regards,

Juan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top