RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Hood - EW-52 vs ES-52 for EF 40mm F2.8 STM

So the hood, EW-52, for the RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM Macro is not quite the same as the one for EF 40mm f/2.8 STM which is the ES-52 hood but they are both small plastic screw-on rings. So why is the new RF hood $41 vs  the $8-12 for the older one?

Also, is there really any difference? I have the 40mm and its ES-52 hood. If anyone has the EW-52 can you measure the diameter of the hole and share it hear. I will have to measure the other one so we can compare them.

Seems like Canon is simply out of touch with what this should cost. Also its hard to understand why they don't include it. Stupid moves like this push people to Sony, Fujifilm, and other vendors.  Sony and Fuji both have lenses at the same price and lower that include a hood and some cases its actually a real hood.

Just a rant but just felt the need to make a statement even though I know Canon is deaf to this kind of thing and has been for years.

I just sold my RF 35 but when I had the lens I found that the metal Nikon HN3 lens hood worked great for that lens.  Paid $15.00 for it on ebay.  Might look at that as an option.

SJK065 wrote:

I just sold my RF 35 but when I had the lens I found that the metal Nikon HN3 lens hood worked great for that lens. Paid $15.00 for it on ebay. Might look at that as an option.

Thanks, Actually own a HN3 hood from my Nikon film lens so I will try it out.

For as long as I can remember Canon only ships a hood with L lenses.

I use a "B+W 52mm 900 Collapsible Rubber Lens Hood" hood for 3 reasons.

The hood screws into the lens barrel that moves with focus so you want to protect it and a rubber hood is better than metal and its cheap $20 at Amazon and $15 at B&H.

davel33 wrote:

For as long as I can remember Canon only ships a hood with L lenses.

I use a "B+W 52mm 900 Collapsible Rubber Lens Hood" hood for 3 reasons.

The hood screws into the lens barrel that moves with focus so you want to protect it and a rubber hood is better than metal and its cheap $20 at Amazon and $15 at B&H.

Probably the best idea for this lens. Thanks.

There is also aftermarket versions of that hood for on the cheap. I also looked at that hood and thought WTH! I personally believe in using lens hoods for both protection and preventing flair, but I don't see the point of that little screw on... BTW, canon does not include lens hoods with non L lenses but it does on all the L series lenses.

BaldEgo wrote:

JJC makes a compatible hood (LH-EW52) for a much more reasonable price. I picked up mine for less than $20.00 Cdn on Amazon Canada a few months ago. It looks and functions just like Canon’s version.

Thank you for the info. I will follow up on it.

Dan W wrote:

There is also aftermarket versions of that hood for on the cheap. I also looked at that hood and thought WTH! I personally believe in using lens hoods for both protection and preventing flair, but I don't see the point of that little screw on... BTW, canon does not include lens hoods with non L lenses but it does on all the L series lenses.

Been buying Canon gear for 25 years so I know that their non-L glass has never included a hood so I was not surprised by this. What surprised me was the HUGE cost differential for the EW-52 when the ES-52 was 1/3 to 1/4 its cost. Also what bothered me was what appears to be a completely useless creation, similar to the the one for the 40mm STM but I assumed that was because it was a pancake lens and had a real motivation to keep it very, very small.

Looks like JJC does make an alternative but wondering if its better to buy that one or one of the flexible rubber B+W ones. Or even one of the Nikon screw on or clip on hoods that works with a 52mm filter thread. All have been suggested here now.

The Nikon HN-3 is a metal screw on hood made for all the older Nikon AI-S 35mm lenses and remembered that  I owned it and it screws on fine.  There is also a HS-12 that I also have that is a snap on made originally for a 50mm that fits fine.

The key question is how well do any of these deal with lens flare since its hard to tell how their extension and angle map to the field of view of a 35mm given where any of the elements are in the lens itself.

Thanks to all for responding. Now I just need to try some of them out to how well the work.

When I first saw the EW-52 I thought it was a joke. The hood looks like an ordinary filter ring. I am afraid that it has very little efficiency in blocking the side light.
I also think about what hood to buy on my RF 35mm. I feel much better about design and size of Nikon HN-3.

mtillitt wrote:

If you can get ahold of an old EW-65 or ES-65 clip on hood they will attach over the main barrel with the use of a small o ring. Not my original idea. It came from an earlier thread on this forum. Great protection from flare and impact damage

So where do you place the O ring? I don't see it here in the photo. Is it inside the hood?

Calimero1 wrote:

When I first saw the EW-52 I thought it was a joke. The hood looks like an ordinary filter ring. I am afraid that it has very little efficiency in blocking the side light.
I also think about what hood to buy on my RF 35mm. I feel much better about design and size of Nikon HN-3.

That’s what you would think, right?

Wrong. The pancake hood actually works better than the HN-3 for blocking stray light.

mtillitt wrote:

The o ring goes in the little groove around the front of the main barrel. I think I used about 3/32 x 2 inch diameter. If you use 3/32 size, going to a larger overall diameter will make it stretch less and be a tighter fit for the hood. It may take a little trial and error to get just the right fit. Mine is pretty snug to take off but it won't get bumped off either. Only bummer is the overall diameter of the hood isn't large enough to reverse over the lens. The one in the picture is the ES-65. EW-65 is a little shorter. Neither vignettes.

Thank you