I nearly always use the hood but even then occasionally get aperture flare
images. My vague feeling is that it is a little better than the 35mm shift
lens and better than the SN 24mm f2.8 prime for flare resistance. I haven't
used a 35mm prime enough to compare.
-jeff
(It's much easier to hand shade a zoom lens than to hand shade a shift lens
that decides it wants to follow gravity ... nor are the hoods for the shift
lenses very useful.)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Siddiq" <iddibhai@xxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 2:24 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] 35-70/3.6 -- hood how important?
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:38:52 -0800, Jeff Keller <jrk_om@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
> > The lens isn't flare proof. Get the hood when you can, the hood is nice,
> > but
> > don't leave the lens home because you don't have the hood. You can
always
> > use your five fingered lens hood if necessary.
> > -jeff
>
> how much will i have to "salute" hood it? kinda hard to single handedly
> hold the whole deal (esp with that heavy a lens making it want to tilt
> down forward). hmm better go around browsing for hoods now.
>
> --
> /S
> aim:iddibhai
> icq:104079359
> msidd004atstudentdotucrdotedu
>
>
> < 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 >
>
>
< 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 >
|