At 03:06 PM 10/31/04, Walt wrote (in part):
>Andrew,
>
>A hood, any hood, as long as it doesn't vignette, is preferable to no hood
>at all.
Yes!
The center of the lens objective on the 80-200/2.8 Tamron is also fairly
close to the end of the filter ring . . . it's set back from it, but not by
much. Whether or not one experiences flare with a particular lens is also
situational . . . subject material (including off-axis light sources) and
filter use. Lenses I would otherwise rate as superbly immune to flare in
many daylight and on-camera flash situations can produce ghost reflections
and a little aperture flare in very low light . . . especially if there are
relatively bright light sources forward of the lens front. A proper hood
reduces risk of this. IMVHO there is NO dioptric or catadioptric camera
lens made that is "flare proof."
Another situation that most wouldn't experience is with off-camera lighting
(studio lights) if, for compositional reasons, the camera position is
behind the lights. Spill from brollies when just behind the
monolight/brollie gap in the "spill" region can be quite troublesome. It's
not very detectable in the viewfinder even if modeling lights are at full
power.
I've become AR about hood use finding that flare occurrance goes down
significantly when lens hoods are used at all times, and when filters are
removed in low light.
-- John
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|