Hey Moose,
Interesting question. As a preamble I would say it is a safe assumption that
you have forgotton more about hoods than I have ever learned. One site I have
liked is: http://www.vanwalree.com/optics/lenshood.html
A few users have reported a tendency for flare though I have experienced none
thus far at higher mag with the hood in place. The CV users group appears to
think highly of the lens as well.? The lens cap is an oddball metal screw-in
variety though the overall engineering is superb.? The hood has a nicely fitted
rubber cap that makes it convenient to carry that way.? The squarish format
should be more effective than an equivalent sized round hood and I suppose they
make it easy to carry it with the hood on with the cap to encourage its
use.?That is exactly the way I used it on a recent macro foray. ?A larger
rectangular one or tulip might be more cumbersome or difficult to cap.?? I
doubt they would skimp on the coatings on this lens though perhaps the internal
design makes it more subject to flare.? There are likely floating elements.?
The hood as is does seem sufficient though I have not tested it at lower mags
in backlit situations.
A guessing Mike
> Haven't seen one in OM mount for 6 months---I captured mine after a
> near heroic effort and the over the top effort of a tech at Cosina who
> went out to a shop in Tokyo for the final capture.
>
> So far am very pleased with its performance.......
>
> 270241539443
>
OK, I'll bite. Why is the hood square?
Surely once you go from round, the bayonet mechanism must align the
sides with the sides of the frame. So why not go rectangular, or its
analog, tulip shape?
A. Curious Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|