On 4/23/2014 10:35 PM, Andrew Fildes wrote:
I used the JJC hood for the 9-18mm and 12-60mm (same hood). I cannot understand
why Olympus doesn't just throw that one in - it's a $2 plastic casting dammit!
Yes, I agree, it's an annoying practice. Fortunately, the JJC (and Rainbow Imaging, which seem identical) hoods are
quite good.
JJC even makes a copy of Oly's clever sliding hood for the 60/2.8 macro. It didn't work at all smoothly at first.
Addition of some Teflon gel lubricant in the channels have made it quite decent. Whether as good as the original, I"ll
likely never know.
With the 20/1.7 I bought the nifty dome cap from japan exposures - not cheap
but very pancake.
I'd forgotten about that. When you posted about it before, I didn't have the
lens.
I have a couple of hood solutions that are fine with the larger bodies, an inexpensive Fotodiox rectangular hood with
slip on cover, and, more elegantly, the original, beautiful metal OM hood for 50/1.4/1.8 and 35/2.8.
<http://zone-10.com/tope2/main.php?g2_itemId=2638>
I've now spent a few hours using the 20/1.7 with Panny's miniscule GM1, popping the cap on an off as it went in and out
of a pocket. So I've ordered a dome hood. I'm looking forward to a slick pocket experience.
It works fine on the 14mm as well, no vignetting - I checked tho' I don't own
that one.
I've seen that report. Seems to me to indicate that the opening was chosen to accommodate a popular filter size, rather
than as best for shading the 20 mm lens? Still, a better hood than none and I hope more convenient than the cap. And a
bonus for the maker that it works with more lenses.
Hooded Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|