Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-13-2012, 10:19 AM   #1
Veteran Member
volosong's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Antelope Valley, SoCal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 663
question about the 01 vented lens hood

So, I snagged me an 01 prime and went down to the bay to get a hood for it, (I always use hoods on all my lenses, mostly for protection from by big, fat fingers). There are two types available, one that is a clone of the Pentax hood and mimics the hood of a DA40. The other one is a typical cone shape hood, but has three metal vents/slots in it. What are those vents/slots for? Isn't a hood supposed to stop stray light from the rear/sides. Seems like the vents defeat this purpose.

12-13-2012, 11:08 AM   #2
Loyal Site Supporter
THoog's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: North Carolina
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,484
The vented hoods are usually used by rangefinder cameras - they don't block the viewfinder. Any extra light coming through the vents is a tradeoff.
12-13-2012, 11:18 AM   #3
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
I asked the same question about the vented hoods for the Q and got that they are used with Leicas so they must be ok. ANY stray light will degrade the IQ, hoods need to block as MUCH stray light as possible to maximize performance. So, vented hoods are not something I'll be buying - regardless of what folks that pay $8-10K+ for their cameras do.
12-13-2012, 11:25 AM   #4
Pentaxian
Aegon's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,413
Rangefinder bodies have an optical viewfinder somewhat near the lens (rangefinders do not operate through-the-lens). Normal hoods tend to block these viewfinders. So rangefinder hoods have vents to permit use of the viewfinder while getting most of the benefit of a hood.

The Q isn't a rangefinder and doesn't have an optical viewfinder near the hood. So the vent isn't necessary.

The vent may have been added to get a rangefinder appearance. If this matters to you, then you might want the vent.

Here are some examples of finder blockage:
LEICA SUMMILUX 50mm f/1.4 (1960-2004)

12-13-2012, 12:07 PM   #5
Veteran Member
volosong's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Antelope Valley, SoCal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 663
Original Poster
Thanks, guys. I ordered the DA40 style hood. I suppose that I won't be lucky enough that a Fuji film canister cap will fit, like it does on the DA40 hood.
12-13-2012, 01:48 PM   #6
Pentaxian
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,760
Im wondering though, is a vented hood much worse than a hood without vents? Or are the vents designed so well that they are virtually equally effective? I am asking because for some reason those vented hoods are quite easy to find and relatively cheap. And stylish.
12-13-2012, 02:01 PM   #7
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,796
I prefer the integrated (DA40) style hood as I'm all for keeping it streamlined and small. I leave it on at all times and the lens and camera fit in my pocket.

I don't use the cap, I just take the hood off and use a blower on the lens periodically if it needs it.
12-13-2012, 02:09 PM   #8
Pentaxian
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,310
I doubt there's much noticeable effect on contrast. The vents are behind the line of sight of most front elements, and the black lining would suppress much of what did stray through. Someone with both could set up an experiment to check, but I suspect they'd be wasting their time. You never know until you try, though.

For practical purposes, I notice that a Forum member John M Flores is showing the contents of his camera bag on another forum, and his Q has a vented lens hood. As John uses his Q for his motorcycle touring magazine work, I reckon that's probably as good a test of real world outcomes as we're likely to see.

12-13-2012, 02:57 PM   #9
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
QuoteOriginally posted by crewl1 Quote
I prefer the integrated (DA40) style hood as I'm all for keeping it streamlined and small. I leave it on at all times and the lens and camera fit in my pocket.

I don't use the cap, I just take the hood off and use a blower on the lens periodically if it needs it.
After first getting the Q, I ordered one of these, but the extra bulk, and inability to reverse the hood for carrying made me look for another solution. So. . .

I'm with crewl1 -- the JJC OEM style hood is tiny and very convenient for pocket carry.

I did find the screw in cap to be a pain because it took quite a few turns to unscrew it, but I've since stretched a small rubber band (like the ones orthodontists use for braces) around the threads on the cap, and this solved the problem for me. It takes up enough space so it takes about 1/2 turn to remove the cap, and the rubber adds enough friction so the cap does not have to be tightened down much to stay on.

Docrwm found some pinch caps that fit the opening, and this is another alternative, as is crewl1's of just leaving the cap off.

Scott
12-13-2012, 04:47 PM   #10
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by snostorm Quote
After first getting the Q, I ordered one of these, but the extra bulk, and inability to reverse the hood for carrying made me look for another solution. So. . .

I'm with crewl1 -- the JJC OEM style hood is tiny and very convenient for pocket carry.

I did find the screw in cap to be a pain because it took quite a few turns to unscrew it, but I've since stretched a small rubber band (like the ones orthodontists use for braces) around the threads on the cap, and this solved the problem for me. It takes up enough space so it takes about 1/2 turn to remove the cap, and the rubber adds enough friction so the cap does not have to be tightened down much to stay on.

Docrwm found some pinch caps that fit the opening, and this is another alternative, as is crewl1's of just leaving the cap off.

Scott
Scott,
The pinch caps were around $2.50 for 2 and are working very well. My hood, like Crewl1, just does not come off the 01.
12-13-2012, 04:50 PM   #11
Veteran Member
volosong's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Antelope Valley, SoCal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 663
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Docrwm Quote
Scott,
The pinch caps were around $2.50 for 2 and are working very well. My hood, like Crewl1, just does not come off the 01.
eBay? What size is the opening? (Just ordered mine today, so it will take a week or so to get to me.)
12-13-2012, 05:26 PM   #12
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by volosong Quote
eBay? What size is the opening? (Just ordered mine today, so it will take a week or so to get to me.)
New 2 x 25mm Snap on Front Camera Lens Cap for Canon Nikon Sony Pentax Lens | eBay

25mm and they work just fine.
01-05-2013, 03:31 AM   #14
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
Hi wtfitzphat,

I have to assume that they would work, but I'd have serious doubts about the quality of the lenses. Not knowing them it's hard to say how they will perform, but I do know that some of the best of the add on front teleconverter lenses, the Sony HGD 1758, when available new, was 2-3x the cost of this whole package for just this one lens. The Olympus TCon17 sold for $70, and most of Nikon's best add on TCs and WCs for their early fixed lens digitals were over $200 each -- some of which even use very expensive ultra low dispersion glass to retain IQ.

A big problem with add on lenses like this is the weight. Q system lenses are designed to save as much weight as possible. After using adapted K mount lenses, I know that the mount is sturdy enough, but the Q system lenses would probably suffer if you hang much weight off their ends on a regular basis.

That being said, I'm gathering the stuff I need to try some premium add on TCs to Q lenses -- especially the 06 zoom as these would stretch the reach of the 06, retaining at least most of the max aperture and most importantly, AF for some specific uses. Once I'm able to test these, I'll post some results along with a whole lot of caveats about how to support them so the main lens is not damaged.

Bottom line, I would not recommend these, -- they might work fine -- but they would cause undue stress on your 01 prime, and they are most likely very questionable in optical quality, so probably have more severe downsides than possible slight advantages.

Scott
01-05-2013, 03:20 PM   #15
New Member




Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3
QuoteOriginally posted by snostorm Quote
Hi wtfitzphat,

I have to assume that they would work, but I'd have serious doubts about the quality of the lenses. Not knowing them it's hard to say how they will perform, but I do know that some of the best of the add on front teleconverter lenses, the Sony HGD 1758, when available new, was 2-3x the cost of this whole package for just this one lens. The Olympus TCon17 sold for $70, and most of Nikon's best add on TCs and WCs for their early fixed lens digitals were over $200 each -- some of which even use very expensive ultra low dispersion glass to retain IQ.

A big problem with add on lenses like this is the weight. Q system lenses are designed to save as much weight as possible. After using adapted K mount lenses, I know that the mount is sturdy enough, but the Q system lenses would probably suffer if you hang much weight off their ends on a regular basis.

That being said, I'm gathering the stuff I need to try some premium add on TCs to Q lenses -- especially the 06 zoom as these would stretch the reach of the 06, retaining at least most of the max aperture and most importantly, AF for some specific uses. Once I'm able to test these, I'll post some results along with a whole lot of caveats about how to support them so the main lens is not damaged.

Bottom line, I would not recommend these, -- they might work fine -- but they would cause undue stress on your 01 prime, and they are most likely very questionable in optical quality, so probably have more severe downsides than possible slight advantages.

Scott
thanks snostorm!
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, hood, mirrorless, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q10, q7
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question about moving to K-01 TheOsOProject Pentax K-01 5 12-12-2012 09:13 PM
Question about K-01 handling of lens aperture Laurentiu Cristofor Pentax K-01 4 04-05-2012 11:47 AM
Question about K-01. fstdslrkx Pentax K-01 11 03-28-2012 04:06 PM
Dumb question about lens hood nhughes Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 6 04-22-2011 03:21 PM
Question about kit lens hood GregK8 Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 11 03-02-2009 06:43 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:58 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top