Do I need a lens hood and a filter for K2000

Agesconde · 06-02-2009, 12:42 AM

Hello everyone. I'm wondering if someone can tell me if I need to use a lens hood and a filter for my k2000. I look through the manual for the recommended/optional accessories but they were not included. Any suggestions would help.

simico · 06-02-2009, 01:33 AM

A lens hood is good if the sun shines directly on your front lens, shading it can avoid lens flare and might get better contrast. You can also use your hand or black cardboard for that.

There are different types of filters, what type are you asking? UV or so-called "protector" filters are useless in my opinion, the front glass of modern lenses is tough enough, with little care you don't have to worry. These filters also have a small negative impact on image quality and AF performance.
Polarizer, "blue sky", etc, filters are used to modify the incoming light and thus the image - you need them if you want to get that specific effect.

Damn Brit · 06-02-2009, 01:59 AM

The lens hood also acts as a certain amount of protection for the front element in the absence of a filter.
Unless you get a very good filter (and even then) you will lose a certain amount of image quality.
Exceptions to this are Polarised and ND filters which you would only use for certain conditions. The former for use in bright sunny conditions and the latter in conditions where you might want a slower shutter speed (waterfall for example) but the light is too bright for that slow speed.

**NaClH2O** · 06-02-2009, 03:55 AM

I always use a hood even when it is cloudy or when I'm inside. I find that it helps increase contrast, especieally outside, and like DB above said it help protect the front element of the lens from bumps and the like.

NaCl(I guess you could call me a 'hoodie' )H2O

Agesconde · 06-02-2009, 10:37 AM

I'm looking for the skylight filter and the UV/Haze. I just don't know which brand is best. The thing about the hood is that the manual stated that I have to take the hood out whenever I'm using the built in flash--I wonder how convenient is it going to be against the quality that I will be getting with or without the hood.

Agesconde · 06-02-2009, 10:42 AM

Originally posted by Damn Brit

The lens hood also acts as a certain amount of protection for the front element in the absence of a filter.
Unless you get a very good filter (and even then) you will lose a certain amount of image quality.
Exceptions to this are Polarised and ND filters which you would only use for certain conditions. The former for use in bright sunny conditions and the latter in conditions where you might want a slower shutter speed (waterfall for example) but the light is too bright for that slow speed.

If I use the hood, can I still use a filter on top of that? Or just use either one? Please bear with me, I'm new to photography and just want to make an informed decision before throwing off a lot of money on this hobby.

Niki · 06-02-2009, 10:50 AM

I don't use my filters, but I do know they screw on to the end of the lens where the glass is and the lens hood fits on an area on the outer tube of the lens, so you can use both at once since they lock onto different areas.

Igilligan · 06-02-2009, 10:57 AM

The kits should come with lens hoods... I always use a hood when outside.

Marc Sabatella · 06-02-2009, 11:42 AM

I believe the K2000 kit was sold without hoods.

Here's my bottom line on the question being asked, keeping in mind the expressed concern about not throwing money away:

Hood = a small amount of money; effect is to *improve* image quality

Filter = also small amount of money to spend; effect is to *degrade* image quality

Make your choice however you see fit, but it's a no-brainer to me. If' you're looking to avoid throwing money away, I certainly be spending it one something that makes my pictures worse when I could be spending it on something that makes them better.

BTW, removing a hood for a flash picture takes a fraction of a second; no more time than it takes to pop up the flash in the first place. But if you're in a situation where you'd be thinking of using flash (ie, indoors), might as well just leave the hood off.

Agesconde · 06-02-2009, 12:39 PM

Originally posted by Igilligan

The kits should come with lens hoods... I always use a hood when outside.

I got 18-55mm with external flash. At buy.com the ad stated that it does come with a lens hood but when i received the package, it was not included. I tried to ask for it but they said I have to call Pentax.

Damn Brit · 06-02-2009, 01:25 PM

You should be able to use the hood and filter together.

bladerunner0427 · 06-02-2009, 10:34 PM

I usually keep the hood on. And definitely have it on when outside in the sun. As for the filter, I use the Hoya Pro1 Digital UV filters. They're made especially for digital cameras. The filter (for me) is extra protection. A friend of mine had dropped his lens and struck an object on the way down. The fall cracked the filter. If it wasn't for the filter, the lens would have cracked or put a good scratch into it. Filters are cheap, lenses are not. But you don't want to use a cheap filter. Cheap filters degrade the image.

Marc Sabatella · 06-03-2009, 01:44 PM

The filte debate is very old, but if you get to mention the arugment in favor (there is a chance of dropping the lens in such a waythat it damages the filter but not the lens), I get to mention the rest of the story:

- that situation isn't very common
- it would probably be just as common for a fall that damaged the filter to *also* damage the filter
- a hood will protect the lens just as well in "most" of the situations that a filter might have helped with
- an insurance policy will protect all your lenses and the camera against a lot more than just certain types of falls, for less money than getting filters for all your lenses

OregonJim · 06-03-2009, 02:20 PM

I learned a cool little tidbit recently after reading "The Asahi Pentax Way" - it turns out that one of the layers in Pentax's SMC coating is itself a UV/Haze filter, making Skylight/UV/Haze/1A filters redundant on SMC lenses - at least for their intended purpose (the 'protection' debate is another matter).

brofkand · 06-03-2009, 03:23 PM

Glass in and of itself is an excellent UV filter. That's why Transitions glasses don't shift when driving: your windshield, for the fact of it being made of glass, filters out most of the UV rays. And UV rays are what make Transitions lenses shift.

UV filters do not enhance image quality, as some manufacturers state. In fact, it has been my experience that they degrade image quality. They eat up some light (not much), but they enhance the liklihood of getting flares (that much more glass in the lens assy to make light bounce around). Maybe not the flare you see (ghosts, etc) but the flare you don't: the flare that robs your images of contrast. That has been my experience with EVERY camera and lens and UV filter I've ever used.

They're worthless in my opinion. If you do scratch your front element of a lens, it can be replaced for not too much money. I've never scratched one on ANY lens, and I've been known to just wipe off lenses with my shirt. Not to say it can't happen, just that I'm fairly "rough" with my lenses and I've never done it.

Get one of those rubber lens hoods that can fold closed and fold open, and fit in your filter threads. Then put your cap over the hood. That's my typical deployment unless a lens comes with a custom hood, in which case I will use it instead of the rubber one.

I always buy a few "generic brand" hoods, lens caps, and etc every time I buy a new body or lens. I also buy step-up rings to go from whatever size the lens is to the size of my filters, which currently is 52mm. When I start getting faster glass, I'll probably buy better filters and move up to 72 or 77mm size filters.

Bottom line is this: in my opinion, the only filters you need for digital are ND-Grad (1 or 2 stops) and a Circular or Linear Polarizer. No UV filter.

Oh, and take everything I just said with a grain of salt. These are my personal experiences, not necessarily to be taken as gospel.

06-02-2009, 12:42 AM	#1
Agesconde New Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: AZ Posts: 11	Do I need a lens hood and a filter for K2000 Hello everyone. I'm wondering if someone can tell me if I need to use a lens hood and a filter for my k2000. I look through the manual for the recommended/optional accessories but they were not included. Any suggestions would help.

06-02-2009, 10:57 AM	#8
Igilligan Guest	What lens did you get with the K2000 The kits should come with lens hoods... I always use a hood when outside.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Lens hood with filter window	AndyB	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	14	11-05-2018 05:23 PM
Bayonet lens hood for Sigma 28-200 w 72mm filter diameter?	Sodbuster	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	0	03-16-2009 09:43 AM
DA 21mm + UV filter + lens hood -- help me?	gemini	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	14	02-03-2009 02:02 AM
Filter on hood or lens?	user440	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	5	05-30-2008 09:12 PM

06-02-2009, 01:33 AM	#2
simico Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Budapest Posts: 821	A lens hood is good if the sun shines directly on your front lens, shading it can avoid lens flare and might get better contrast. You can also use your hand or black cardboard for that. There are different types of filters, what type are you asking? UV or so-called "protector" filters are useless in my opinion, the front glass of modern lenses is tough enough, with little care you don't have to worry. These filters also have a small negative impact on image quality and AF performance. Polarizer, "blue sky", etc, filters are used to modify the incoming light and thus the image - you need them if you want to get that specific effect.

06-02-2009, 01:59 AM	#3
Damn Brit Guest	The lens hood also acts as a certain amount of protection for the front element in the absence of a filter. Unless you get a very good filter (and even then) you will lose a certain amount of image quality. Exceptions to this are Polarised and ND filters which you would only use for certain conditions. The former for use in bright sunny conditions and the latter in conditions where you might want a slower shutter speed (waterfall for example) but the light is too bright for that slow speed.

06-02-2009, 03:55 AM	#4
NaClH2O Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bronx NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,631	I always use a hood even when it is cloudy or when I'm inside. I find that it helps increase contrast, especieally outside, and like DB above said it help protect the front element of the lens from bumps and the like. NaCl(I guess you could call me a 'hoodie' )H2O

06-02-2009, 10:37 AM	#5
Agesconde New Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: AZ Posts: 11 Original Poster	I'm looking for the skylight filter and the UV/Haze. I just don't know which brand is best. The thing about the hood is that the manual stated that I have to take the hood out whenever I'm using the built in flash--I wonder how convenient is it going to be against the quality that I will be getting with or without the hood.

06-02-2009, 10:42 AM	#6
Agesconde New Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: AZ Posts: 11 Original Poster	Originally posted by Damn Brit The lens hood also acts as a certain amount of protection for the front element in the absence of a filter. Unless you get a very good filter (and even then) you will lose a certain amount of image quality. Exceptions to this are Polarised and ND filters which you would only use for certain conditions. The former for use in bright sunny conditions and the latter in conditions where you might want a slower shutter speed (waterfall for example) but the light is too bright for that slow speed. If I use the hood, can I still use a filter on top of that? Or just use either one? Please bear with me, I'm new to photography and just want to make an informed decision before throwing off a lot of money on this hobby.

06-02-2009, 10:50 AM	#7
Niki Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 244	I don't use my filters, but I do know they screw on to the end of the lens where the glass is and the lens hood fits on an area on the outer tube of the lens, so you can use both at once since they lock onto different areas.

06-02-2009, 11:42 AM	#9
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	I believe the K2000 kit was sold without hoods. Here's my bottom line on the question being asked, keeping in mind the expressed concern about not throwing money away: Hood = a small amount of money; effect is to improve image quality Filter = also small amount of money to spend; effect is to degrade image quality Make your choice however you see fit, but it's a no-brainer to me. If' you're looking to avoid throwing money away, I certainly be spending it one something that makes my pictures worse when I could be spending it on something that makes them better. BTW, removing a hood for a flash picture takes a fraction of a second; no more time than it takes to pop up the flash in the first place. But if you're in a situation where you'd be thinking of using flash (ie, indoors), might as well just leave the hood off.

06-02-2009, 12:39 PM	#10
Agesconde New Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: AZ Posts: 11 Original Poster	Originally posted by Igilligan The kits should come with lens hoods... I always use a hood when outside. I got 18-55mm with external flash. At buy.com the ad stated that it does come with a lens hood but when i received the package, it was not included. I tried to ask for it but they said I have to call Pentax.

06-02-2009, 01:25 PM	#11
Damn Brit Guest	You should be able to use the hood and filter together.

06-02-2009, 10:34 PM	#12
bladerunner0427 Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 113	I usually keep the hood on. And definitely have it on when outside in the sun. As for the filter, I use the Hoya Pro1 Digital UV filters. They're made especially for digital cameras. The filter (for me) is extra protection. A friend of mine had dropped his lens and struck an object on the way down. The fall cracked the filter. If it wasn't for the filter, the lens would have cracked or put a good scratch into it. Filters are cheap, lenses are not. But you don't want to use a cheap filter. Cheap filters degrade the image.

06-03-2009, 01:44 PM	#13
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	The filte debate is very old, but if you get to mention the arugment in favor (there is a chance of dropping the lens in such a waythat it damages the filter but not the lens), I get to mention the rest of the story: - that situation isn't very common - it would probably be just as common for a fall that damaged the filter to also damage the filter - a hood will protect the lens just as well in "most" of the situations that a filter might have helped with - an insurance policy will protect all your lenses and the camera against a lot more than just certain types of falls, for less money than getting filters for all your lenses

06-03-2009, 02:20 PM	#14
OregonJim Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon Posts: 1,327	I learned a cool little tidbit recently after reading "The Asahi Pentax Way" - it turns out that one of the layers in Pentax's SMC coating is itself a UV/Haze filter, making Skylight/UV/Haze/1A filters redundant on SMC lenses - at least for their intended purpose (the 'protection' debate is another matter).

06-03-2009, 03:23 PM	#15
brofkand Pentaxian Join Date: May 2009 Location: North Carolina Posts: 836	Glass in and of itself is an excellent UV filter. That's why Transitions glasses don't shift when driving: your windshield, for the fact of it being made of glass, filters out most of the UV rays. And UV rays are what make Transitions lenses shift. UV filters do not enhance image quality, as some manufacturers state. In fact, it has been my experience that they degrade image quality. They eat up some light (not much), but they enhance the liklihood of getting flares (that much more glass in the lens assy to make light bounce around). Maybe not the flare you see (ghosts, etc) but the flare you don't: the flare that robs your images of contrast. That has been my experience with EVERY camera and lens and UV filter I've ever used. They're worthless in my opinion. If you do scratch your front element of a lens, it can be replaced for not too much money. I've never scratched one on ANY lens, and I've been known to just wipe off lenses with my shirt. Not to say it can't happen, just that I'm fairly "rough" with my lenses and I've never done it. Get one of those rubber lens hoods that can fold closed and fold open, and fit in your filter threads. Then put your cap over the hood. That's my typical deployment unless a lens comes with a custom hood, in which case I will use it instead of the rubber one. I always buy a few "generic brand" hoods, lens caps, and etc every time I buy a new body or lens. I also buy step-up rings to go from whatever size the lens is to the size of my filters, which currently is 52mm. When I start getting faster glass, I'll probably buy better filters and move up to 72 or 77mm size filters. Bottom line is this: in my opinion, the only filters you need for digital are ND-Grad (1 or 2 stops) and a Circular or Linear Polarizer. No UV filter. Oh, and take everything I just said with a grain of salt. These are my personal experiences, not necessarily to be taken as gospel.