Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

bwDraco · 08-12-2011, 05:50 PM

I've noticed this in essentially every Leica lens hood I've encountered, including those for some Panasonic Leica Four Thirds and Micro Four Thirds lenses. Why does Leica use square lens hoods? Is there an advantage to this design?

--DragonLord

Last edited by bwDraco; 08-12-2011 at 06:01 PM.

SpecialK · 08-12-2011, 06:51 PM

They are more effective than round ones because they match the shape of the image.

nickthetasmaniac · 08-12-2011, 07:19 PM

As above.

A round lens hood will need cover the image circle, which means that there will be unnecessary gaps at the top and sides that a direct light source could come through and strike the lens element. A square hood will avoid this.

As a guess, I'd say it's probably more expensive to manufacture (at least it would have been when they were made of metal) which could explain why Leica does it when others don't...

bwDraco · 08-12-2011, 09:40 PM

Thanks.

I kinda wish more manufacturers took this "100% no compromise" approach in designing and building equipment like Leica, regardless of cost and even at huge premiums for a larger number of products, like the Sigma 200-500mm f/2.8 (US$26K) and Leica Noctilux-M 50mm f/0.95 ASPH. (US$10K) ...

--DragonLord

Last edited by bwDraco; 08-12-2011 at 09:57 PM.

RioRico · 08-13-2011, 03:16 AM

Not just Leicas with square|rectangular metal hoods -- I have such for a YashicaMat TLR. No compromise!

borno · 08-13-2011, 05:26 AM

A round hood would probably block the viewfinder on a rangefinder camera, or TLR.

jogiba · 08-13-2011, 06:05 AM

I have not seen round film or sensors.

RioRico · 08-13-2011, 09:31 AM

Originally posted by jogiba

I have not seen round film or sensors.

Film: apply sharp scissors.
Sensor: use masking tape.

Back in the day, I made an oatmeal-carton pinhole camera, with 8x10 photo paper as the negative. This produces an infinite-DOF fisheye panorama that fades towards the corners. So, after processing, I'd sometimes cut the image into a circle. I suppose I could have pre-cut the paper, which would then be: CIRCULAR FILM! See, it ain't no big thang.

Hmmm, dredging back into my distant memories, I recall reading of popular portable 'miniature' cameras of the 1880's and thereabouts, in the form of revolvers, pistols, even shotguns. And these used circular plates! So there's a history here.

TomK · 08-13-2011, 11:48 AM

I really have not thought this out so I hope I am not missing something obvious and wind up looking like a real dope.

But, is it not similar to the use of a polarizing filter?
By that I mean, if the lens rotates when zooming or focusing would not the orientation that was previously set then have to be re-set? Round is round is round.
Also are the Leicas square or are they rectangular to match the 1 x 1.5 film area?
I would think that square would also have the same "gap" problems as another poster notes for round ones.

**rparmar** · 08-13-2011, 11:50 AM

Cine hoods are rectangular as well.

And many rangefinder hoods have holes in the back so you can still see your subject.

**rparmar** · 08-13-2011, 11:51 AM

Sorry, double post due to server wackiness.

rhodopsin · 08-13-2011, 12:19 PM

Hey guess what?

************** BIG ANNOUNCEMENT!!! **************

PENTAX, that's right, Asahi Pentax, made rectangular hoods for Takumars.

My 20, 24, 28, and 35mm M42 S-M-C Takumars all have rectangular hoods.

bwDraco · 08-13-2011, 02:36 PM

Originally posted by rhodopsin

Hey guess what?

************** BIG ANNOUNCEMENT!!! **************

PENTAX, that's right, Asahi Pentax, made rectangular hoods for Takumars.

My 20, 24, 28, and 35mm M42 S-M-C Takumars all have rectangular hoods.

, but I'm disappointed that many manufacturers (Leica excepted) have gone cheap with this stuff nowadays—round hoods that are less than optimal in reducing lens flare, plastic lens mounts that wear out faster than metal mounts, removal of distance scales, etc.

All of this is simply to reduce costs. I'm a very quality-oriented consumer, and while not many people can afford to buy no-compromise equipment like the Canon EOS-1D Mark IV or Leica M9, I wish manufacturers took fewer of these kinds of shortcuts in designing and building equipment. I expect a reasonable degree of quality for all of the equipment I obtain, and I'm willing to pay more to get a product that doesn't suck.

None of this means that one brand of equipment is necessarily better than another; this is a phenomenon that I'm seeing across the vast majority of consumer products. Shortcuts in manufacturing equipment, like plastic mounts, are simply disappointing to me.

Almost no equipment is made to the standards they would have been made to several decades ago

--DragonLord

séamuis · 08-13-2011, 02:53 PM

Originally posted by TomK

I really have not thought this out so I hope I am not missing something obvious and wind up looking like a real dope.

But, is it not similar to the use of a polarizing filter?
By that I mean, if the lens rotates when zooming or focusing would not the orientation that was previously set then have to be re-set? Round is round is round.
Also are the Leicas square or are they rectangular to match the 1 x 1.5 film area?
I would think that square would also have the same "gap" problems as another poster notes for round ones.

not a problem because you won’t be using zoom lenses on a rangefinder. the closest thing to such is a tri-elmar, but then that isn’t really a ‘zoom’ lens in the traditional sense, and even that utilizes a square hood. rotating front elements aren't something you really see with prime lenses. this is only something that effects more modern consumer zoom lenses, which are a world apart from a Leica rangefinder lens.

K-9 · 08-14-2011, 02:32 PM

Those expensive Voigtlanders (125mm, 180mm) also came with square hoods.

08-12-2011, 05:50 PM	#1
bwDraco Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: New York Photos: Albums Posts: 1,071	Why does Leica use square lens hoods? I've noticed this in essentially every Leica lens hood I've encountered, including those for some Panasonic Leica Four Thirds and Micro Four Thirds lenses. Why does Leica use square lens hoods? Is there an advantage to this design? --DragonLord Last edited by bwDraco; 08-12-2011 at 06:01 PM.

08-13-2011, 11:51 AM	#11
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,823	Sorry, double post due to server wackiness. Last edited by rparmar; 08-13-2011 at 01:31 PM.

08-13-2011, 02:36 PM	#13
bwDraco Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: New York Photos: Albums Posts: 1,071 Original Poster	Originally posted by rhodopsin Hey guess what? ************ BIG ANNOUNCEMENT!!! ************ PENTAX, that's right, Asahi Pentax, made rectangular hoods for Takumars. My 20, 24, 28, and 35mm M42 S-M-C Takumars all have rectangular hoods. , but I'm disappointed that many manufacturers (Leica excepted) have gone cheap with this stuff nowadays—round hoods that are less than optimal in reducing lens flare, plastic lens mounts that wear out faster than metal mounts, removal of distance scales, etc. All of this is simply to reduce costs. I'm a very quality-oriented consumer, and while not many people can afford to buy no-compromise equipment like the Canon EOS-1D Mark IV or Leica M9, I wish manufacturers took fewer of these kinds of shortcuts in designing and building equipment. I expect a reasonable degree of quality for all of the equipment I obtain, and I'm willing to pay more to get a product that doesn't suck. None of this means that one brand of equipment is necessarily better than another; this is a phenomenon that I'm seeing across the vast majority of consumer products. Shortcuts in manufacturing equipment, like plastic mounts, are simply disappointing to me. Almost no equipment is made to the standards they would have been made to several decades ago --DragonLord Last edited by bwDraco; 08-13-2011 at 02:58 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Lens hoods?	matsui255	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	15	11-29-2010 06:43 AM
Do I need 2 lens hoods?	lovemehate	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	24	10-16-2010 10:06 AM
lens hoods	beer_nuts	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	4	06-21-2010 09:33 AM

08-12-2011, 06:51 PM	#2
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,482	They are more effective than round ones because they match the shape of the image.

08-12-2011, 07:19 PM	#3
nickthetasmaniac Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 2,361	As above. A round lens hood will need cover the image circle, which means that there will be unnecessary gaps at the top and sides that a direct light source could come through and strike the lens element. A square hood will avoid this. As a guess, I'd say it's probably more expensive to manufacture (at least it would have been when they were made of metal) which could explain why Leica does it when others don't...

08-12-2011, 09:40 PM	#4
bwDraco Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: New York Photos: Albums Posts: 1,071 Original Poster	Thanks. I kinda wish more manufacturers took this "100% no compromise" approach in designing and building equipment like Leica, regardless of cost and even at huge premiums for a larger number of products, like the Sigma 200-500mm f/2.8 (US$26K) and Leica Noctilux-M 50mm f/0.95 ASPH. (US$10K) ... --DragonLord Last edited by bwDraco; 08-12-2011 at 09:57 PM.

08-13-2011, 03:16 AM	#5
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Not just Leicas with square\|rectangular metal hoods -- I have such for a YashicaMat TLR. No compromise!

08-13-2011, 05:26 AM	#6
borno Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: md-usa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,580	A round hood would probably block the viewfinder on a rangefinder camera, or TLR.

08-13-2011, 06:05 AM	#7
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491	I have not seen round film or sensors.

08-13-2011, 09:31 AM	#8
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by jogiba I have not seen round film or sensors. Film: apply sharp scissors. Sensor: use masking tape. Back in the day, I made an oatmeal-carton pinhole camera, with 8x10 photo paper as the negative. This produces an infinite-DOF fisheye panorama that fades towards the corners. So, after processing, I'd sometimes cut the image into a circle. I suppose I could have pre-cut the paper, which would then be: CIRCULAR FILM! See, it ain't no big thang. Hmmm, dredging back into my distant memories, I recall reading of popular portable 'miniature' cameras of the 1880's and thereabouts, in the form of revolvers, pistols, even shotguns. And these used circular plates! So there's a history here.

08-13-2011, 11:48 AM	#9
TomK Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: NJ USA Posts: 281	I really have not thought this out so I hope I am not missing something obvious and wind up looking like a real dope. But, is it not similar to the use of a polarizing filter? By that I mean, if the lens rotates when zooming or focusing would not the orientation that was previously set then have to be re-set? Round is round is round. Also are the Leicas square or are they rectangular to match the 1 x 1.5 film area? I would think that square would also have the same "gap" problems as another poster notes for round ones.

08-13-2011, 11:50 AM	#10
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,823	Cine hoods are rectangular as well. And many rangefinder hoods have holes in the back so you can still see your subject.

08-13-2011, 12:19 PM	#12
rhodopsin Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Deep Forest Posts: 643	Hey guess what? ************ BIG ANNOUNCEMENT!!! ************ PENTAX, that's right, Asahi Pentax, made rectangular hoods for Takumars. My 20, 24, 28, and 35mm M42 S-M-C Takumars all have rectangular hoods.

08-13-2011, 02:53 PM	#14
séamuis Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H. Posts: 5,979	Originally posted by TomK I really have not thought this out so I hope I am not missing something obvious and wind up looking like a real dope. But, is it not similar to the use of a polarizing filter? By that I mean, if the lens rotates when zooming or focusing would not the orientation that was previously set then have to be re-set? Round is round is round. Also are the Leicas square or are they rectangular to match the 1 x 1.5 film area? I would think that square would also have the same "gap" problems as another poster notes for round ones. not a problem because you won’t be using zoom lenses on a rangefinder. the closest thing to such is a tri-elmar, but then that isn’t really a ‘zoom’ lens in the traditional sense, and even that utilizes a square hood. rotating front elements aren't something you really see with prime lenses. this is only something that effects more modern consumer zoom lenses, which are a world apart from a Leica rangefinder lens.

08-14-2011, 02:32 PM	#15
K-9 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: USA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,971	Those expensive Voigtlanders (125mm, 180mm) also came with square hoods.