Are you using lens hoods?

[bholliman]

Definitely! Almost always outdoors and sometimes indoors. I don't use UV filters much anymore, so lens hoods are my primary protection for the front element.

 

[Besisika]

Never used hoods. Take up too much room. I use filters for protection. But then when shooting into the Sun I take off the filter.

I am the opposite, I use them at all times. I don't want to use my head as of when to and not to use it. So much thing to think about already in photography, whatever I can remove off my brain I do.

 

[martti]

You pay a lot of money to get the best of the best of the best and then you spoil the shot with unneeded reflections. It is like buying a Porsche and wearing dried old rubber all around.
Where's the sense?

 

[Maximilian]

On all lenses exept for the 40/2.8.

 

[sanj]

I can't remember an exception. Always use.

 

[AcutancePhotography]

I will stop using protective filters, when it is the filter that is holding back the quality of the image and not my technique. ;D

I honestly can't remember the last time I had a reflection in my image due to a filter. But then I seldom shoot directly into the light.

 

[privatebydesign]

I will stop using protective filters, when it is the filter that is holding back the quality of the image and not my technique. ;D

I honestly can't remember the last time I had a reflection in my image due to a filter. But then I seldom shoot directly into the light.

To the first paragraph: There is no one thing holding back your image quality, it is an amalgamation of many little things. Once you get above the level of competent (and we all dip above and below that at times however pompous we might sound ), there is no single magic bullet improvement http://www.largeformatphotography.info/chasing-magic-bullet.html you have to focus on the little things and in time the results on screen are just 'better', for no real or singular reason.


To the second paragraph: How would you know? You might notice by the shadows in this with/without example that the sun is around 120º to my left.

 

[gbchriste]

Yes. My portrait work is almost always in wooded and natural environments where contact with brush, branches, etc is a constant threat as I move around. I got a pretty good gouge on the hood of my 70-200 2.8L II the very first time I took it out. Based on the position of the mark, it probably would have been the front element that took the hit if I hadn't had the protection. And as I almost always include some type of backlight in each session, the hood is indispensable for cutting down on glare and flare.

 

[Tsuru]

I used to use hoods on all my lenses. I had a folding rubber hood for an old Nikkor 50mm that I loved because it was just enough to protect the lens but it was flexible so if someone ran into your camera (more than once ) it wouldn't hurt.
I just looked in my bag and the only hood I have now is for the 24-105mm. I think I've taken all the others out simply because they take up too much room.
The only lenses I use filters for are the ones that need them to complete the weather sealing.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

I use BW 007 Clear filter to protect my lenses from dust and water, plus easy cleaning. Lens hood to protect from hard bump.

Broken hood and scratchy filter are cheaper to replace

+1, I fully agree

 

[Viggo]

Always with any lens. It was early on that the lens hood saved a 2470 mk1 that I dropped, and later the same happened with a 24 L II. I see no reason, for me, not to use them. I also use filters, except the 200 for obvious reasons, because kids

 

[EdB]

Always have a hood on, never use filters.

 

[Dylan777]

I use BW 007 Clear filter to protect my lenses from dust and water, plus easy cleaning. Lens hood to protect from hard bump.

Broken hood and scratchy filter are cheaper to replace

People say this all the time, how many times have you seen scratched modern front elements? I have been hand cleaning my 70-200 f2.8 IS lens for nearly ten years, it has never had a filter on it and has been soaked in sea spray (many times), it has crossed deserts, been rained on more times than I could count and it doesn't have even the smallest mark on it.

Where are all these damaged front elements to support the $80 a pop 'protective' filters? Besides, there have been many instances of broken filters scratching the front elements when the front element wasn't otherwise damaged, so deduct that number of incidents from the first number, add up the cost of them and deduct the cost of all the filters and, well, you get my opinion on 'protective' filters

I am not saying don't do it if you want to do it, I am saying I believe it is advice that has long outlived its practical application and is just repeated parrot fashion with no modern risk/benefit calculation analysis behind it. For instance it used to be much more difficult to get lenses repaired (the parts supply) than nowadays, the coatings used to be much less durable and prone to damage from cleaning, and the actual filters used to be much cheaper, that just isn't the case now so I believe the advice isn't valid either.

Just straight maths, if you have three 77mm lenses that is $250 in 'protection' filters, well first off you'd be far better off spending that $250 on an actual insurance policy to cover for other damage as well, and secondly, $250 will get most front elements replaced anyway if you are unlucky enough to damage one, I know that you can get a 17TS-E done for that and that has to be one of the worst.

Got your points loud and clear privatebydesign

Although I haven't run into scratchy issues with my lenses yet, still, I just can't stand wiping off dust, dirty, water or whatever from bare front element. Must prefer clear filter.

 

[NancyP]

Hood available to be used 95% of time - sometimes I have a hard time packing the 82mm UWA filter I use for the 21mm lens, so I use my hat to flag if needed.

I have two lenses with retracting integral hoods, two non-filterable UWAs with fixed integral hoods

 

[Shane1.4]

I always use hoods and rarely use filters. I took my hood off my 35mm last summer as I was getting tired off the extra size. Moments later I dropped it on the front element and cracked it. Sigma repaired it no questions asked.

 

[benique]

Does it matter what brand you choose for the hoods? Are they all the same or are there some noticeable differences? What brands can you recommend?

 

[TeT]

On my SL1 Hoods interfere with the pop up flash, so occasionally when using that camera I have to remove the hood... On my 6D then never come off the lenses

 

[Random Orbits]

If it came with one, I'll usually use the lens hood: with the exception being the 8-15 fisheye (the hood always comes off). If the lens had not come with the hood, I have not bought the hood separately (non-Ls, EF-M lenses).

 

[ERHP]

The only one I don't keep the hood on consistently is the 24-70 II, mainly for the CPL. But it is always in the bag. Sometimes where the hood would create a shadow, the 100mm goes hoodless as well but overall they stay on everything.

 

[Zeidora]

On pretty much every lens, filter plus hood. Hood is for stray light and better micro contrast.
One exception is the MP-E 65. If you put a hood on it, you can't get light on the subject. The macro-flash bracket sort of is like a hoodie, but has very different function. No filter on that one either.
The other exception is the rectangular fisheye (F-Distagon 16 mm C/Y), no front filter possible (has some rear filters built in), so only "hood".
For the 300/2.8, no front filter (unless you consider the font element the filter), but then the hood.