KUVRD launches the world’s first Universal Lens Hood, and it’s pretty cool.

KUVRD

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 13, 2017
64
1
Provo, Utah
www.kuvrdcamera.com
It is one of those things like most things in photography that doesn't have a simple answer... it depends. Obviously there are a lot of factors and totally scene [light] dependent, lens matters also and to some degree viewer discernment and who the images are for or purpose of them. It depends on the light and where it is coming from and obviously no-one can answer that without knowing the scene and knowing a particular lens behaviour. Some are really prone to flare/veiling/contrast issues etc and it doesn't take much to cause noticeable problems in lot of lighting conditions, some lenses may be more forgiving and only cause issues in extremes. edit: you can look up types of flare for comparissons and also review tests on the models you use that check for that deliberately to see. Plus some may be there but not apparent such as large area but mild veiling not dramatically visible until the extreme zones, just caussing a general fog that can hide high frequency detail and some loss of contrast but not a problem most would notice and if you aren't shooting for editors or clients who'd object who cares.

Also the degree and qualities of it matter even when present thus again is not so simple as any = bad. Well controlled only detected when pixelpeeping means good enough and I'd class that in the same camp as absent of flares. More this second point is how sometimes it may even be favourable. More so with cine glass than stills orientated glass where they don't try and obliterate such things so much as make it look good and can be used for creative reasons. For instance if you have massive generalised veiling hazy blob wiping out contrast in a landscape shot with sun coming from camera front/side and horrid looking blob artifacts it will look nasty where having a really nice well done cinematic flare starbursts and veiling is less general blob and nice "godray" style shafts it can look much much nicer than no flare at all. Generally for photo glass though it is preferably avoided as often doesn't look so favourable as less effort is put into things like pleasing flare for stills (or makign parfocal and so on thus cine glass oft cost more even if for stills it is equivalent image quality otherwise re: sharpness and general rendering).

If you only shoot scenes with light behind you with nothing too reflective close by and have lenses that generally don't complain unless you push them to extremes such as shooting into the sun or point lightsource unintentionally (ie. almost never) and don't already own hoods I wouldn't sweat it. That isn't me but sounds like it could be fine for you so I wouldn't rush out and buy hoods. Plus even if you did notice problems you can fix it with hand/moving closer to something to flag that offending light path and so on in most situations. If you constantly find yourself in scenes with light(s) at potential problem positions to the camera in scenes where you want nothing but image light getting to the sensor it is obviously bigger deal chancing it happening or not and troubleshooting when it happens. Thus airing on side of caution using a hood to help prevent it saves time and messing by avoiding the problem rather than waiting for problem then rectifying.

There are generally no downsides if you own hoods though if you own the right hoods as they oft reverse mount to lens for storage, as for vignetting even wide angles that could be prone to vignetting tend to have petal hoods made to match the lens fov thus avoid it. Generally as again there can be rare instances and lighting conditions.
BRAVO!! We rate your comment a 12 out of 10... Seriously, fantastic comment. Nothing more to say.
 

KUVRD

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 13, 2017
64
1
Provo, Utah
www.kuvrdcamera.com
I guess I'm an outlier because I use a lens hood all the time. I don't have any kind of filter on the front end of my lenses so I count on the lens hood to protect the front of the lens from damage as well as doing its usual job of preventing glare, etc when photographing. I do wildlife/nature photography so am out in all kinds of terrain and weather and am pretty clumsy and with my lenses hanging off of me and banging around they need protection (if I had to dig my stuff out of a camera bag and put it together whatever I was going to photograph would be long gone, so most of my gear is out and ready--and abused :rolleyes:) When packing for a trip, if the hoods won't fit reversed on the lenses in the camera bag, I nest them together in my suitcase and stuff them with clothes--never travel without them.
Catherine
Well then... from the sound of your comment, I think our Universal Lens Hood would be absolutely perfect for you :)

Just saying... ha.

KUVRD
 

KUVRD

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 13, 2017
64
1
Provo, Utah
www.kuvrdcamera.com
I use my hoods on all glass except macro work, then I make sure I have protection for the front element in other ways. I am a firm believer that mitigating flare comes from distinct shapes designed for a particular lens. Then there is the issue of drops where a rigid hood will offer more protection. All in all, I just don't see this being a good way to spend my money, or for the sellers, it's very ho hum like their caps. Quite boring and hardly revolutionary.
Slclick,

Well, agree to disagree, right? In the end, we're out here trying to create, design and innovate conventional camera accessories and do so by prioritizing the main pain points and challenges the majority of photographers face with that traditional product as the focus for what features and solutions our products will have.

And so, if your opinion is that are products are ho hum, boring and hardly revolutionary, we're the first to say that for the most part, you're right. Our goal in designing our products has never been to WOW the crowd, captivate audiences and disrupt the camera industry with ground breaking new stuff.. it's been to find out common pain points photographers deal with when using certain camera accessories and design something that addresses those pain points... We're not re-inventing the wheel, we're attempting to create a better mouse trap... and for some photo/videographers, they'll connect with our products and find them useful... and others won't.

And for the reasons you like and use lens hoods, it sounds like our lens hood wouldn't serve you or enhance your workflow anymore than what conventional lens hoods already do for you.

Luckily you didn't have to spend money on our product to find that out and we didn't have to refund you for expecting something of our product that, from your perspective, it doesn't provide. Looks like we all win.

KUVRD
 

KUVRD

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 13, 2017
64
1
Provo, Utah
www.kuvrdcamera.com
Don't know where the worlds first comes from I've seen these around over the years although never owned one. I seem to recall one of the pro's I follow the personal work of (forget who, possibly mcnally) saying years ago he liked using one because universal, didn't take up much room in kit bag and not prone to breaking like hard lenshoods. Call me cynical but half the stuff I see on kickstarter I feel already existed and the campaigns are basically just group buys with a huge markup for folks who didn't want to do research/hunting around and rather just throw money at it. Although there is a place for that, my issue is more I see a lot of crowd funding campaigns made out it is an idea of the project team that needs backing to make it reality when in fact they already often are albeit lesser known things.
Yeah, you might be right. Luckily, ours isn't one of those. Our lens hoods was designed after seeking out any and all alternatives and seeing that none of them lived up to the standard we were wanting, nor did they solve all the common pain points photographers had brought up when discussing the challenges they have when using lens hoods.

We'd LOVE to know this photographer friend of yours and know more about this universal lens hood you mentioned. Sounds really interesting and will genuinely come as a shock to us for not having spotted it over the hundreds of hours of research we've done thus far with our product.

Look forward to hearing form you!

KUVRD
 

KUVRD

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 13, 2017
64
1
Provo, Utah
www.kuvrdcamera.com
OK so people saying this exists - link us to one. I'd like to see/compare.

For those saying it doesn't protect - isn't the primary function of a lens hood to block unwanted light reflections? I would think a purely protective hood would already be generic, even from lens manufacturers.
THANK YOU. No more needed to be said. We appreciate your comment. It's always nice hearing it from someone else.

KUVRD
 

KUVRD

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 13, 2017
64
1
Provo, Utah
www.kuvrdcamera.com
I'll probably get one, just to see if it truly does allow you to shoot through windows etc without reflections.
Plus, if you are like me and want to travel as light as possible, then this seems to be a good option. I rarely take the lens hood when I travel by plane somewhere, so I might just with something like this.
Plus the idea of using it to protect your camera as you change a lens, or put it down, is neat too.

Plus I'm sure you can use it to protect your hand from your overheating R5 so it has that going for it too..... I guess once it emerges from the EOSHD fridge it might be RIGID though ;-) (You are welcome)
Hahaha! Great comment. We think that it's a great addition to any minimalist travel seeking to do EXACTLY what you just said... enhance workflow in ways that currently normal lens hoods cannot... i.e. remove reflection/glare when shooting through windows, acting as a placement when switching out camera gear, etc.

AND! If you support us, we'd LOVE to get your feedback after you've tested it out yourself.

KUVRD
 

KUVRD

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 13, 2017
64
1
Provo, Utah
www.kuvrdcamera.com
Agreed. I love how one feature is it won't be seen in corners or cause vignetting, but the ones tailor made for each lens will. Or completely ignoring the protective benefits of a rigid hood. And they just don't look aesthetically pleasing at all for me personally. I only see this for someone how normally doesn't use a hood...but then wouldn't they just keep not using a hood?
Hey pal,

Check out our main kickstarter video at 2:53 and let us know if it's as protective as a normal lens hood... also, click on the link below and let us know if you see any vignetting in the corners of the frame;


I'm dying to hear your thoughts.

KUVRD
 

KUVRD

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 13, 2017
64
1
Provo, Utah
www.kuvrdcamera.com
Be sure to order the correct version of two sizes of this "universal" hood or it mightn't fit... #unintendedirony


Fits any lens except those it doesn't fit. Universal!
Degos,

We have two sizes out of consideration and convenience for the user, not because we're morons ignorantly stating one thing while contradicting ourselves in the same breath.

Both sizes have an elasticity range that will stretch and fit over ALL lenses... The question changes from whether or not they're universal to "How much time are you willing spend struggling and really working to get it over certain lenses?"

Just like our lens caps, they’re 'universal' but we have multiple sizes due to the fact that photographers want efficiency and convenience in using them just as much as they do universality and versatility in the product.

KUVRD
 

KUVRD

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 13, 2017
64
1
Provo, Utah
www.kuvrdcamera.com
Was there not another thread that discussed this....
RF Lenses with control ring :unsure:
'The only lens hood you'll ever need' universal, that will be why they have two versions :giggle:
Zim,

If so, no need to go and find it. We'll address both points here;

First, we have two sizes out of consideration and convenience for the user, not because we're morons ignorantly stating one thing while contradicting ourselves in the same breath.

Both sizes have an elasticity range that will stretch and fit over ALL lenses... The question changes from whether or not they're universal to "How much time are you willing spend struggling and really working to get it over certain lenses?"

Just like our lens caps, they’re 'universal' but we have multiple sizes due to the fact that photographers want efficiency and convenience in using them just as much as they do universality and versatility in the product.

Second, we designed both sizes of our lens hoods so that the smallest side walls that wrap around and hug the lens barrel work perfectly to stretch DIRECTLY ONTO the top of the adjustments rings of lenses... be it the zoom ring or the focus ring.... without creating friction or drag when adjusting or turning the ring.

They have also been designed to stretch over and onto the stationary parts of lenses as well… so you can stretch and fit our lens hood onto the front lip of lenses, on the control rings of the RF lenses you mentioned, for some zoom lenses you can stretch and fit our lens hood onto the front lip and internal barrel that protrudes outward when having to zoom in and out, you can stretch it directly over and on top of the adjustments rings, onto the stagnant and ‘no-moving parts’ areas of the lens or to the very back of the lens where the male and female mounts connect…

We designed this thing so that with WHATEVER lens you have, there is a way to stretch our hood over your lens’ barrel, have it hug any section of the lens and do so while STILL providing you -the user- the access, protection and total usage of the lens and our hood at any given moment.

KUVRD
 

KUVRD

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 13, 2017
64
1
Provo, Utah
www.kuvrdcamera.com
Wide angle lenses are generally the issue. I haven't seen a hood for a 16-35 type of zoom lens that does anything useful and they are generally a pointless piece of plastic. I love the reverse zoom feature of the ef 24-70mm f2.8 L (mkI). The barrel extended at the wide 24mm end and was compact at the long 70mm end. It meant that canon could design a large hood that fixed to the body and not the front element so that worked effectively across it's massive zoom range. It was a marvellous design that really worked very well. It also meant that the lens / image actually magnified as your focussing got closer to MFD than loosing magnification. It was a pretty special lens once understood. It's a pity Canon ditched this idea for the mkII.
I agree that this product is a sales / marketing gimmic and another photo gizmo that looks useful until about 5 mins of using it on a shoot.
I think the "removes glare" should read "can reduce glare". I also don't understand the blanket statement of "can use any sized CPL"...that's a very broad statement. I've had a Sigma 105mm CPL, a 150mm CPL from wunapanna but currently use both 82mm, 77mm and 72mm CPLs depending whihc lens I'm using. I'd rather have a dedicated CPL for each lens...just in case i break or drop one...I'm then not stuffed for the day.
Hey,

Check out these two links below. One is showing how you can fit any sized circular filter into the hood and use it for different sized lenses... also, if you watch our main kickstarter video, you'll see it demonstrated at 2:08...


Lastly, our lens hood doesn't reduce glare, it ACTUALLY REMOVES it... that's what the second link shows...


Let us know if you still think it's a marketing gimmick.

KUVRD
 
  • Like
Reactions: GMCPhotographics

zim

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Oct 18, 2011
2,004
191
Zim,

If so, no need to go and find it. We'll address both points here;

First, we have two sizes out of consideration and convenience for the user, not because we're morons ignorantly stating one thing while contradicting ourselves in the same breath.

Both sizes have an elasticity range that will stretch and fit over ALL lenses... The question changes from whether or not they're universal to "How much time are you willing spend struggling and really working to get it over certain lenses?"

Just like our lens caps, they’re 'universal' but we have multiple sizes due to the fact that photographers want efficiency and convenience in using them just as much as they do universality and versatility in the product.

Second, we designed both sizes of our lens hoods so that the smallest side walls that wrap around and hug the lens barrel work perfectly to stretch DIRECTLY ONTO the top of the adjustments rings of lenses... be it the zoom ring or the focus ring.... without creating friction or drag when adjusting or turning the ring.

They have also been designed to stretch over and onto the stationary parts of lenses as well… so you can stretch and fit our lens hood onto the front lip of lenses, on the control rings of the RF lenses you mentioned, for some zoom lenses you can stretch and fit our lens hood onto the front lip and internal barrel that protrudes outward when having to zoom in and out, you can stretch it directly over and on top of the adjustments rings, onto the stagnant and ‘no-moving parts’ areas of the lens or to the very back of the lens where the male and female mounts connect…

We designed this thing so that with WHATEVER lens you have, there is a way to stretch our hood over your lens’ barrel, have it hug any section of the lens and do so while STILL providing you -the user- the access, protection and total usage of the lens and our hood at any given moment.

KUVRD
Hey kuvrd i have no horse in this race i was just saying to the fellow inmates that there was already a thread on this giving a couple of example reactions.
Personally i always use the lens hood for that lens and i don't find them an inconvenience. Where I'm really dumb (money) and a bit ocd i think is always want to have oem.

Anyway good luck to you
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

cayenne

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,376
358
It is one of those things like most things in photography that doesn't have a simple answer... it depends. Obviously there are a lot of factors and totally scene [light] dependent, lens matters also and to some degree viewer discernment and who the images are for or purpose of them. It depends on the light and where it is coming from and obviously no-one can answer that without knowing the scene and knowing a particular lens behaviour. Some are really prone to flare/veiling/contrast issues etc and it doesn't take much to cause noticeable problems in lot of lighting conditions, some lenses may be more forgiving and only cause issues in extremes. edit: you can look up types of flare for comparissons and also review tests on the models you use that check for that deliberately to see. Plus some may be there but not apparent such as large area but mild veiling not dramatically visible until the extreme zones, just caussing a general fog that can hide high frequency detail and some loss of contrast but not a problem most would notice and if you aren't shooting for editors or clients who'd object who cares.

Also the degree and qualities of it matter even when present thus again is not so simple as any = bad. Well controlled only detected when pixelpeeping means good enough and I'd class that in the same camp as absent of flares. More this second point is how sometimes it may even be favourable. More so with cine glass than stills orientated glass where they don't try and obliterate such things so much as make it look good and can be used for creative reasons. For instance if you have massive generalised veiling hazy blob wiping out contrast in a landscape shot with sun coming from camera front/side and horrid looking blob artifacts it will look nasty where having a really nice well done cinematic flare starbursts and veiling is less general blob and nice "godray" style shafts it can look much much nicer than no flare at all. Generally for photo glass though it is preferably avoided as often doesn't look so favourable as less effort is put into things like pleasing flare for stills (or makign parfocal and so on thus cine glass oft cost more even if for stills it is equivalent image quality otherwise re: sharpness and general rendering).

If you only shoot scenes with light behind you with nothing too reflective close by and have lenses that generally don't complain unless you push them to extremes such as shooting into the sun or point lightsource unintentionally (ie. almost never) and don't already own hoods I wouldn't sweat it. That isn't me but sounds like it could be fine for you so I wouldn't rush out and buy hoods. Plus even if you did notice problems you can fix it with hand/moving closer to something to flag that offending light path and so on in most situations. If you constantly find yourself in scenes with light(s) at potential problem positions to the camera in scenes where you want nothing but image light getting to the sensor it is obviously bigger deal chancing it happening or not and troubleshooting when it happens. Thus airing on side of caution using a hood to help prevent it saves time and messing by avoiding the problem rather than waiting for problem then rectifying.

There are generally no downsides if you own hoods though if you own the right hoods as they oft reverse mount to lens for storage, as for vignetting even wide angles that could be prone to vignetting tend to have petal hoods made to match the lens fov thus avoid it. Generally as again there can be rare instances and lighting conditions.
Thank you for the excellent, and well reasoned reply!!

You've given me a bit to chew on here and ponder.

LOL...I may actually start experiment WITH lens hoods at some point here.
:)

Thanks!!

C
 

cayenne

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,376
358
Hahaha! Great comment. We think that it's a great addition to any minimalist travel seeking to do EXACTLY what you just said... enhance workflow in ways that currently normal lens hoods cannot... i.e. remove reflection/glare when shooting through windows, acting as a placement when switching out camera gear, etc.

AND! If you support us, we'd LOVE to get your feedback after you've tested it out yourself.

KUVRD
I"m thinking if nothing else, the shooting through glass benefits might be enough to make me want to try 1-2 of them...

How much longer is the KS campaign going before closing?

Thanks!

Cayenne
 

slclick

Pinhole
Dec 17, 2013
4,201
2,215
Although I can see people thinking the exact opposite of me, I just get rubbed the wrong way with Mfg.'s chiming in here. I've got nothing to base it upon except loathing companies scrambling to deflect common sense, distaste for today's marketing bs and the myriad experience we collectively have which can be a detriment to products some here deem suspect.
 

becceric

EOS M50
Oct 30, 2016
26
56
Although I can see people thinking the exact opposite of me, I just get rubbed the wrong way with Mfg.'s chiming in here. I've got nothing to base it upon except loathing companies scrambling to deflect common sense, distaste for today's marketing bs and the myriad experience we collectively have which can be a detriment to products some here deem suspect.
I’m in your camp.
 

ScottyP

EOS RP
Feb 18, 2012
799
3
Pennsylvania, USA
Actually... it doesn't. Thanks to its specific fold points, you're able to collapse at multiple different grooves so that our hood retracts far enough to remove itself from the shot, eliminating both dark spots in the corners of the frame and also any vignetting.

Check out this gif here to better explain this;


Hopefully that helps clarify things.

KUVRD
Sure, but if(when) I fail to collapse it enough, I have lens hood in the shot.