1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

How necessary is the hood on the Oly 75-300.

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Dave in Wales, Apr 13, 2015.

  1. Dave in Wales

    Dave in Wales Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 5, 2011
    West Wales
    I have one, but I'm just wondering how necessary it is.

    It's like carrying a small bucket around in my bag.
    • Funny Funny x 1
  2. PeterB666

    PeterB666 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jan 14, 2010
    Tura Beach, Australia
    Hoods are great for shooting towards the sun and keeping fingers off the front element. It makes a lousy bucket as it has a large hole in the bottom.
    • Funny Funny x 2
  3. macro

    macro Mu-43 Veteran Subscribing Member

    Jan 22, 2012
    New Zealand
    Contrast, stray light, use the bucket. I always use the hoods on the tele lenses Dave and they are a lot larger, have a large bucket ...
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Jfrader

    Jfrader Guest

    Pretty necessary. You can usually dispense with a hood when shooting indoors, although windows or interior lighting can produce some glare if you are not careful. If you try it outdoors, be sure the front element is shaded. Best way to do that is to stand in shade, even if you have to move around to do it. Even then, you may get some reflected glare. You can also shade the front element by hand, holding a hat or something so it casts a shadow over the lens. Of course, shade does not provide the additional physical protection for the front element as mentioned above.

    Short answer, when shooting outdoors with a long lens (really any lens,) use of the hood is best practice. It helps preserve contrast and image quality by reducing glare and reflected side light and helps to protect the front element from the occasional bumps, scrapes and finger prints.
  5. janneman

    janneman Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 6, 2012
    Jan (John) Kusters
  6. Ross the fiddler

    Ross the fiddler Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Rather than using that somewhat oversized lens hood (the bucket) from the 70-300 lens I use the 40-150 lens hood on mine (JJC version) but.... it is modified to do so!

    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

    Here are the modified before (original Olympus LH61D) & after (modified JJC 61D) photos where I very carefully trim some of the retaining ribs back to that on the right.

    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

    BTW, if you think the 70-300 lens hood is a bucket, then you should see how big the 50-200 SWD lens hood is!
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2015
  7. I've gone for a wide angle hood. More for a protector than anything else. Plus, when I've got a CPL attached, I can rotate it easier using the hood.
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2015
  8. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    I tend to use lens hoods for protection more than flare resistance. That being said, I've no lens hood for the 75-300 and I've not had any issue with it as far as IQ goes.
    • Informative Informative x 1
  9. oldracer

    oldracer Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Oct 1, 2010
    No reason to wonder. Just go and make some test shots with and without, in situations where there is strong off-axis light. Look for reduced contrast due to the off-axis light getting inside the lens and bouncing around, never 100% absorbed by the black inside coating. Maybe shoot some kind of black/white checkerboard with the sun just out of the field of view and see what the pixel values are with and without the hood. Try this at full wide and full tele, too.

    If you can't tell the difference with and without the hood, or if there is a difference, you have answered your own question.

    Re substituting a lens hood that is smaller. Again, test. Smaller diameter, same length probably means vignetting at least at full aperture, full wide. Shoot something like a white sheet of paper with and without, then see what the pixel values in the corners vs the center are. The lens will probably exhibit some vignetting on its own; the question is whether the small hood makes it worse. The truth here is probably that the manufacturers would have made the hoods smaller if it could have been done without vignetting. Why wouldn't they?

    Hoods on zooms are not too effective beyond the zoom's widest focal length. Reason is that with a narrower/tele field of view the wide hood can no longer protect the lens from all off-axis light.

    For me, physical protection of the lens is an important reason for hoods. On my old film Nikon lenses the metal hoods showed many scars and paint chips. My M43 equipment is lighter so the hood doesn't have to absorb as much energy when swung into something, but the hoods still show evidence of earning their keep.
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2015
  10. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    As you can see from responses, it is not necessary at all, but will yield a performance advantage in certain situations. So will a hand.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. Ross the fiddler

    Ross the fiddler Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I've used a hood from the 40-150 lens which is a wider viewing angle than 75-300 & is so much more compact in my bag (as it can also be reversed) than the LH61D hood on the lens. It is just cost cutting by Olympus to use the same hood (LH61D) as that of the 4/3's 70-300 lens & then putting in on the much smaller diameter body of the 75-300, even though it still uses a 58mm filter. It just looks like a silly over-sized bucket on the end when it doesn't need to be. I wish JJC could have redesigned it as a JJCLH61Ds to fill that purpose. For me, I have a protection filter on the lens & I always use the hood too (unless it may cause a shadow with flash, which is pretty unlikely anyhow) as it also gives me that added physical protection besides the light shading.
  12. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    What we need is a clever lens hood made by the lens manufacturer that zooms longer-shorter as the lens is zoomed in-out, and folds into a lens cap when camera turned off or lens removed.

    Would only add, what, $500 to the cost of each lens? (based on what they currently charge for a plastic tube)
    • Like Like x 1
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.