I wonder why Olympus did not make and/or include lens shades with the lenses for the m-4/3rds cameras?? Any thoughts??
No idea, but they're pretty good for flare resistance and the ZD 14-42 lens hood actually fits the mZD 14-150. Cheers Brian
What 14-42mm lens hood...I didn't get one with the lens. I guess that is my argument....they didn't make a hood for that lens or the 17mm
I understand...my question is why did they not include a lens hood with these lenses as they did with the 4/3rds lenses. That is the question...does anyone know the reasons behind this? Sorry to be such a pain in the but, but most manufacturers now do include a hood.
Bill I no longer have that lens but perhaps it's the 'folding' design that precludes a hood. I know where you are coming from - all my Pana lenses (except the 20mm) came with hoods.
Again, I can't understand why. I have been using Olympus from the E-10,E-20,E1, E-3 and the E-520...all with removable hoods and now with the m-4/3rds they have changed their pattern...I can't believe that it is to make more money for an accessory, not Oly, there has to be a reason. We have people on this panel that have a very close relationship with Olympus and I am sure that they could ask and find out why because it is a major change in their marketing policy.
olympus doesn't even offer a hood for the kit lens, so there's no extra money to be made there from what i've read, those who have installed aftermarket hoods have AF problems. the motor in the lens seems to be very weak.
This is true. I bought the hood for my 9-18, it's designed for it and works fine. Why wasn't it included with the lens?
Bill, I will ask the question... it will be interesting if there's an answer other than 'none needed'. Cheers Brian
On internally focusing lenses, a lens hood works. Not sure about the kit zoom. The focuser mechanism might not be able to handle the weight of the hood. I would imagine wide angle lenses are more susceptible to flare and those should include one.
I asked my rep why the hood wasn't included with the 9-18. He said the hoods weren't out of production when the lenses were starting to ship. I then asked why there was no cut out or space in the lens box. He then changed the subject.
I can think of a couple reasons: 1) Cost cutting; 2) Size: If people walk around with hoods on their Pen lenses, the Pen looks larger, which makes it less appealing to others looking on.
Amin, I'd like to think you are right on the aesthetic issue. The financial issue bothers me. I have never used hoods even on my Leicas. The 9-18 for some reason, with me is a must have. The position over my shoulder puts the lens right against my arm. The hood keeps the glass away. So I bought the hood but felt it should have been included. It's not a low priced lens. On a side note, I have replaced the 9-18 cap 4 times already.
