Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/11/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Charles E. Love, Jr. wrote: > Also, there are lots of cheaper lenses (non-Leica) that have decent hoods. > For example, I have Pentax 67 lenses, and the hoods are much easier to use > and better built than the Leica M 21 and 28 hoods; some are even metal! > Leica itself has built some pretty good ones too--e.g. the old R 19 2.8, and > the current Summicron 35 F2. My objection isn't to the plastic, but to the > low quality, deformation, The way I use cameras, hoods had better *not* be high quality; they're the bit that's most likely to bash into things, and a plastic one is less likely to get seriously bent or transmit shock to the lens than a metal one. I'd settle for a regular supply of cheap disposable plastic ones. (Rubber is fine, too). Not everything in photography needs to be designed as an heirloom. A Pentax 67 is presumably much less likely to get walloped head-on into hard objects than a Leica, so a more durable hood perhaps makes sense there. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- jack@purr.demon.co.uk - Jack Campin, 2 Haddington Place, Edinburgh EH7 4AE