John Shriver
Well-known
I've decided that the prices of the "correct" hoods for the 3.5cm Elmar (wide angle) are nuts, even on eBay. Buying a hood that costs more than half the price of the lens isn't sane in my book.
So I have the metal from a ruined A36 filter, and some chromed brass drain pipe of the right diameter to solder onto it. But, how tall are the "official" hoods? Does someone here have a FLQOO or FOOKH, and willing to take the time to measure it?
So I have the metal from a ruined A36 filter, and some chromed brass drain pipe of the right diameter to solder onto it. But, how tall are the "official" hoods? Does someone here have a FLQOO or FOOKH, and willing to take the time to measure it?
back alley
IMAGES
raid
Dad Photographer
I bought last year on PN or here on RFF an off-brand chrome squarish lens hood (maybe by Walz), and it fits most of my 50mm lenses. What a deal ($7). For the Elmar 50/3.5 I have another squarish Walz filter that fits this lens. Again, it was a deal.
John Shriver
Well-known
Thanks, Joe!
Yup, my "FISON" is a Walz clone of the real Leica item. Just as good, but cheaper. But my presumption is that it's too narrow for a 35mm lens. I've done (but not yet developed) some test shots with the Elmar wide angle (3.5cm, 35mm) lens with the FISON and FIKUS (fully collapsed). Perhaps they will be OK.
I have a couple of Canon hoods that are compatible with 35mm lenses, and can be equipped with screw-clamp 34mm Series VI adapters. But they are big, the whole point of my Leica kit (IIIa, 35mm Elmar, 50mm Summar, 90mm Elmar, Imarect) is light weight and small size. I have plenty of lenses that are better than these three, but these old Leitz lenses are mostly the weight champs. (Well, the Elmar 50mm is lighter than a Summar, and I may yet take the Canon 100/3.5, as it's lighter than the 90mm Elmar.)
Yup, my "FISON" is a Walz clone of the real Leica item. Just as good, but cheaper. But my presumption is that it's too narrow for a 35mm lens. I've done (but not yet developed) some test shots with the Elmar wide angle (3.5cm, 35mm) lens with the FISON and FIKUS (fully collapsed). Perhaps they will be OK.
I have a couple of Canon hoods that are compatible with 35mm lenses, and can be equipped with screw-clamp 34mm Series VI adapters. But they are big, the whole point of my Leica kit (IIIa, 35mm Elmar, 50mm Summar, 90mm Elmar, Imarect) is light weight and small size. I have plenty of lenses that are better than these three, but these old Leitz lenses are mostly the weight champs. (Well, the Elmar 50mm is lighter than a Summar, and I may yet take the Canon 100/3.5, as it's lighter than the 90mm Elmar.)
back alley
IMAGES
i use that hood on my canon 35/2.8 chrome version.
very small lens.
very small lens.
payasam
a.k.a. Mukul Dube
The FOOKH is 17mm deep, with an inner diameter of 36mm (or a hair over) and an outer diameter of 41.5mm. You'd best check these figures against Joe B. Alley's pictures. The one I had with my earlier Summaron 35/3.5 came with a remarkable piece of Leitz ingenuity: a cap which fitted into the hood or over the lens if the hood was not mounted. The hood of my present Summaron is a substantial portion of an aircraft hangar. Damn sight cheaper.
John Shriver
Well-known
Finally broke down and bought a only half-crazy priced FLQOO. It's 23mm deep, deeper than the FOOKH.
