percepts
Established
The zeiss hoods are all bayonet connectors. Does using third party screw in hoods cause any vignetting? I guess not because if they did then filters would also cause a problem. So why do zeiss use bayonet mounts for hoods? To encourage people to buy zeiss hoods?
sahe69
Well-known
To facilitate the simultaneous use of filter and hood? To make mounting of the hood easier?
Personally I prefer bayonet mount hoods over screw-in versions, but having said that the ZM (and CV) hoods really are a bit too expensive.
Personally I prefer bayonet mount hoods over screw-in versions, but having said that the ZM (and CV) hoods really are a bit too expensive.
Papercut
Well-known
I too prefer bayonets. But, the Zeiss hoods are not that expensive when looked at in comparison with the competition: the retail for a Summicron 35 asph hood is $119 USD . And it's just a bit of plastic! The Summarit 35/50 hood is $140 (presumably because it's metal). The Tri-Elmar hood is $180, the 21 Summilux hood $252. The Zeiss hoods seem reasonable in comparison ($84 and they're metal). 
Last edited:
percepts
Established
I like the idea of rubber hoods as they absorb any little knocks and don't bang against a second camera causing paint chips etc. But having looked at some 3rd party rubber hoods they don't look nearly as good as the rubber hoods I have on my contax slr lenses. It may have to be the zeiss metal hoods.
sahe69
Well-known
I too prefer bayonets. But, the Zeiss hoods are not that expensive when looked at in comparison with the competition: the retail for a Summicron 35 asph hood is $119 USD . And it's just a bit of plastic! The Summarit 35/50 hood is $140 (presumably because it's metal). The Tri-Elmar hood is $180, the 21 Summilux hood $252. The Zeiss hoods seem reasonable in comparison ($84 and they're metal).
I guess compared to Leica very few things are expensive
Anyway, I was actually thinking more of the CV hoods. Compared to the prices of the CV lenses, they are proportionally more expensive than the Zeiss counterparts, the actual cost being more or less the same.
Papercut
Well-known
Indeed, when put in terms of a ratio of lens-cost to hood-cost the picture changes, especially with CV
I guess compared to Leica very few things are expensive
Anyway, I was actually thinking more of the CV hoods. Compared to the prices of the CV lenses, they are proportionally more expensive than the Zeiss counterparts, the actual cost being more or less the same.