lens hood for cv 35/1.4?

[Ramersdorfer]

Hi

I recently borrowed a Bessa R with 35/2.5 lens and was really impressed with the results and handling and the fun factor, having messed around with SLRs up to now.

I persuaded my wife to buy me a Bessa R2A for my birthday and I´ve ordered a CV Classic 35/1.4 to go with it. I´m now impatiently awaiting its arrival.

My question is - is it really worth shelling out for the expensive lens hood or do I not really need it (is flare an issue with this lens) or are there cheaper alternatives? 70 Euros seems a lot to pay for a piece of round plastic (or is it metal)?

I know I´ll get some useful advice. Seeing some of the pictures on RFF are what prompted me to borrow the Bessa in the first place, and reading the threads helped me decide on the R2A.

Thanks !!

 

[Jason Sprenger]

I recently acquired a 35/1.4 MC myself and also have the 35/2.5. The 35/1.4 seems a bit more susceptible to flare than the 35/2.5 and with the larger glass elements, I worry more about possibly damaging the lens. It was worth it to me to get the hood where I wouldn't feel the need with the 35/2.5. Though when compactness is desired, I may go with a UV filter and be mindful of light sources relative to the framelines.

The Voigtlander hood for this lens is metal and happens to fit on the ZM 50/2 Planar and ZM 35/2 Biogon.

 

[martin s]

I haven't had any issues so far, I think it's just too expensive (for a piece of metal afaik). I'll be selling it in favor of the f1.2 though, so I won't buy it anymore anyways. It's pretty resistant to flare imo, I don't have that many lenses to compare it to though.

martin

 

[Prosaic]

Agree, price is a bit steep. Will protect the front element (fingerprints, bumps) and helps with bright sunlight. So yes, I think its worth it (...just).

 

[user237428934]

The shade is metal and when it's not on the lens but just in the bag I get extra attention from the airport security personell at the x-ray scanners. They always want to see what it is.
It's expensive and not large enough to be really efficient.

 

[Tom A]

The hood for the 35f1.4 is rather complex with its bayonet attachment. It is solid and, yes it does protect the largish front element.
I tend to check my hoods regularly and I am always surprised at the dings and scratches that have accumulated on the edges. Each one of those could have been on the rim of the lens, or even worse, on the front element!!!!
The 35f1.4 is not particularly prone to flare - considering that it is a high speed 35. Much less so than the pre-asph Summilux 35 so from that point of view, you might not need a hood, but i do regard hood's as "bumpers" on my lenses.

 

[user237428934]

And a with a hood on the lens you looks a lot more professional ;-)

 

[Ramersdorfer]

Thanks for your comments

I guess I´ll probably end up getting the hood but maybe for the first few rolls I´ll just put a UV filter on.


tom.w.bn - that´s about as far as i´ll get with the professionality. In fact I´d rather not look the part. I´ll have tourists asking me to take their picture, thinking I know what I´m doing.

 

[Burlap Jacket]

Cameraquest sells the "Smaller ROUND lens hood with Voigtlander Cap" for the 35/1.4 for $45. It's not vented from what I gather. I believe there's a photo of that hood in a recent classified post.

http://cameraquest.com/inventor.htm