loneranger
Well-known
I recently bought a zeiss 18/4 zm. It comes with a great looking hood. Problem is no matter how I place the hood on, I seen part of the hood in my pictures. I tried with the short end at the sides and the opposite, still the hood shows up in my pics. What am I doing wrong?
hou baloo
Member
If it's an 18mm, you had better have a VERY wide hood - the field of view on that lens should exceed 90 degrees!
kmerenkov
Established
I think that hood coming with the lens ought to work right.
Though I have nothing to say to the OP because I have never had such wide lenses.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
The hood that came with my 18mm -- new, for review, from Zeiss -- is round, or rather, sort of petal-shaped:
http://www.rogerandfrances.com/photoschool/reviews 18 zeiss.html
Are you sure you have an appropriate hood? Or just one that fits? Was the lens bought new?
Cheers,
R.
http://www.rogerandfrances.com/photoschool/reviews 18 zeiss.html
Are you sure you have an appropriate hood? Or just one that fits? Was the lens bought new?
Cheers,
R.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
The 18f4 is a substantial lens and it really doesn't matter which camera you use it on - it will block the finder quite a bit. I would recommend the Zeiss 18 finder on it! It is expensive, but as it sits on top of the camera, it has less intrusion into the view. It is also spectacularly bright!
The 18 is quite flare free, but I find that I use the hood with it - more as a "bumper" and front element protection than anything else.
The 18 is quite flare free, but I find that I use the hood with it - more as a "bumper" and front element protection than anything else.
loneranger
Well-known
I guess I did not make myself clear, its not that I can see the lens in the camera viewfinder, but the hood is showing up in my processed pictures.
The hood is petaled (not round) and came with the lens. Lens was bought new from tony rose, so I dont think it is the wrong hood. It attaches perfectly well.
projectbluebird
Film Abuser
Are you sure it's the hood? Is it always in the same place, or does it move around?
Whenever I use my VC 15/4.5 (I know, I know, not the same lens, but it is a super-wide!)
I usually get several frames with my fingers in the edges, even though I hold my M3 by the sides.
You need to be very careful with the massive field of view on superwides. I once had a loop of the shoulder strap in the corner of one of my photos, it had fallen off my shoulder and was resting in the crook of my elbow!
Whenever I use my VC 15/4.5 (I know, I know, not the same lens, but it is a super-wide!)
I usually get several frames with my fingers in the edges, even though I hold my M3 by the sides.
You need to be very careful with the massive field of view on superwides. I once had a loop of the shoulder strap in the corner of one of my photos, it had fallen off my shoulder and was resting in the crook of my elbow!
lngu81
Established
it's simple, the hood is not designed for the lense, 18mm is extremely wide. the seller properly gave you the wrong hood, you should contact the seller 1st to make sure that you get the right 1
Here's a photo of the lens hood from the PopFlash site. You'll see it's not square, but round "petal" configuration. It should be mounted, as in Roger's web page illustration, with the longer petals oriented top and bottom. If this is not the hood supplied, they sent you the wrong one.
Attachments
alan davus
Well-known
Loneranger, I have the 18 Distagon with the same supplied hood. You must attach it according to the instructions twisting it on until it locks. The two long points should then be top and bottom when the lens is on your camera. And don't feel such a dope when you work it out because I had the same problem with mine.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Sorry if I appeared patronizing. I was merely trying to eliminate the most obvious possibilities first -- which is why I asked if it was bought new.
Others' posts are likely to be of more use than mine.
Cheers,
R.
Others' posts are likely to be of more use than mine.
Cheers,
R.
PCB_RF
Established
This is difficult to diagnose without seeing any images. I don't know if you're shooting film or digital, either. I can think of a few possibilities. Please understand I have no idea of your level of hardware expertise, I'm only stating the only possibilities I can think of, without benefit of seeing the images.
1. Incorrect hood (only if it's a generic hood)
2. Correct hood, incorrectly installed (not likely, unless it's off-center?)
3. Correct hood, petals are bent toward center (least likely, but possible?)
4. Installed UV or UVIR filter is vignetting (very likely if you used a std. filter)
5. You're seeing "normal" light fall-off common in ultrawides (possible)
6. Something is very wrong with the lens (hopefully not)
To make sure it's not the lens, shoot without hood or filter. If you see corner darkening, and this is the first time you've shot anything wider than, say 24mm, you might just be seeing normal corner light fall-off. The darkening will be relatively even, without distinct lines or edges.
If you've shot ultrawides with film, but not digital, and this is a digital camera, the ultrawide light falloff is often more pronounced on a digital sensor.
Some folks shoot ultrawides with center filters, neutral density in the center only, to even out the corner fall-off. Corners can be darker by 1-2 stops, depending on lens design. I haven't played much with the Zeiss 18mm, don't know the usual fall-off for the this lens.
If you're very familiar with ultrawides, and, without filter or hood, you're seeing marked vignetting, more distinct and darker than normal ultrawide vignetting, something is likely wrong with the lens.
If the naked lens looks fine, and you used a filter, try with the filter and without the hood. If you see the darkening with the filter, it's the filter.
Ultrawide lenses often need thin-mount wideangle filters. Typically the front of the filter ring isn't threaded and the filter is flush with ring at the front. The mount itself is thinner/narrower than a standard filter.
If it's not the lens or lens + filter, it must be the hood.
IIRC, there are no other Zeiss hoods that fit this lens, so I don't think you could have an incorrect Zeiss hood. If you have a generic hood, not Zeiss, and the hood threads into the front of the lens, then it could very easily be the hood. If you're threading a generic hood into a filter that's mounted on the lens, it is extremely likely to vignette.
If it's a Zeiss hood, mounted with the long petals top/bottom and the short petals on the side, and if the hood mounts evenly/square, it's hard to imagine it could be the hood. If it's a Zeiss hood mounted any other way, it could likely vignette.
The bent hood scenario is very unlikely, but if the petal corners are bent inward, they'll vignette.
If anybody can think of any other possilbilities, feel free to chime in.
If loneranger can post some pix and provide more details, we might be able to make a better guess. What kind of camera? Aperture? Evenly dark in all 4 corners? Etc?
Good luck,
Paul
1. Incorrect hood (only if it's a generic hood)
2. Correct hood, incorrectly installed (not likely, unless it's off-center?)
3. Correct hood, petals are bent toward center (least likely, but possible?)
4. Installed UV or UVIR filter is vignetting (very likely if you used a std. filter)
5. You're seeing "normal" light fall-off common in ultrawides (possible)
6. Something is very wrong with the lens (hopefully not)
To make sure it's not the lens, shoot without hood or filter. If you see corner darkening, and this is the first time you've shot anything wider than, say 24mm, you might just be seeing normal corner light fall-off. The darkening will be relatively even, without distinct lines or edges.
If you've shot ultrawides with film, but not digital, and this is a digital camera, the ultrawide light falloff is often more pronounced on a digital sensor.
Some folks shoot ultrawides with center filters, neutral density in the center only, to even out the corner fall-off. Corners can be darker by 1-2 stops, depending on lens design. I haven't played much with the Zeiss 18mm, don't know the usual fall-off for the this lens.
If you're very familiar with ultrawides, and, without filter or hood, you're seeing marked vignetting, more distinct and darker than normal ultrawide vignetting, something is likely wrong with the lens.
If the naked lens looks fine, and you used a filter, try with the filter and without the hood. If you see the darkening with the filter, it's the filter.
Ultrawide lenses often need thin-mount wideangle filters. Typically the front of the filter ring isn't threaded and the filter is flush with ring at the front. The mount itself is thinner/narrower than a standard filter.
If it's not the lens or lens + filter, it must be the hood.
IIRC, there are no other Zeiss hoods that fit this lens, so I don't think you could have an incorrect Zeiss hood. If you have a generic hood, not Zeiss, and the hood threads into the front of the lens, then it could very easily be the hood. If you're threading a generic hood into a filter that's mounted on the lens, it is extremely likely to vignette.
If it's a Zeiss hood, mounted with the long petals top/bottom and the short petals on the side, and if the hood mounts evenly/square, it's hard to imagine it could be the hood. If it's a Zeiss hood mounted any other way, it could likely vignette.
The bent hood scenario is very unlikely, but if the petal corners are bent inward, they'll vignette.
If anybody can think of any other possilbilities, feel free to chime in.
If loneranger can post some pix and provide more details, we might be able to make a better guess. What kind of camera? Aperture? Evenly dark in all 4 corners? Etc?
Good luck,
Paul
PCB_RF
Established
Just re-read the postings, and see the lens was bought new from Tony Rose, with hood included. That eliminates the possibility of wrong hood.....
sepiareverb
genius and moron
All the ZM's I had/have use an external bayonet mount for the hood, eliminating any chance that a filter is putting the hood in the path of the image.
I'd agree with a test roll- w/hood & filter, w/hood & no filter, w/o hood or filter.
I'd agree with a test roll- w/hood & filter, w/hood & no filter, w/o hood or filter.