Which lens hood should I use if I want vignetting on my prints from the latest version 35/2 ASPH for my M6TTL? Specifically, I'm looking for some darkening around the edges but not a ton. Will the hood for the 50 fit and do the job? I suppose everyone already knows, but the current 35/2 has the rectangular hood. Thanks

-- J. Eicher (eic@co.henrico.va.us), April 19, 2002

Answers

I would think a generic circular screw-in 39mm hood (metal or rubber) for a 50mm lens would do the trick.

-- Chris Chen (furcafe@NOSPAMcris.com), April 19, 2002.

Why not just tape a piece of cardboard with a hole cut in it to the existing hood?

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), April 19, 2002.

If you are shooting prints and do your own darkroom work (or use a custom lab for special prints), the darkening may be added at the printing stage. Or you can scan the negs and do it in Photoshop, I suppose.

-- Douglas Kinnear (douglas.kinnear@colostate.edu), April 19, 2002.

adding vignetting at the printing stage is ideal, as suggested. mechanical vignetting will vary somewhat depending on aperture selected, so it is difficult to control with a hood. if you don't get involved in the printing end of things, i have made "vignetting filters" in the past using a black marker and a uv filter. this works pretty well.

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), April 19, 2002.

Definitely it is better to vignette the print. The problem with trying to vignette the negative is that, as has been stated above, you can't see the precise amount of effect you are getting. If you overdo it on the neg your pooched, so to speak. By doing it at the printing stage you can try varying amount of vignetting till you get the exact amount you need.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodick@yahoo.com), April 19, 2002.

Actually, are you looking for a hard-edged cutoff, or a gradual fade to black at the edges? A too-small lenshood opening will give something closer to the former.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), April 19, 2002.

Forget the hood, and stack three filters on the front -- that ought to do it...

-- J Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), April 20, 2002.