> * In macro photography when the hood would prevent me from
> getting the lens close enough (with a little extension
> the 100/2.8 USM macro will focus inside its hood!).
Duh!
Is there something strange about the new 100 not found on the old.
For a focal length of 75mm or so the minimum possible EVER distance to
the lens is 75mm (no matter how much extension you add) even allowing
for the integral hood (25mm-recessed front element) AND a short
supplementary hood this is way short of being inside.
Please explain what I'm missing: I can't believe you just made it up
;o)
> * Sometimes when I want to avoid looking professional
> or attracting attention (or indeed intimidating people).
Now why is it that a simple lens hood makes someone suddently look
more professional? You are so right: visually it transforms a
camera from a toy to a tool ;o)
> Still, I probably use hood for over 99% of the time.
The point is, as always, *you* decide not to use it for a reason.
That is a big step up from carrying it in your bag and only fitting it
when you are blinded by the flare. ;o)
I have never had a shot spoiled by the hood. But, I would agree, if
I were using flash and macro AND there was no angle for the flash to
hit the front element I would consider removing the hood.
Bob
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
