Thanks Godfrey, your suggestion sounds like what i'm looking for: something affordable that does the job. I'll look around to see if I can find something like that here in Toronto.
Thanks again. Fernando On 5/15/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'd use a generic, metal, standard lens hood (B&H Photo sells the Kalt brand in 67mm for $13). <http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home? O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=70751&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavi gation> http://tinyurl.com/gwgt9 I did the same with my FA28-105/3.2-4.5 AL IF and it worked very nicely. Here's a picture: http://homepage.mac.com/godders/lenshood-lineup-1845.jpg (second from the right). It's not the best possible hood at 105mm, but it didn't vignette at 28mm. I use the same hood on the 20-35/4 and it also doesn't vignette, does a respectable job. I dislike rubber lens hoods. They just seem to get in the way a lot of the time. Godfrey On May 12, 2006, at 8:03 PM, Fernando Terrazzino wrote: > Hi, > > I just bought a 24-90 zoom to use in my *istDS and it didn't come with > the hood. Now, my question is, should I get a wideangle hood or a > "regular" one? I mean, should the crop factor "influence" the hood > selection? > Any one tried those cheap rubber hoods? Would that be good enough? > > I emailed Pentax Canada today to know if I could get a replacement but > I don't expect any answer anytime soon ;-) > > Thanks > > Fernando >
