by "Fred Anonymous" <anon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Mar 14, 2008 at 06:54 PM
"Garry Douglas" <garry@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:13tkk8uckp9c73f@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Dudley Simons" <drs1005@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:frdgr8$5bu$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Capture Boy wrote:
>>> Can anyone tell me if the Canon 100mm MACRO lens comes with a lens
hood
>>> as
>>> standard, or does it cost extra.
>>>
>>> Many Thanks
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Doesn't the Canon 100mm macro have a recessed front element like the
>> Sigma macros? That being the case you don't actually need a lens hood
as
>> the lens barrel does the job quite nicely. The other thing is that if
>> you are using the lens at closest focus you may have issues with a lens
>> hood shading the object being photographed - depending on how its being
>> lit obviously
>>
>> Hop ethis helps
>
> Good points. Also I tend to use my 100/2.8 with a MacroLite3 (at least I
> did before upgrading to a 350D rendered it useless) so a hood was never
an
> issue.
>
> Garry
>
HI chaps.
I borrowed a Canon 100mm macro and the front element was not as recessed
as
the 105mm Sigma that I used to use.
If I'd kept the Canon macro then, yes, I would have bought a lens hood.
Catch with the hood is that it may get in the way of an on-camera flash
(but
so might the actual body of the lens).
Regards, Ian.