Re: Canon 100mm Macro lens

"Fred Anonymous" <anon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:frehu5$phi$1$830fa795@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "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.

That's why the 100/2.8 (and other macro lenses) are really intended for
use 
with a ring flash.

Garry