Helios 40-2 Hood, accessories

[abe in space]

Just picked up a Helios 40-2 in fairly rough condition on eBay. Very excited, but it's only coming with the tripod ring and the front lens cap. The back cap isn't an issue; I'll be putting an EF adapter & back cap on it. But I was looking into possibly getting hoods and filters for it, along with a possible lens bag/case. Fortunately it seems it just uses a standard 67mm thread, so there's plenty out there to choose from.

For those of you that have experience with it, is a hood necessary for this lens? Does it do much for the flare? If so, do you have any particular suggestions for what sort to get? I don't think one of the 'Tulip' styles would be the best idea, since M42-Canon EF adapters tend to seat the lenses slightly crooked for easier access to aperture dials, and I think the off-center Tulip would drive me nuts. Are the retractable rubber ones any good? Or would I be better off getting a hard plastic model?

I may also get a UV filter for protective purposes, but unsure there.

Also, does anyone know of a particular aftermarket lens bag/case that will fit this lens well? There are some original 40-2 lens cases out there for sale, but they're incredibly expensive, and I'd rather put that dough to use buying other lenses or audio equipment. I thought maybe one of the "large" sized neoprene cases would fit, but this thing is such a beast I'm unsure.

Lastly, does anyone have experience with the stock lens cap? It looks like the kind that grips onto the outside rather than the inside filter threading. Does it generally stay on well despite this?

Any advice would be very much appreciated. Thanks!

[Orio]

[Attila]

Congrats! Not necessarily to shoot with hood, if you not shoot directly against sun , will be no flare. I had 3 times this lens , none of them had hood, even if I bought looks factory complette mint set.

[Orio]

[Orio]

Year: 2007
at the Carnevale di Busseto

Example of photo taken with Helios-40-2 no hood and sun out of the way:
#1


Examples of photos taken with Helios-40-2 and lateral sun out of the frame
Same place, same time as the previous photo. Only different orientation of camera respect to sun:
#2

#3


I guess these say it all... and these survived. I had to trash others that were even worse.

[abe in space]

Thank you so much for the detailed and thorough reply re: the hood and the UV, Orio. And Attila, thanks for your thoughts as well.

One last question: since the metal ones aren't adjustable, how long of a hood would you recommend, roughly? There seems to be a pretty wide range.

[Orio]

[ZoneV]

I have adapted a hood on my older Helios 40-1 chrome - for EOS 5D. The diameter is roughly = lens diameter.
I made only rough tests, but my hood is much longer and as far I know with no influence to image borders.

[aoleg]

Please feel free to use this Lens Hood Calculator: http://prime35.com/images/HOODCALC.XLS

Basically, you'll enter the lens focal length, front element diameter, camera sensor size (longer hoods are needed for cropped cameras), and your hood front diameter (the wider it is, the longer your hood can be).

[Orio]

[aoleg]

[Orio]

I repeat, I may be wrong and accept to be proven wrong, but please don't say that's intuitive,
because that must be the most counter-intuitive thing that I have read in a while.

Imagine that in the following image, the white+red area combination is the image as captured by a full frame sensor,
and the red area alone is the image as captured by an APS-C sensor:



My logic tells me that if I use a full frame camera, I must use a hood that blocks the sun rays in a way that
all the white and red areas are protected - otherwise it would not make sense to wear a hood that only
protects the outer edges of my images.

Since APS-C is nothing but a smaller-than-full-frame sensor that is placed exactly in the centre of where the full frame sensor would be,
and since the lens is the same, and thus also the focal lenght is the same and the image circle that they cast is the same,
the only difference being that there is a light sensitive area only in the middle and not all over the regular sensor frame,
the logical consequence for my logical mind is that a hood that is enough to protect the whole image of a full frame sensor,
must also be enough to protect the image of a smaller sensor that is placed exactly in the middle of where a full frame sensor would be placed.

[sichko]

[abe in space]

What makes the most sense to me is sichko's statement, that on APS-C the hood CAN be longer, but that it shouldn't HAVE to be. The only way that would make sense is if on full-frame cameras you intentionally exposed the center of the image to flare, but covered up the outside.

I can, however, see how it *might* be true that lenses specifically made for APS-C sensors need longer hoods, since they're often intentionally made with shorter focal lengths (and therefore, often, more spherical front elements). So, for example, if you're trying to get an FF equivalent 35mm focal length, and you're using a Canon crop sensor camera, you'll use a 19-20ish mm lens. If you're using a a full frame cam, you'll just use a 35mm lens. 20mm lens's front element is likely to protrude out further, and thus, might require a longer hood to compensate for that.

But if you're talking about the same lens on both cameras, yeah, it just doesn't make sense unless you let the lens flare in the center on your FF camera.

[tomasg]

With any lens, the longer the hood, the better, problem is vignetting of course. On a FF lens you CAN use (it s not needed) a longer hood if you mount it on a crop sensor camera, simply becouse the extra vignietting wil be, cropped out I believe the Sigma 70-200/f2.8 comes with an extension for the hood, for APS-c cameras. See here:http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/sigma_70-200_2p8_os_c16/page3.asp

http://a.img-dpreview.com/lensreviews/sigma_70-200_2p8_os_c16/Images/hood-ext.jpg

Tomas

[Ymmot]

As far as I understand using a lens on a crop sensor decreases the effective field of view of the lens compared to full frame (hence the notion of 'equivalent' focal lenght). Thus the use of a longer hood is indeed possible without causing extra vignetting. For me this allows to use the metal hood for 50mm 1.8 (Slide on with locking screw, also suitable for the 35mm lens) zuiko for my 24mm 2.8 zuiko (normally a screw in hood, much more anoying), which would probably be a very bad idea on full frame, but is fine for my 4/3 camera.

[ZoneV]