# Which lens hood should I use?



## anubis404 (Feb 26, 2009)

I'm planning on buying a Nikkor 80-200 AF-D, and I'm going to need a lens hood. I don't like the look of the dedicated lens hood, but I will buy it if necessary. Since they are the same focal lengths, would the lens hood from the Nikkor 80-200 AF-S work just as well? Or will the dedicated work better?


----------



## Garbz (Mar 1, 2009)

If it even fits which it might, then the AF-S one would would better given it's a petal design, which means it extends further forward blocking flare that would come in from the middle of the frame edges.

But all in all I must say that the 80-200 AF D (note no dash, the AF-S is also a D lens, common typo.) is very well coated. I haven't once had a contrast or flare problem with this lens and I use the hood purely for protection in which case the standard round hood would do just as well as the petal hood from the AF-S model.


----------



## dhilberg (Mar 2, 2009)

Funny that you mention this. I actually just bought this lens a week and a half ago and was curious about the same thing. I ended up getting the proper HB-7 hood for it. You'll love the lens btw, it's a beast. I haven't had a whole lot of stick time with it, but it's been great so far.

According to this website here, the HB-17 hood from the 80-200 f/2.8 AF-S will fit on the non-afs lens. However, the HB-17, like the lens it was made for, isn't produced anymore. A quick search on ebay shows one selling for $189. 

This adapter here allows you to use the HB-29 hood from the 70-200 f/2.8 VR lens on the 80-200 f/2.8 ED lens, which otherwise doesn't fit. I've not used it and haven't read anything about it.

If you try it post back and let us know.

EDIT: Shop around for this lens. Nikon's prices have jumped lately, and places like B&H and Adorama have it listed for $1100. You can get it significantly cheaper ($925) at Amazon.com. I would jump on it ASAP before it goes up even more.


----------



## Garbz (Mar 3, 2009)

dhilberg said:


> This adapter here allows you to use the HB-29 hood from the 70-200 f/2.8 VR lens on the 80-200 f/2.8 ED lens, which otherwise doesn't fit. I've not used it and haven't read anything about it.



Just a follow up on that adapter, it lets you mount the 70-200 hood, but from what I have heard the 70-200 hood mounted in reverse on the 80-200 AF means that it doesn't fit in the carry case anymore. This is just something I have heard in passing though so it is worth researching more.


----------



## dhilberg (Mar 4, 2009)

Garbz said:


> Just a follow up on that adapter, it lets you mount the 70-200 hood, but from what I have heard the 70-200 hood mounted in reverse on the 80-200 AF means that it doesn't fit in the carry case anymore. This is just something I have heard in passing though so it is worth researching more.



The 80-200 doesn't fit in the case even with the proper HB-7 hood reversed on it.


----------



## N1LSS (Mar 4, 2009)

dhilberg said:


> Funny that you mention this. I actually just bought this lens a week and a half ago and was curious about the same thing. I ended up getting the proper HB-7 hood for it. You'll love the lens btw, it's a beast. I haven't had a whole lot of stick time with it, but it's been great so far.
> 
> According to this website here, the HB-17 hood from the 80-200 f/2.8 AF-S will fit on the non-afs lens. However, the HB-17, like the lens it was made for, isn't produced anymore. A quick search on ebay shows one selling for $189.
> 
> ...



Yeah, definitely make sure you shop around for the best price. All three of the places dhilberg mentioned are reputable and have competitive prices


----------



## anubis404 (Mar 7, 2009)

dhilberg said:


> Funny that you mention this. I actually just bought this lens a week and a half ago and was curious about the same thing. I ended up getting the proper HB-7 hood for it. You'll love the lens btw, it's a beast. I haven't had a whole lot of stick time with it, but it's been great so far.
> 
> According to this website here, the HB-17 hood from the 80-200 f/2.8 AF-S will fit on the non-afs lens. However, the HB-17, like the lens it was made for, isn't produced anymore. A quick search on ebay shows one selling for $189.
> 
> ...



No need. I just bought the lens for $650, and I must agree that it is a beast. I'm mostly concerned with protection when buying a lens hood, however I was under the impression that hoods noticeably improved contrast and image quality. Is this true, even with this lens?


----------



## zemlin (Mar 7, 2009)

dhilberg said:


> The 80-200 doesn't fit in the case even with the proper HB-7 hood reversed on it.



There are two concentric foam rings down in the bottom of the case.  Remove the inner ring if you are storing the lens with the hood.


----------



## TUX424 (Mar 7, 2009)

anubis404 said:


> No need. I just bought the lens for $650, and I must agree that it is a beast. I'm mostly concerned with protection when buying a lens hood, however I was under the impression that hoods noticeably improved contrast and image quality. Is this true, even with this lens?


Just wondering but were did u get that lens for $650, it sells for $1100 at adorama.com it used to be $879, i hate inflation.


----------



## dhilberg (Mar 8, 2009)

zemlin said:


> There are two concentric foam rings down in the bottom of the case.  Remove the inner ring if you are storing the lens with the hood.



Wow, thanks. I never would have noticed this.


----------



## dhilberg (Mar 8, 2009)

anubis404 said:


> No need. I just bought the lens for $650, and I must agree that it is a beast. I'm mostly concerned with protection when buying a lens hood, however I was under the impression that hoods noticeably improved contrast and image quality. Is this true, even with this lens?



Generally speaking, with any lens, stray light entering it will lower the contrast of the resulting image. Using the hood helps prevent stray light entering the lens, thus maintaining and possibly improving contrast. Not that this is a huge deal as contrast is easily adjusted in PP.

Did you buy this lens used? If not, that's a great price.


----------



## dhilberg (Mar 8, 2009)

TUX424 said:


> Just wondering but were did u get that lens for $650, it sells for $1100 at adorama.com it used to be $879, i hate inflation.



Nikon's prices have been spiking everywhere, but I still managed to get mine new for $899 (not including shipping) from PhotoWorld through Amazon.com. It's still available for $925 [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-80-200mm-Nikkor-Digital-Cameras/dp/B00005LEOH/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1236502778&sr=8-1"]here[/ame]. It's $1100 at most places now.


----------



## Garbz (Mar 8, 2009)

dhilberg said:


> The 80-200 doesn't fit in the case even with the proper HB-7 hood reversed on it.



Err... The Nikkor AF 80-200 f/2.8 D, fits quite comfortably into its standard CL-43A case with both a Hoya SHMC (normal profile filter) and the HB-7 hood reversed.


----------



## dhilberg (Mar 9, 2009)

Garbz said:


> Err... The Nikkor AF 80-200 f/2.8 D, fits quite comfortably into its standard CL-43A case with both a Hoya SHMC (normal profile filter) and the HB-7 hood reversed.



Yea, I found this out after zemlin mentioned (see above) an inner ring at the bottom of the case can be removed to accommodate the larger size of the lens with the hood reversed on it.

Otherwise it doesn't fit.


----------



## Garbz (Mar 9, 2009)

Oh crap sorry. I totally forgot to mention I did that . The top inner ring also has a little tab in it which can be removed, as the presence of the filter on the lens adds 2mm to the lens height and would otherwise not fit into the case either.


----------



## dhilberg (Mar 10, 2009)

The one on the top I noticed, although I didn't make the connection that it was for accommodating an attached filter, thanks. I'm actually going to pick up a UV filter for this lens for protection, so I need to know this.


----------

