I have the E46 variety 28mm for my M's, all of which have the .72 viewfinder. Even with the vented hood, which incidentally, is actually BIGGER than the hood for the E49 lenses, the finder gets significant blockage on the right. How much better is this situation with the .58 body? Can i Justify the expense of trading one of my .72's for the .58, or should I just shoot with out the hood?

-- Tom Nutter (tmnphotos@erols.com), January 30, 2002

Answers

Yes, you can justify the expense, even if that does not solve the problem. Any way, with the 0.58 you have onother way of seeing the field but you ought to use the right hood! By Joe

-- joe pelizza (breglumasi@hotmail.com), January 30, 2002.

The viewfinder blockage is identical regardless of the magnification. The cutout in the 28 hood touches the lower right-hand edge of the 90mm frameline. I've gotten used to it on the .58, as it's so much nicer to use the 28 on a .58 body than on a .72 with the aux finder (I wear glasses). I'll sometimes use my 35 Summilux-ASPH without a hood, but I'd be leary of using the 28 hoodless. The lens is amazingly flare resistant, but I'm sure the hood makes a difference in daylight conditions.

-- Robert Schneider (rolopix@yahoo.com), January 30, 2002.

As far as I can tell, smaller magnification, combined with greater angle of view means v/f occlusion is more or less the same when you go from .72 to .58. There are 2 trade-offs which balance each other out - so you get the same result.

-- steve (stephenjjones@btopenworld.com), January 30, 2002.

I choose answer (3) - shoot without the hood.

Hoods (even the really good rectangular Leica hoods) become vestigial on wide-angles - light from outside the frame starts striking the front elements long before it appears in the image.

Take a shaded 28 or 21 outside, turn it slowly towards the sun, and notice how quickly some light starts to hit the front element and the black areas inside the lens between the elements. If it's getting in there and bouncing around it's having an effect, even if the light source is still only glancing at 80 degrees or so from the side.

The wide-angle shades maybe add 5 degrees of light protection over no hood at all, (out of 360 degrees of possible shooting angles). Outside that 5 degree range either you're getting light into the lens anyway, or you're turned far enough away that the lens tube itself is casting enough shadow.

I still use hoods on occasion - as a rain hat, or for other physical protection. And with longer lenses you get much more effect from the hood, esp. with a lens like the 90 Tele-Elmarit where the front element is very unprotected in it's 'natural' state. The 12575 metal shade adds about 50-60 degrees of shooting range before the light starts to strike the glass.

One of the advantages to the 46mm 28 Elmarit and 'cron is that without their hoods they impinge very little on the frame area - compared with the 49mm lens - which reaches nearly to the 75mm frames without a hood.(!)

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), January 30, 2002.

I used to own the E49 and later the E46 28/2.8, now my only 28 is the Tri-Elmar. All my M's are 0.72 but I have the .06 Hexar RF. Even with that I prefer the 28 accessory finder. The view through the separate finder looks more like what a 28mm looks like though an SLR, in terms of scale of foreground-background. The view through the camera finder is that of a standard lens and for me using the accessory finder means one less thing I need to "envision" in my mind when shooting with the M.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), January 30, 2002.

I must agree with Andy that the "improvments" offered by a lenshood are often more theoretical that real. I usually leave the hood off of my Gen-4 28/2.8-M lens, preferring to see as much of the frame as possible. I only leave the hood on when I'm working in crowds, to protect the front element from an errant elbow, or when its raining or snowing. I'll occasionally also use a hood when shooting over sunlit snow or water. Otherwise, the hood just takes up space, cuts off more of the finder image, and actually provides less dust protection when capped (due to the cutout) than the lenscap alone.

-- John Layton (john.layton@valley.net), January 30, 2002.

Dear Tom,

I know the problem. Whether 0.72, 0.58, 0.6 or the CLE's 0.43 (I believe) it's the same old bloody problem with the Leica 28/2.8 with hood. After that hood disinigrated right on the lens (there's a story behind that, but never mind) I started using a 48-49 step up ring as a hood. Problem solved. The lens is fun now--on all of the above.

Originally the 28/2.8 was meant to be used with a top mounted viewfinder, when hood obstruction was academic.

The new VC 28/1.9 has one outstanding virtue. The hood is less obstructive.

-- Alex Shishin (shishin@pp.iij4-u.or.jp), January 31, 2002.