I don't think the OP actually cares about whether or not it is used incorrectly but he does have the right to make an observation about what is happening.
With respect of course your post was simply wasted cyber space.
No more wasted than any other posting in this conversation. The OP was curious about something and so was I. Quite frankly, I believe the real reason the OP brought up the topic wasn't to gain knowledge about lens hoods, but to start a conversation, and since conversations need participants to be a conversation, my post was no more or less a waste of cyber space than yours.
Blair Shaw Jr wrote:
Not on the II version......it is sold separately and has a window at the bottom to open to adjust a CPL if one is used and it must be reversed before the lens can be installed into it's specially built case.
There is no version II of the EF 400 f/5.6L lens.
Apparently you are confusing the EF 400 f/5.6L with the two EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L lenses, of which neither one has a built-in lens hood like the EF 400 f/5.6L lens. Also, when I bought my EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L II, The lens hood came with it.
Jules Karney wrote:
Thank you, thank you very much.
And why should you think we would care WHAT you do? You for one, aren’t too bright! EH?
Maybe, maybe not, but I'm definitely brighter than you...
According to Canon, EF lenses can be used on both ... (
Although this is partially correct, it needs clarification.
A red dot means EF lenses, this is correct. A white dot means EF-S lenses. Not quite. A white dot means EF-M lenses, not EF-S lenses. A white square means EF-S lenses.
The part about mounting an EF-S lens, white square, on an EF body, red dot, will damage the mirror is partially correct. First, you can't natively mount a white square lens on a red dot only body. Canon specifically designed it that way and if someone is mounting EF-S lenses to a red dot only EF body, they must modify the lens to do so. Mounting the lens won't damage the mirror but trying to take a photograph will, when the mirror smacks into the rear end of the EF-S lens.
Canon is very clear and very specific about not modifying EF-S lenses to fit EF only bodies.
It's really that simple.
Somewhere in this conversation someone said they mount EF-S lens or lenses on an EOS 5Dsr, so I got out my 5Dsr and sure enough, red dot only, no white square. Just for giggles I attempted to mount a few EF-S lenses to my 5Dsr. Not a single one came close to fitting, as Canon intended.
Here's a wild idea; get a Canon M50 APS-C MILC and get a Viltrox EF-EOS M2 adapter to mount your EF lenses. The cool thing about the adapter is it's got a 0.71X magnification factor so it turns the APS-C M50 into a virtual full frame. Pretty cool.
I know this works because I have an M50 and the 0.71X adapter.
I do not find trump to be relevant to human life.
Regardless of what you find relevant, your comment is not relevant to this conversation. If you desire to mock Mr Trump, please start your own conversation; I'm sure plenty of people will join in, both for and against...
Does anyone remember when Steph Curry of the Golden State Warriors said that he didn't believe that we sent anyone to the moon and later apologized. Did all of the kids who look up to him as a role model hear the apology? People in a position to influence the young should realize the responsibility they have and make sure they know what they're talking about before they say nonsense that people will believe.https://www.space.com/42763-steph-curry-moon-landing-scott-kelly.html
I don't know who Steph Curry is, was and could care less about anything he had to say.
Blair Shaw Jr wrote:
Why do some folks wear their caps backwards? I s... (
Isn't the lens hood on an EF 400 f/5.6L built in and not removable or reversable?
I know the feeling. I've acquired so much gear over the years, a single camera bag would be able to hold only a portion of it.
Really? I though Canons lenses were interchangeable - A friend of mine uses an L series 80-200 (or equivalent) on her aps-c canon so I had assumed you could use the crop lenses on a full frame as well - yes I know there would be limitations just curious is this assumption is wrong.
EF-S mount lenses are designed specifically to not mount full frame bodies for several reasons. One of those reasons is, the mirror in APS-C bodies is smaller than full frame bodies and EF-S mount lenses insert farther into the body. If you were to modify the EF-S mount so it would attach to a full frame body, the mirror would more than likely smack the rear end of the lens as it flips up out of the way of the shutter. This would not be a good thing.
I always am trying to learn everything about photography that I can. If there is a reason so many are doing this I would like to know why and if there is some benefit. I always use mine and they are on where they protect the lens from the sun and from bumps on the front element but I would like to know if there is something that I am missing or not aware of. I am always interested in learning something new.
There's nothing new about being lazy or misusing something. Think of it like the people who wear baseball style caps at an angle of like the people who walk around with there pants partially down and their underwear showing. Is there really anything to be learned from those people?!
Do you really think the folks who use their cameras with the lens hood in the storage position are really on to something and know more about it than the people who designed it? Lens hoods are designed to serve a purpose and they actually do serve a purpose. Continue to use your lens hoods as the designers and manufactures intended, you won't go wrong. Ignore the people who are too lazy or too ignorant to attach the lens hood properly. You have nothing to learn from them.
I own both the 6D and the 80D and honestly, I use my 80D more than the 6D. Instead of selling your 80D, keep it and find a nice used 6D. The 6D is a nice camera but for wildlife, action and general photography, it can't touch the performance of the 80D.