Schneider-itis: The Perennial Problem

[ridax]

99.9% (?) of large format lenses don't come with lens shades

I think that's because in LF, the shades' shapes are dependent not only on the lens but also on the format, on the amount of tilts and shifts, on the focusing distance, and so on. So as B.S.Kumar said, hoods must be adjusted for each image.

The aim is to keep the front of the hood parallel to the lens standard.

I don't think this is necessary. Myself, I prefer to keep the hood front parallel to the film plane. Hoods I consider the most convenient are those that attach to the camera, not to the lens. That way, the lens can be tilted while the hood remains in the same position and needs no readjustment.

[B.S.Kumar]

The aim is to keep the front of the hood parallel to the lens standard.

My mistake. The front of the hood must be parallel to the film plane. If necessary, barn doors may be used for maximum efficiency in blocking stray light.

Kumar

[Daniel Unkefer]

With the Sinar Bellows mask units, the blinds are adjusted at taking aperture, so that they are -just- out of the picture precisely. So all the extraneous image circle is not bouncing around inside the camera. The units needed adjusted so they are parallel to the image plane, when camera movements are applied. In Hollywood they call this a "Matte Box".

Modern Sinar blinds not working smoothly by Nokton48, on Flickr

[Alan Klein]

My mistake. The front of the hood must be parallel to the film plane. If necessary, barn doors may be used for maximum efficiency in blocking stray light.

Kumar

That what I thought. That's what complicates it so much when using lens shades. After you;re done with all the movements, you have to readjust the shade. By that time the sun set.

[Alan Klein]

I guess this is why coated lenses became so popular.

[Ari]

I don't mind using threaded lens hoods, they can be left on the lens. But shades and compendium hoods are not my thing.
Too big, bulky and fiddly, it's like having a second camera to adjust.

[Oren Grad]

I don't mind using threaded lens hoods, they can be left on the lens. But shades and compendium hoods are not my thing.
Too big, bulky and fiddly, it's like having a second camera to adjust.

I'm in the same boat. Adjustable compendium hoods allow the greatest flexibility in optimally shading the lens while retaining maximum movement capability, but at the cost of a lot more fuss in setup.

Good luck with your lens repair!

[BrianShaw]

Ditto

[Michael R]

I'm in the same boat. Adjustable compendium hoods allow the greatest flexibility in optimally shading the lens while retaining maximum movement capability, but at the cost of a lot more fuss in setup.

Good luck with your lens repair!

I tend to do the same under most circumstances as I really dislike most compendium hoods. However when I need more optimized shading, rather than a hood I use something similar to that Sinar thing with the 4 blinds, which I can just clip directly onto the lens without much fiddling. I cobbled it together myself taking a cue from the less sexy Linhof version of the Sinar thing, which is just a few pieces of cardboard for the masking blinds.

Alternatively, I got one of those Lee self-supporting "compendium" hoods. It's much easier to use than the typical compendium with the fiddly rod etc. This thing just attaches to the front of the lens like a regular hood, and you adjust its self-supporting bellows. It doesn't shield as tightly as a compendium, but works pretty well, although it obviously won't accommodate gigantic lenses. Unfortunately it is expensive. I happened to luck out on a great deal so I took a chance.

[ridax]

After you're done with all the movements, you have to readjust the shade. By that time the sun set.

When there is no time to make the hood adjustment precisely, one can always make a fast rough adjustment. There will be more sideways light rays getting into the lens than with a perfect hood, but it will definitely be better than no hood at all.