Hasselblad Distagon 60 C

[F994]

Hello guys, I found a Hasselblad Distagon 60 C for around $290 and I'm really considering to buy It. A dear friend of mine told me it's a wonderful lens, I'm asking you your opinion to be sure about it.

I previously used a Distagon 50 C but I didn't really liked it.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Personally, I like the 50mm lens. The 60mm lens is too close to the 80mm lens for me. [Just like I prefer the 28mm lens over the 35mm lens in 35mm. The 35mm lens is too close to the 50mm lens.]

I like the spacing of the 38mm [SWC], 50mm, 80mm, 250mm lenses or 38mm [SWC], 50mm, 100mm, 250mm lenses for the Hasselblad.

 

[F994]

I know but I realized that 50 is too short and too long in any situation for me.

So I'd like to use 40 and 60. Do you know something about its sharpness and pros/cons?

 

[Sirius Glass]

If you understand MTF plots you can compare them. I think they are posted on http://www.hasselbladhistorical.eu/HS/HSTable.aspx

The 40mm lens uses your camera body, but it is suseptable to distorion. I prefer the SWC because it is rectilinearly correct. See one of my photos below Look at the verticals near the edges.

 

[F994]

Just WOW! I know that Biogon 38 is a great lens but unfortunately right now I just invested a huge (for me) amount of money on my 500C/M, a SWC would be too expensive. Maybe when I'll finish the university I can think about that but for now I'll concentrate myself on other kind of lenses. Could you explain me what MTF plots are?

 

[bdial]

I am a fan of the 60, I agree with your friend, it's a lovely lens and I find the field of view works nicely.
As I recall it's supposed to be one of the sharper lenses in the lineup.

 

[Colin Corneau]

I'm also a fan of the 60mm. It's a great field of view, and what I found useful was that it's roughly similar in view to the 35mm lens in 135 format...since I'm a big fan of a 35mm lens, this has been a great choice for me in medium format!

 

[F994]

Then I'll go with the 60 C T* f/3.5, the lens is basically new, do you think $290 is a fair price?
By the way, as in 135 with 24mm lenses I think that in medium format the 50mm while taking pictures includes just too much of the scene, you know, when you put almost everything is a small square frame that unavoidably gets boring.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The definition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_transfer_function

An explanation of how to read the plots: http://photo.net/learn/optics/mtf/

Basically the closer to a horizontal straight line the better.

First take a look at the CF 80mm lens and the CF 100mm lens. The modulation transfer curve is flatter for the 100mm lens, which is much much sharper.


Then compare the SWC and the 40mm modulation transfer curves.

Modulation transfer curves are hard to learn to read and understand, but they provide scientific data about how a lens should perform. Use these for comparison, but one must remember that these curves are only part of the lens performance and should not be the be all end all for choosing lenses.

 

[jspillane]

The 60mm is great, very sharp optic. I personally find it different enough from the 80mm that I do own both, although I rarely carry both unless I am doing something very specific. I stray towards using the 80mm when I am travelling just because it is smaller and faster (better for handheld use and carrying all day). On a tripod I prefer the 60mm, paired with the 120mm.

If it is in good condition (smooth focus, shutter speeds working) $290 is an decent price for a C T* (I would say average for current market). That being said, I got a CB (basically equivelent to CFi) for around $300, so decide if you want the C T* model versus a later variant.

 

[M. Axel Wikstrom]

I think it's a great lens. Love mine. Also like my 80, but the 60 makes a very nice compromise between "normal" and not too wide. Optically very good.

 

[Darko Pozar]

I have used the 60 C complemented with the 100mm and used only these two for years.
I found the 60mm most satisfactory, even for portraiture.

IMO $290 is a fair price...

 

[Chris Livsey]

The optical formula for the 60mm f3.5 has remained unchanged, that indicates of course it did not require changing.
It was the only (not 100% sure about the restricted market 120mm CB) CB issue lens that retained the original formula.
I agree the price is fair but the older C shutter is always a gamble, the cost of any repair will probably exceed that of a replacement lens. If you can find a CF and the difference is not large it would be a safer buy.
You also don't state if T* not that large a difference in performance (IMHO) but affects the price, nor why the 50mm was not to your liking, was it image quality or weight or field of view?

 

[F994]

I prefer the T* coating, wide angle lenses suffer for the lack of it, generally they become a flares factory. I didn't like the 50 mostly for the field of view, I also consider the loss of sharpness in the corners in this lens. The weight is not a problem, choosing the Hasselblad system for the weight is not a good bet, at all.

 

[Chris Livsey]

I prefer the T* coating, wide angle lenses suffer for the lack of it, generally they become a flares factory. I didn't like the 50 mostly for the field of view, I also consider the loss of sharpness in the corners in this lens. The weight is not a problem, choosing the Hasselblad system for the weight is not a good bet, at all.

Flare propensity depends on the scenes you shoot but I can understand preference to the T* is the C lens so coated they come in both "flavours"? If it is the price looks even better if not are you going to be disappointed if flare is a major issue for you?
On weight if you had gone from an 80mm to a 50mm you would have noticed the +300g difference, the 60mm is only 100g less than the 50mm, ( all rounded and approx) whilst you are correct that no one sensible chooses the system on total weight the individual choice within the system of lenses and finders radically changes how you perceive the system weight.
The 60mm is sharper in the corners no doubt.

 

[F994]

Flare propensity depends on the scenes you shoot but I can understand preference to the T* is the C lens so coated they come in both "flavours"? If it is the price looks even better if not are you going to be disappointed if flare is a major issue for you?
On weight if you had gone from an 80mm to a 50mm you would have noticed the +300g difference, the 60mm is only 100g less than the 50mm, ( all rounded and approx) whilst you are correct that no one sensible chooses the system on total weight the individual choice within the system of lenses and finders radically changes how you perceive the system weight.
The 60mm is sharper in the corners no doubt.

I kind of struggle to uderstand what you're saying about the coating. By the way yes, I think that the T* is fundamental for the scenes I'm going to shoot. I generally end up shooting with a bright sun above my head.

The one I found is a 60 C T* f/3.5.
About the sharpness: that's what I wanted to hear.

 

[Chris Livsey]

I kind of struggle to uderstand what you're saying about the coating..

Lens flare depends on the light hitting the lens, simply if you shoot into a light source, such as the sun, you will provoke flare. (Technically more flare than normal, there is always some flare). Some photographers rarely do that, controlled studio light for example, so the improvement in a T* coating is not as relevant for them, it may also affect the contrast and colour rendition to a degree so some photographers prefer the older coatings. The flare within the lens was addressed in the CFi series where even Zeiss said it was only under specific conditions the difference would be seen.
As an aside Voigtlander supply, among other focal lengths, a 40mm f1.4 M Leica fit lens in a multicoated MC or an SC single coated version for lower contrast in particular with B/W work.
If you shoot regularly in a way that tends to produce flare and you do not want it, some use it to artistic effect, then T* will be more important to you, does that clarify?

 

[F994]

If you shoot regularly in a way that tends to produce flare and you do not want it, some use it to artistic effect, then T* will be more important to you, does that clarify?

All clear! Thank you!

 

[Chris Livsey]

All clear! Thank you!

I hope you enjoy the lens, should you purchase it, and add a reply either way for posterity. Given the threads resurrected this Christmas we may be re-visiting this in five years time!!

 

[F994]

I hope you enjoy the lens, should you purchase it, and add a reply either way for posterity. Given the threads resurrected this Christmas we may be re-visiting this in five years time!!

For sure! I'll be more than happy to help someone else. I didn't really find many opinions on this lens so I needed to ask.

 

[HiHoSilver]

Personally, I like the 50mm lens. The 60mm lens is too close to the 80mm lens for me. [Just like I prefer the 28mm lens over the 35mm lens in 35mm. The 35mm lens is too close to the 50mm lens.]

I like the spacing of the 38mm [SWC], 50mm, 80mm, 250mm lenses or 38mm [SWC], 50mm, 100mm, 250mm lenses for the Hasselblad.

'Just speaking as one who has *alot* less experience/skill than Sirius here - I had the same decision & went w/ the 50. Its the old C style, but it works better than I do. I compared the two lens in the shop & got more of what I wanted w/ the 50. I share Sirius' bias with the smaller format also. The little 24ai nikkor delivers the goods ever time.

 

[HiHoSilver]

Personally, I like the 50mm lens. The 60mm lens is too close to the 80mm lens for me. [Just like I prefer the 28mm lens over the 35mm lens in 35mm. The 35mm lens is too close to the 50mm lens.]

I like the spacing of the 38mm [SWC], 50mm, 80mm, 250mm lenses or 38mm [SWC], 50mm, 100mm, 250mm lenses for the Hasselblad.

'Just speaking as one who has *alot* less experience/skill than Sirius here - I had the same decision & went w/ the 50. Its the old C style, but it works better than I do. I compared the two lens in the shop & got more of what I wanted w/ the 50. I share Sirius' bias with the smaller format also. The little 24ai nikkor delivers the goods every time.

 

[Sirius Glass]

As I said, I like the pairing of 50mm and 80mm lenses. I can see the pairing of the 60mm and 100mm lenses although to me both are a little on the long side. I also have the 100mm lens which is becoming my "normal" lens, but it is a little be long a times and I have to drop back to the 80mm lens.

 

[F994]

As I said, I like the pairing of 50mm and 80mm lenses. I can see the pairing of the 60mm and 100mm lenses although to me both are a little on the long side. I also have the 100mm lens which is becoming my "normal" lens, but it is a little be long a times and I have to drop back to the 80mm lens.

On the Freytag's book "The Hasselblad Way" I've read that the 100mm Planar was designed and meant as a photogrammetry lens, it basically has no distortion and it's perfect for reproductions. I'm sure it would couple perfectly with a 60mm lens and its sharpness would be nice for some landscapes. For now I only have the 80mm planar that I basically use as an all-situations lens but I'm managing to expand my kit.

 

[Colin Corneau]

Is it the 100mm that's f/2?

There's a lens that seems ideal for portraits...coupled with a 60mm who could ask for anything more.