Hasselblad Distagon 60 C

[F994]

I was talking about the f/3.5 one, I didn't even know that f/2 Planar 100 were produced.

A friend of mine also told me that he uses the Planar 80 as a portrait lens with the aid of a 10mm macro tube, I used the same trick using a 5mm extension tube on a 50mm lens with 135 film format, I was really satisfied by the results.

 

[Sirius Glass]

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.

No. As the data sheet in post #9 states f/3.5. And it is so sharp it is not good for portraits of women, unless there is a particular woman whom you hate. :devil:

 

[frank]

100f3.5

 

[etn]

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.

The one you are referring to is the acclamed 110 f/2 which is indeed widely used for portraits. It is however an F lens i.e. for focal plane bodies only. It is a different lens than the 100 f/3.5 C/CF/CFi discussed here.

Hope this helps

Edit: corrected typo

 

[RalphLambrecht]

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.

View attachment 170059 View attachment 170060

to me the distortion of the 40mm is part of its charm

 

[Luis-F-S]

Hated the 50, have had the 60 for some 25 years. Paid a whole lot more than $290 for mine!

 

[outwest]

At the low end I have 50, 60 , 80 and 100. The 50 usually stays at home. I like the 60 for a walking around lens over the 80. The 60 and the 100 make a great combo.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

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.

Yes, I like a similar spacing 50,80,150,250.

 

[F994]

I forgot to update the thread. Unfortunately the seller wasn't honest and sold me the lens full of fungus. I sent it back and got my total refund. I got a rotten Distagon 50 C for free from my friend's grandpa and sent to someone that knows how to get that things fixed. It had some small traces of fungus, a dent on the filter mounting ring, lazy shutter and focusing and EV rings that needed to be cleaned and oiled. Everything has been fixed, I'll write a post about its resurrection in the next days to let you see how these lenses were made to last.

 

[F994]

here you can see what the 60mm Distagon looked like.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Ugh! I believe that you will be happier with the 50mm in the long run.

 

[F994]

Ugh! I believe that you will be happier with the 50mm in the long run.

For sure I'll get used to it, for now a good 60 is way to expensive for my pockets and the priority is to get a 150mm Sonnar to complete the set.

 

[Chris Livsey]

here you can see what the 60mm Distagon looked like.

That's a shocker, you wonder what the seller was thinking "maybe he won't notice? " !!

 

[F994]

That's a shocker, you wonder what the seller was thinking "maybe he won't notice? " !!

I clearly asked him about the presence of scratches, dents, "fog" and fungus. He assured me the lens was in mint conditions, aesthetically and mechanically it was true, but optically it was a total disaster. After seeing what it looked like I immediately called the seller and he said something like "I work as a photographer since mid seventies and your experience is nothing compared to mine, I can assure you that it won't affect the performance of the lens"
Evidently he wasn't a good photographer. Neither a good person.

 

[Chris Livsey]

I can assure you that it won't affect the performance of the lens"

as a door stop.