New guy says hello! and is the 50mm really that bad?

[Dick1982]

Hello everyone,

I live in Spain and have been using my analouge Leica M sytem with great joy for some time (after selling my digital equipment, havent looked back!). Now I am considering moving into MF and am thinking of Hasselblad V system also for the possibility of buying a digital back when the prices come down eventually.

Yesterday I went to test a 503CXx with a 150mm C, 80mm CF and 50mm c lense. Back home when I developed I was very dissappointed. Sure I printed as big as I could and there is no grain thats nice. But the corners were all soft as pudding!! I asked him today to take pictures with his digital back at those focus card thingies and even he was mazed. This is what we found.

the 50mm sucks! Pardon my french but seriously, this lense only gets sharp in the corners at f11!
Same with the 150mm but I even found this one softish in the center at f4! The portriate he took of me at f4 is very soft.

The 80mm Cf is the only real decent one here. Even at f2.8 its shap in the corners.

We also shot with his 500mm @ f8 (its widest) on both film AND digital to make comparisons and also soft. He said he read someweher this lense becomes sharp @ f16! Cmon, that cannot be right!

I might ruffle some feathers by saying this (maye not a good idea on my first post...) but I am used to Leia lenses which are sharp corner to coner at wide appertures and in the worse cases (40 plus year old lenes) when stopped by 2 max., and then very little.

Am I mising something here? Does one have to shoot Hasselblads stopped down for good results?
Is it possible that the camera is not focusing well for some reason (this happens with Leica but then again its a rangefinder system)?

I really want to LIKE the V system and holding the camera and seeing how it works was a blast, but I am a bit dissappointed at my results.

All comments are much appreiated and thanks in advance guys!

Hasta la vista

 

[Douglas Fairbank]

I won't be able to say anything that will change your mind about what you have. But I would say that the old 50C lens was corrected for large distances, I mean landscapes and architectural, furthermore all lenses improve with stopping down. I have assumed that your lens is optically clean and undamaged. Newer 50mm lenses have secondary focus to correct for closer distances and flat field tests with a new lens compared to an old show much improved results because of this user selectable correction (better contrast too).
Hasselblad publish the MTF data for their lenses on the website, maybe Leica also do that, why not check to see if the results you see match expectations.

 

[blowupster]

The 50mm C was not a good lens. The CFI is far better with correction ring for close distance. Personaly I use the 50mm/2.8 FE with my CFV and the result is great.
If you like old lenses that dose not compromise quality: The 30mm (mine is from 1965); the 100mm/3.5 (mine from 1970) and the 250mm C superachromat (what year ?). Not so bad the 60mm/3.5 (mine from 1985), the 80mm (mine is from 1956) and the 250mm (mine is from 1956 + one from 1952:same formula as today).

I'm lookinf for the early C 60mm/5.6 (I've one 1953 form my 1000F excellent in the center, poor elsewhere).

For my M9-P I have 1 Summicron 35mm (1959), 50mm(1960) and Elmar 135mm (1960) If you use hood and stop down +2. they give excellents quality pictures realy close to my other Asph. lenses that may be used at PO.