Hasselblad Sonnar 150mm CF vs. Tessar 160mm CB

Greetings all!

 

(This is my first posting on this forum)

 

 

Having acquired a 501CM kit with a 80mm CB lens some time ago, I feel

like adding a second lens to my equipment. And I have decided as such

upon a medium telephoto in the 150mm region.

Make no mistake, if I could have afforded a CFE or CFi lens, it would

have been my first, second and third choice. But alas, my pockets are

not deep enough to sustain the cost of a second-hand Sonnar 150mm CFi,

much less a new one.

 

So, my alternative is to buy a s/h Sonnar 150mm CF, which seems to be

available in plenty on Ebay in the sub $800 region.

And when I am at it, another alternative presents itself: The Tessar

160mm CB. If I could get hold of either at the same price, which

should I go for?

 

Will the older CF be superior to the newer CB, or does the newer

design (shutter/ergonomics) of the CB make it a more viable option?

Does the simpler constructed (less elements) CB hold its own up

against the CF or is the CB simply a less sophisticated lens?

I would very much like to hear the opinions of you people on here.

 

And finally a question to the people who doesn't like the CB lenses:

If you had a choice between a CB lens and an old series C lens, what

would you choose?

 

Thanks in advance to all of you!

 

Eirik Vie

I found myself in a similar situation, aiming to purchase a 150mm CF to match my other CF lenses. In the UK I found that a used 160mm CB was a lot cheaper than the CF lens, even though most CB's were only a couple of years old. So I did some basic research and then bought the CB lens for ?520, compared to ?900 which would have been the price a couple of years ago for the CF.

 

In my opinion the CB isn't the same optically as the CF, on paper it's not quite as sharp. It is however a decent lens and I trusted that Blad / Zeiss would hardly offer anything less. The CB is a bit lighter than the CF and the focussing a little smoother.

 

I was thankful at the time that the negative publicity associated with the CB lenses made the price so low, having owned the lens for a couple of years I am happy with the performance. I dont own a Sonnar CF so I cant compare.

 

If money was no object I would go for the CF lens (or newer) over the CB. If they were the same price/condition I would also go for the CF. If the choice was between a CB and an older c series I would go for the former, since CB/CF parts are still all available and hence represent a lower-risk investment.

I used to have BOTH a 160 CB and a 150 CF and, being so pleased with 20x24 prints from

'chromes shot with the 160 CB, I traded the 150 CF over a year ago when I was upgrading

most of my lenses to CFE's as I own both a 503cw and a 203FE. (And cost wasn't a

consideration as I bought the CFE 120, 180, 250 SA and CFE 350 SA.) I don't understand

where the 160 CB got a blemished reputation as the one I have is certainly a "keeper." I

wouldn't hesitate to buy it over the CF. I had to choose which one to trade and I traded

the 150 CF and kept the CB 160 because of its performance. I hope this helps.

First of all, I would prefer a CF4/150 or a CB4.8/160 over an older C-lens. Ergonomics are much better anyway, and there is slow chance that a 40 years lens will hold against a much younger one, even it's design is a little simpler. There are no real quality arguements against the CB160, this is a well proven Tessar design. Some arguements for the Tessar/Sonnar:

 

Tessar: Handholdability due to smaller weight, newer for same price, smoother focusing, no need for service as it can be had almost new. Improved back lens mount and flash connector.

 

Sonnar: Half step faster, shorter barrel, heavy solid quality feel.

 

If you like to travel with your outfit, the Tessar is the way to go. For tripod work, i would take the Sonnar.

In this thread Kornelius Fleischer (of Zeiss) makes favorable comments about the 160.

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=000cKS

It might be of interest to know that dr Fleischer/Müller, the "head of camera lens applications", also goes under the title "manager strategic marketing".<br>I.e. his job is to sell, make favourable comments about, Zeiss photographic lenses. All of them...<br><br>And dr. Fleischer/Müller doesn't hide the fact that the CB Tessar is the lesser of the bunch. The advantages he quotes are the ones produced by the stray light reducing measures also present in the CFi/CFE lenses. Not any optical quality of the Tessar design. The differences, compared to CF lenses,however, are tiny, the advantages are small, and very much only ever become detectable in very adverse conditions.<br>The Tessar was meant to be cheap: the B in CB standing for Budget. Something had to, and did, give.<br><br>The thing that makes a hand-holdable lens is mass, not absence of mass. The lesser weight of the 160 mm makes it more susceptible to shake.<br><br>All in all, the Tessar is a fine lens, if you do not want/need the best lens.

It was fun to read John's link to the past thread on the 160 CB. My past post on the 160 is now close to five years old and after all this time I stick by what I said. I also note that QG continues to unfairly judge this fine lens.

 

Eirik if a 160 CB comes around at a competitive price similar to a 150 CF I recommend that you go for the 160 CB. I know you will enjoy the lens and use it often because of its fine attributes of optical performance and comfortable handling.

Doug,<br><br>What was true when this lens came out still is true today. Facts are facts... ;-)<br>And it's not as if Zeiss tried to keep it a secret that "all in all, the Tessar is a fine lens, if you do not want/need the best lens", is it?<br>Surely you have come across Dr Fleischer/Müller saying the same (the 'best lens', i.e. other Zeisss lenses, being too good was the way he worded his praise for the 160 mm CB Tessar).<br>Now what's "unfair" about that. ;-)

I can offer this information from inside Zeiss:

Of all the new Zeiss lenses in the Hasselblad system (generation CFi, CFE, CB), the Tessar 160 CB is the very best in terms of straylight handling.

And it balances very well with a camera body in handheld work.

If you are after colors with utmost purity, or shadows with unparalleled tonal range in b & w, your best choice is the Tessar 160 CB.

Readers and talkers have downgraded the reputation of this lens over years. Those who have really used it and have educated eyes to see the subleties in their photos, have a quite different appreciation for this lens.

I do use it without hesitation, and I prefer it over its neighboring Sonnar 150 and 180.

Hope this makes clear what I really think about the Tessar 160 CB.

 

Get it, enjoy it!