Carl Zeiss Distagon 60mm f3.5 HFT PQ Lens Review for Rollei or Hasselblad

[peter brown - www.peterbro]

<blockquote>Hi all,

<p>

I have just added a review of the Carl Zeiss Distagon 60mm f3.5 HFT PQ Lens

for Rollei (or Hasselblad) owners or anyone interested.

<p>

<br />

This is the link: <a

href="http://www.peter-brown-photographer.com/equipment%20page/dista

gon%20PQ%2060mm%20review.html">Distagon 60mm Review</a>.

<p>

<a href="http://www.peter-brown-photographer</a>

 

</blockquote>

[rolleica_bean]

This is a very interesting lens. I really want to get one if I don't have 50mm FLE now. It is the same price as 50mm FLE, no cheap as I always expect it to be lower and about the same as 50 EL.

[squareframe]

Peter,

 

thank you for sharing your website, your beautiful imagery, and your detailed reviews of equipment.

[david_littleboy__tokyo__ja]

The 60mm length is also my favorite for a normal lens, but I find the Zeiss prices quite incomprehensible.

 

The MTF curves for that lens on the Hassy and Rollei sites aren't all that impressive, so my question is: how much better is it (in terms of actual MTF curves or actual lines resolved on a test chart at f/8 with real film, not hypothetical areal resolution) than the 55/2.8 Mamiya 645 lens?

 

At 2/3 of an stop faster (for significantly more accurate focusing), less than 1/2 the weight, less than 1/4 the price, and performance at f/5.6 to f/11 adequate to give sharp 4000 dpi scans from Provia, the Mamiya lens would seem to be the hands down winner...

[peter brown - www.peterbro]

<blockquote><h4>Hi David,</h4>

<p>

Are you comparing Rollei's Carl Zeiss Distagon 60mm f3.5 HFT PQ lens with

electronic linear drive shutter to Mamiya's 55/2.8 N/L lens with the Seiko #0

mechanical shutter or the 55/2.8 which does not have an internal leaf

shutter? <p>

Your comments regarding the Mamiya being half the weight of the Zeiss lead

me to believe you must be referring to the Mamiya lens which does not have

the internal leaf shutter, because as you will be aware the 55/2.8 N/L lens is

considerably heavier, in fact almost twice that of the 55/2.8. <p>

I'm sure these factors will have some bearing on price comparisons and really

isn't it better to compare apples with apples?<p> I'm also pleased you were

able to get your new 55mm lens for US$250 which is a quarter of the price I

paid for my US$1,000 CZ 60mm. I consider this price to be good value for the

Distagon 60mm considering the lens has an internal shutter, is compatable

with all the Rollei 6000 series cameras and is a high quality lens which

provides me with fantastic results. Lets face it, quality is remembered, long

after the price is forgotten. <p>

As far as mtf curves go, I believe that they have some value for technicians,

engineers or lens designers but are really not much use to working

photographers, apart from giving a bit of an indication on how the lens may

perform under ideal conditions. When working in the field there are far too

many variables for mtf curves to be significant.<p>

I'm unable to give you my opinion on the comparison you ask about as I have

never tried the Mamiya 55mm lenses and therefore I can only comment on

the excellent results I obtain with the Distagon 60mm, which is more than

sharp enough for any application I need. I believe that the 250 lp/mm that

the Distagon 60mm resolves is one of the highest tested and is only equalled

by the Superachromat 250/5.6. The well-respected Zeiss Biogon 38mm only

tested to around 200 lp/mm, so in terms of resolving power the 60mm seems

to me to be well in excess of that needed to record a very sharp image on

either Provia or Velvia.<p>

I cannot agree with you that 2/3 of a stop faster with apertures in the 2.8 -

3.5 range would make for significantly more accurate focusing, at these

apertures and with the High Definition screen in the 6008i I cannot imagine

any advantage.

<p>

I'm sure you will get plenty of debate about which of these two lenses is the

best and I'm equally as sure that you will continue to use your Mamiya 55/2.8

lens to make great photos - I'm sorry I couldn't be of more help in justifying

your decision to buy into the Mamiya system but I'm sure you've made the

right decision.<p>

Thanks for your comments which are much appreciated and I'll leave you with

a comment from the great photographer, Alfred Stieglitz;<p>

<h4> "If you place the imperfect next to the perfect,

people will see the difference between the one and the other.

But if you offer the imperfect alone,

people are only too apt to be satisfied by it."</h4>

<p>

 

Kind regards<p>

Peter Brown/Cairns Australia<p>

[david_littleboy__tokyo__ja]

"I'm sure you will get plenty of debate about which of these two lenses is the best"

 

There isn't any debate. My question was: "How much better is the Zeiss lens." I find that the Mamiya provides adequate resolution for decent 4000 dpi scans at f/8 and f/11 but contrast and sharpness are down outside that range (although I can't see this with an 8x loupe); certainly no problem at 13x19 at f/8 or f/11. The reviewer found that the Zeiss lens was observably better at it's sweet spot. That sounded rather familiar...

[peter brown - www.peterbro]

<blockquote><h4>David,</h4><p>

 

Not quite correct - better to quote the entire sentence so that it's not taken

out of context or has another implied meaning. <p>

The reviewer actually said " I find the lens performs well at <b>all,</b>

apertures <i>(including wide open)</i> <b>but</b>, of course works

<b>best </b><i>(like most lenses)</i> in the f8-f11 sweet zone." <p>

Yes, this should be familar to any photographer - what's your point?<p>

 

Kind regards,<p>

 

<h4> Peter Brown - "the reviewer"</h4>

[Rob F.]

Hi Peter, It's nice to get some validation--I bought a 60 Distagon a couple of years ago, and was very pleased with its performance after getting less than salutory results with the 50mm distagon, which I found needed to be stopped down to around 11 1/2 to get sharp edges. The 60, by way of contrast, delivers decent sharpness across the field wide open, and improves progressively, just as one would expect, as we stop it down. No surprises, no dissapointments. The contrast and general "signature" of the images is very much to my liking as well.

 

So it's nice to see the lens getting the attention it deserves.

[struan_gray]

<blockquote>

<p>Peter, I don't know what you are using</p>

<blockquote>

<p>to compose your postings</p>

<blockquote>

<p>But it's not closing</p>

<blockquote>

<p>a blockquote tag</p>

<blockquote>

<p>and your text is</p>

<blockquote>

<p>getting hard to</p>

<blockquote>

<p>read</p>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

[claudio_trezzani]

<p>generally speaking, every HFT Zeiss lens (designed for Rollei) fits (as bayonet) on a Hasselblad body (and vice versa)?<br>

Thanks for your explanations</p>

<p>best regard<br>

Claudio Trezzani</p>