Whether the optical quality of a lens is "bad" is subjective (depends on your level of scrutiny) and specific (depends on what sensor you'll use it with and at what apertures). From that point of view only testing such a lens can tell you this.
If your question is rephrased to "how does the optical quality of the HC35 compare to the other HC lenses?" then this is much less subjective. To answer that question I would point to our Lenses for 150mp article
which classifies the HC35 at the bottom of the range of HC lenses. It was released in 2002, when a 22mp 1.1 crop sensor was cutting edge, and does not compare favorably to the newer HC50 II released in 2010 or the HC28 released in 2006
As I discuss in the article, newer lenses are not always optically better than older ones, but within
the scope of a given high-end company's lineup it is true much more often than not. Your 80mm is also an older design, but normal-length lenses are easier to design than wide-length lenses (especially on an SLR), and is, in my testing and experience, a full notch better than the HC35m.
I've been careful here only to make a relative comparison within the HC lineup both because I think that's the most fair/useful way and because my company chooses not to sell Hasselblad cameras, so I must be considered biased.
And again, "not as good within the line up" does not mean "you will not enjoy it or find it useful" – especially with an older sensor like an H3D that will not push these lenses nearly as hard as more recent larger and higher-resolution sensors.
My advice, as always, is try to test one before you commit.