Hasselblad 501 CM auxiliary shutter cracks

I just bought a hasselblad 501 CM in a mint condition from eBay. The camera looks almost unused but after inspecting I noticed there are three cracks on the auxiliary shutter of the body. (picture attached)

Do you know what caused them and if they are serious defects and can affect on the camera operation or pictures?

That's not a "mint" body with that kind of problem.

Even in perfect condition, the auxiliary shutter is known to be a bit finicky and prone to leaking from not closing completely or correctly.

Of course, you have it in hand and can actually judge the cracks, but from here I'd be afraid of one of them falling to pieces every time I fired the shutter-heaven forbid I needed to open them by hand to clear a lens jam.

That's not a "mint" body with that kind of problem.

 

Even in perfect condition, the auxiliary shutter is known to be a bit finicky and prone to leaking from not closing completely or correctly.

 

Of course, you have it in hand and can actually judge the cracks, but from here I'd be afraid of one of them falling to pieces every time I fired the shutter-heaven forbid I needed to open them by hand to clear a lens jam.

The cracks are only on the curtain's coating and not on the inner material. I don't understand how it can fall in piece. and how it can cause jamming. I think these cacks are on the coatings and caused by the age. My question is how they can affect the pictures if you have any experience in this case.

I just bought a hasselblad 501 CM in a mint condition from eBay...... there are three cracks on the auxiliary shutter of the body.

That's not 'mint'. Mint means as-new, out-of-the-box condition.

Send it back. There's no way of telling how deep those cracks run, and they certainly don't look like surface coating crazing to me.

Those cracks are common to the point of ubiquitous with every Hasselblad body mfr'd after approx 1977. The ill-conceived "palpas" anti-reflective coating on the rear shutter doors and inside the mirror box began cracking and splitting almost immediately.

Fortunately, its more of an eyesore than a functional issue. Unless the body endured extremely heavy professional use, the coating tends to remain intact: the cracking and splitting relieves the initial strain, then the several split portions maintain their integrity indefinitely. In rare instances, abused or banged on pro bodies can shed chunks of palpas that jam the mechanism (more likely with the thicker mirror box coating). And it can make servicing later bodies more of a chore for the tech.

But in 9 out of 10 coated bodies I've seen, the cracks are stable and cause no problem. The rear doors under the coating are the same gauge metal as the earlier bodies, and just as durable. So if this 501cm appears to be otherwise 'mint' and functioning normally, enjoy it with no concern. The 501cm is scarce and expensive in any condition: don't reject it for superficial palpas cracks.

As orsetto says, that is normal with the palpas anti-flocking material used in those bodies.

A NOS (ie: New) untouched 501cm would look like that, so it is technically "mint".

On the bright side, the palpas flocking does work as advertised, even "crackled" like that. Still better than the earlier bodies with just flat black paint.

As real-world examples, my own four Hasselblad bodies are pictured below, with various conditions of rear shutter palpas coating. Top left is a 1991 500cm, top right is a 1994 500cm, bottom left is a 1994 553ELX, bottom right is a 1986 500ELX. All have functioned perfectly for years. The second photo shows the palpas coating cracks inside the mirror box of the two 500cm bodies.

Hasselblad is ingenious but not infallible: much like Nikon, they've made a few bonehead design choices over the years that they obtusely refused to acknowledge (doubling down instead). The palpas coating is very poorly implemented: the cracks are harmless, but they look terrible in such an expensive system. It doesn't usually chip off, but it does develop a tendency to dump extraneous dust on the mirror and focus screen as it very slowly decays. Since its essentially an epoxy impregnated with rubber powder, there is no way for independent techs to remove it from the mirror box or re-apply a fresh coat (nor can they seal the finish on the flaps to reduce dust).

Nobody ever seriously complained the flat black paint Hasselblad used between 1957 and 1984 was ineffective: the palpas is one of those "who asked for it" type of "improvements". Its on my top three list of completely unnecessary and avoidable Hasselblad blunders, right behind the self-destructing flimsy plastic focus grip retaining rings and cheap spray-painted scales/numerals of the CF lenses.

(BTW, if you ever want a backup body for your 501cm with the same larger drift-proof mirror, consider a 500ELX or 553ELX. They sell for 1/3rd to 1/4th the price of a 501cm, but include a built-in motorized winder and TTL flash metering feature.)

the palpas is one of those "who asked for it" type of "improvements".

- Maybe it was meant to be a noise damping measure, rather than an (obviously not) improved anti-reflection coating?

- Maybe it was meant to be a noise damping measure, rather than an (obviously not) improved anti-reflection coating?

That's a logical deduction based on the appearance, composition and location of the palpas.

But AFAIK, if Hasselblad promoted it at all it was only as an anti-reflection improvement. And unfortunately, despite the encouraging appearance, palpas does nothing whatsoever to dampen the sound. My first Hasselblad was an ancient 500c with the flat black paint, and of course it was as raucously loud as any other Hasselblad. When prices really cratered between 2009-2014, I snapped up the ones pictured very cheaply (along with others in various states of dysfunction). Initially I imagined the newer bodies with palpas were quieter, until the day I lined them all up and compared their noise.

It was quite a surprise to discover the quietest Hasselblads were the oldest! The 500c is noticeably less noisy than the early 500cm without palpas, and the final 500cm and 503cx with palpas are noisiest of all (aside from the motorized ELM and ELX). In practical terms its a distinction without a difference: no Hasselblad V body could ever be called "quiet" with a straight face. The Hasselblad emits a unique two stage clank: press the shutter button, and you have a reasonable (for 6x6) amount of noise and vibration as the mirror flips up, the rear doors open and the leaf shutter fires.

But, when you take your finger off the button, the rear flaps jarringly snap shut hard, with a distinctive "THWOP" sound thats more annoying than the initial firing. Winding to the next frame brings down the mirror and recocks the shutter: as the film locks into place the film magazine suddenly jerks to stop with a ridiculously loud clatter that sounds like someone zooming down a zip line. Compared to this, the huge Mamiya RB67 sounds like a Leica: much quieter with far less shock and awe. The RB67 easily allows 1/30 sec handheld, with Hasselblad you're lucky to get away with 1/125th. Since I prefer 6x6, I traded the RB67 for a Mamiya C220f system. The TLR is my go-to for handheld low-light 6x6: the lenses may lack that Zeiss sparkle, but the Hasselblad sparkle gets obliterated by handheld shockwave blur in anything but bright light.

That's a logical deduction based on the appearance, composition and location of the palpas.

 

But AFAIK, if Hasselblad promoted it at all it was only as an anti-reflection improvement. And unfortunately, despite the encouraging appearance, palpas does nothing whatsoever to dampen the sound. My first Hasselblad was an ancient 500c with the flat black paint, and of course it was as raucously loud as any other Hasselblad. When prices really cratered between 2009-2014, I snapped up the ones pictured very cheaply (along with others in various states of dysfunction). Initially I imagined the newer bodies with palpas were quieter, until the day I lined them all up and compared their noise.

 

It was quite a surprise to discover the quietest Hasselblads were the oldest! The 500c is noticeably less noisy than the early 500cm without palpas, and the final 500cm and 503cx with palpas are noisiest of all (aside from the motorized ELM and ELX). In practical terms its a distinction without a difference: no Hasselblad V body could ever be called "quiet" with a straight face. The Hasselblad emits a unique two stage clank: press the shutter button, and you have a reasonable (for 6x6) amount of noise and vibration as the mirror flips up, the rear doors open and the leaf shutter fires.

 

But, when you take your finger off the button, the rear flaps jarringly snap shut hard, with a distinctive "THWOP" sound thats more annoying than the initial firing. Winding to the next frame brings down the mirror and recocks the shutter: as the film locks into place the film magazine suddenly jerks to stop with a ridiculously loud clatter that sounds like someone zooming down a zip line. Compared to this, the huge Mamiya RB67 sounds like a Leica: much quieter with far less shock and awe. The RB67 easily allows 1/30 sec handheld, with Hasselblad you're lucky to get away with 1/125th. Since I prefer 6x6, I traded the RB67 for a Mamiya C220f system. The TLR is my go-to for handheld low-light 6x6: the lenses may lack that Zeiss sparkle, but the Hasselblad sparkle gets obliterated by handheld shockwave blur in anything but bright light.

Funny enough, when I started using Hasselblads I found my 500c relatively quiet, but you have to bear in mind that my reference was the loud SQ-A and the earth-shattering S2a.

I recall walking around at a work party one day with the S2a, and every time I tripped the shutter I got a "what the heck was that" look from it...so much for being inconspicuous. In practice, I found 1/1000 more of a necessity than a convenience as I could be assured sharp hand held shots with it. That's not to mention the fact that Hasselblads are often called a Rube Goldberg design on this forum, but they have nothing on that series of Bronicas. The SQ-A was somewhat quieter than the focal plane Bronicas, and of course lacks the secondary "clack" of the auxilliary shutter on the Hasselblad(the SQ-A uses a simple flap behind the mirror-just like the RB67-that stays up until the film is advanced) but overall the mirror is noisier.

I'm in agreement, though, on the RB67. The big 7x7 mirror LOOKS like it should make a racket(and when I call it a 7x7 system, I get funny looks but it's the truth since the lenses and body all have to account for a vertical film orientation) but the whole thing is amazingly quiet(relatively speaking) with almost no perceptible mirror shock. I've used 35mm cameras that had more.

Yep, the Bronica S2A has to have been the loudest, most terrifying camera ever sold. Its astounding to think wedding pros who couldn't afford Hasselblad in the 60s-70s used these things: the shutter sounds like someone slamming a tin garbage can lid against a cement wall. Just horrendous.

Aside from the shotgun shutter noise, those early focal-plane-shutter Bronicas were pretty clever and fun. I pulled together a complete outfit with four Nikkor lenses back in 2008 for less than $500, just for kicks. Really well made system, tho I never got comfortable with the strange "no barrels, just lens heads with exposed guts hanging out" philosophy. The bodies were even more mechanically intricate than Hasselblad: mirror folds down to floor during exposure, a cloth blind rolls over the focus screen, ka-POW goes the shutter, viewscreen unblinds, mirror instantly returns). Eventually the thrill wore off and I sold the system at a slight loss. The S2A body is almost as large and heavy as a Mamiya RB67, and the shutter noise really made any sort of discretion impossible.

Still, I'd love to get my hands on its electronic successor EC/TL. That was the first (and for a long time only) medium format SLR with built-in mirror-mounted TTL aperture-priority AE metering compatible with all lenses and viewfinders (including folding waist level). The versatility of this meter was never equaled in any other medium format camera (the Rolleiflex SLX was perhaps similar, but vastly more expensive since it had a built-in motor drive and shutter-priority AE requiring bespoke electronic leaf shutter lenses with motorized aperture controlled by the meter).

The S2 is smaller than the RB67, but definitely quite a brick of a camera. The first time I picked up my SQ after using the S2 for a while, I was amazed at how light the SQ was.

Also, the weird lens mount/focusing arrangement of the S2 did make the lenses a fair bit smaller and lighter-I always thought the camera looked kind of weird with the "stubby" 75mm Nikkor mounted on it.

It did look a bit different with the 150mm attached

I actually owned both and EC and EC-TL at one point, but they had been water damaged and didn't work. I did like the idea of the split mirror, in addition to the AE function. I have a few magazines still kicking around here that I need to dig out and move along...

That 150mm F/3.5 Zenzanon was a sweet lens, my favorite with the S2A. Better than the dodgy 135mm Nikkor and impractically long-focus 200mm Nikkor: it replaced them both in my kit.

Other than the RB67, the quietest MF SLR camera I ever owned was the old Kowa Six. No interchangeable back, but took both 120/220 and was built/finished exquisitely. It was the only true 6x6 "Japanese Haselblad" for awhile, with its sharp leaf-shutter lenses. Very easy to focus WLF, lots of "snap". The mirror was heavily damped, with a film plane cover riding behind it, so firing sound was even softer than RB67- more a whir than a clunk, with no jarring mirror shock. I could never find 55mm or 150mm lenses for it that didn't have haze or fungus, and I hated the finger-killing breech lock lens mount, so off to eBay it went after three years (right behind my Bronica S2A).

Unfortunately Kowa was unable to add interchangeable backs to the followup Super 66 without making the already-clumsy, weirdly tall Six body even clumsier. The backs had clever built-in dark slide rollers, but were an odd L-shape to accommodate the straight flat film path (much better than Hasselblad's torturous double helix). The system barely lasted a decade on the market: sold new only 1968-1974, it was popular second hand thru the late 1970s. After Bronica replaced their focal plane system with the modern, electronic leaf-shuttered ETR in '76 and SQ in '80, interest in Kowa evaporated and their 6x6 system became a footnote (along with their truly bizarre leaf shutter 35mm SLR system).

Yep, the Bronica S2A has to have been the loudest, most terrifying camera ever sold.

- Haha! That brings back a college-days memory. A fellow student declared he'd been given a Bronny S2A for Christmas, and a wave of mild jealousy went around the room. The jealousy quickly faded when he produced a pile of prints to show us - all ruined by very obvious camera shake.

My temptation to buy an ETRS was equally sated the moment I held and fired one. After my ears stopped ringing, I wondered if I should get my hands checked out for white-finger from the vibration.

WRT the Kowa 6: Lovely-looking on the outside; built like a baked-bean can on the inside. Mine was always needing work, especially on the lenses, the shutters of which seized up with regularity, and apart from the 85mm standard, didn't shine optically either. One over-enthusiastic wind on, and your frame-spacing was buggered too.

WRT the Kowa 6: Lovely-looking on the outside; built like a baked-bean can on the inside. Mine was always needing work, especially on the lenses, the shutters of which seized up with regularity, and apart from the 85mm standard, didn't shine optically either. One over-enthusiastic wind on, and your frame-spacing was buggered too.

Right you are again: the lens issues are what finally soured me on the Kowa. If it wasn't haze, it was shutter glitches every time I found a prospective wide or tele. The only "perfect" lens I ever had was the 85mm that came with the body: shutter was fine, focusing very smooth, clear glass. Kowa seems to have been the exception to the rule that "Japanese leaf shutter lenses break down far far less often then German". The Hasselblad lenses are killer expensive to service, but at least can still be serviced (and hold some of their value afterward).

Strangely, the flimsy internal gearing you refer to is exactly the same Achilles Heel of the Bronica S, C, S2 system (fold out the crank for a quicker wind, and you end up at the camera hospital for a rebuild). At least Bronica wised up and put much tougher gearing in the final S2A model, IDK if Kowa followed their lead with their own final 66 model. My two favorite things about the Kowa were the velvety-smooth focus ring feel (unmatched by Hasselblad until their final hideously expensive CFi series), and fantastic focus screen: plain ground glass, but bright while giving the most positive in-focus snap I've ever experienced with a WLF (better even then the Mamiya RZ67 or Hassy Acute Matte).

Funny how muscle memory and fear can be hard to shake. After the touchy Bronica C led me to S2A, and Kowa Six adventure, to this day I have an aversion to speed cranking the Hasselblad (even tho its up for it). I either use the old-style knob with no crank, or the latest crank that doubles as a knob. Whenever I unfold the crank, my hand starts shaking. Same reason I gravitated to the Mamiya C220 over C330: knob vs crank. Medium-format PTSD?

Funny how muscle memory and fear can be hard to shake. After the touchy Bronica C led me to S2A, and Kowa Six adventure, to this day I have an aversion to speed cranking the Hasselblad (even tho its up for it). I either use the old-style knob with no crank, or the latest crank that doubles as a knob. Whenever I unfold the crank, my hand starts shaking. Same reason I gravitated to the Mamiya C220 over C330: knob vs crank. Medium-format PTSD?

Not having a crank feels strange to me. I cut my MF teeth on a Rolleiflex, which has the most velvety smooth crank you could ask for, and all of my subsequent SLRs have either been crank or lever advance(I did use my SQ and ETRS with a speed grip, which gives you two-stroke advance and cocking).

A good friend of mine, who I know from watch collecting, not photography, bought his 500C used in the 1970s. When I showed him mine, he suggested that the best place for the crank was in the garbage, and said that his favorite was the metered knob. We just agree to disagree on that-I like the crank :)

Having a crank on the Bronica S2's was almost a necessity as you had to wind it almost 5 turns.

I never found the 500 Hasselblads that loud - it was a pleasant sound. The 2000's were loud, metallic, and sharp. Louder than the Bronica S2's.

As far as the Crank was concerned, it was nice to have when you were shooting a series with a moving subject or model.

We are wondering off topic a bit though,

Palpas is essentially astronomy flocking, but made to deteriorate, shrink and crack faster. Hence the premium, ;)

@ ben_hutcherson: I love the Hasselblad meter knob! Seeing it on the cover of a Hasselblad brochure back when I was 16 was the first time I became aware of (and coveted) a 500cm. Thirty-plus years later, I finally bought one of these knobs from eBay, mint with storage bubble, box and instructions. I overpaid, but after adjusting its potentiometer the Gossen selenium cell has been a dead accurate match for my Nikon meters. Two years ago, upon picking up my 120mm Makro Planar after a shutter CLA, I got lucky and found another meter knob behind the counter of my local hole-in-the-wall repair shop (buried alongside a bunch of dusty Minolta XG1s and Mamiya MSX500s), My tech said, eh, make me an offer, I said $40?, and he said sold! Amazingly, it works as well as my other Gossen knob (albeit looks more worn). Very handy outdoors.

@ tom_chow: you're not exaggerating what a chore it was to wind the Bronica C and S2A! Not only does it take multiple turns (as you reminded me), but the last hard jolting part: ugh, I never got used to that. You'd swear the camera had to be broken, or you were in the process of breaking it, every time you got to the end of the wind cycle and had to forcefully push past a resistance notch (IIRC, that last rough bit cocked the focus screen roller blind). Fascinating, but very quirky design.

Yeah, we've wandered pretty far afield, but WTH: there's still a tenuous connection to the OP's question about palpas on the barn doors. Presumably he's had time now to further vet his "new to him" 501cm body is fully OK in all aspects other than the typical palpas cracks. The 501cm is a wonderful camera, perhaps the apotheosis of crank-wound mechanical Hasselblads (and more in keeping with the classic design than the top-line uglier 503cw with its tacked-on flash controls).

Too bad it took Hasselblad the better part of a decade to figure out how to shove the larger ELX mirror with non-decaying bracket into a crank-wound body. By the time they pulled it off, digital was around the corner, so far fewer 501cm and 503cw bodies were made than older-mirror 500cm, 501c and 503cx. The scarcity makes the 501cm much too expensive second hand: you can buy two or three of the older bodies for the price of just one 501cm or 503cw (way too much money for a not-really-collectible camera with no lens, finder or back: we're talking about common, meant to be used tools here, not a shelf queen Rolleiflex 2.8F or Makina 67W).

Same applies to the 503cw: ridiculously overpriced today for what it is (a 501cm with TTL flash meter and ability to take a removable electric winder). Sure, if you tend to prefer electric wind there are some ergonomic advantages to the horizontal winder with grip as opposed to the bottom-mounted no-grip winder on the ELs. But the cost is out of all proportion for an "amateur" unless you've got really deep pockets. You can buy four 500ELM, three 500ELX, two or three 553ELX, or two 555ELDs for the price of one 503cw + winder.

Slap a side grip on one of those, and you're good to go, with much more reliable motor and beefed-up wind gearing (the 555ELD even throws in NASA-grade mechanicals and digital back contacts). Aside from studio fashion, most photographers only occasionally need a motor for 6x6 shooting: I think Victor's original idea of having a supplementary, dedicated body specifically engineered with a motor is the more sensible arrangement. Esp at todays giveaway prices: I've seen nice 500ELMs go for less than the cost of a waist lever finder alone (and 500ELX/553ELX with 501cm mirror routinely sell for the same or not much more than an A12 back).

I love the Hasselblad meter knob!

- Does that stupid thing even work though?

Surely it only ever meters light reflected off the side of the camera? Because that's what it can mostly 'see' from it's badly thought-out position.

Much like the Yashica 124 meter that changes reading if you wave a hand above it.