Hasselblad 553 ELX

<p>Greetings,</p>

<p>Have noticed quite a few Blad 553 ELX bodies on the auction site these days... but they're not selling or selling at very, very low dollar amounts.</p>

<p>What's the story on this particular model such that the demand is so low (aside from the notions that MF usage is declining or that people are going digital)?</p>

<p>Is there a problem with the camera itself?</p>

<p>Is it just a glut?</p>

<p>Or???</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

<p>PS: BTW, I have a mint, unused 55xelx on the shelf behind me! I've been having great fun using the 500c/m instead of the 553. :)</p>

<p>I think the weight of the motor drive is a negative to the average amateur. As I get older, I realize it is harder to handle the weight that I used to when I was younger. Also most amateur photogs shooting MF probably don't need a drive like a fashion photog would. </p>

<p>When I was younger, I thought it would be so cool to have a motor drive. But now with digital, I find that I shoot my DSLR in single frame mode, just like a manual thumb crank camera. I use of the rapid sequence less than 1% of the time.</p>

<p>Personally I would rather have the ELX that uses AA batteries, rather than the ELM that uses a proprietary and expensive rechargable battery (not counting the 9v battery adapter).</p>

Your P.S. says it all, H.C. ;-)<br><br>A note about the batteries: there are two ELX models. The 503 ELX uses one or two large recharchable batteries, the 553 ELX takes 5 AA batteries.<br>(Hasselblad did offer an AA battery chamber retrofit for older models, so there are a few EL, EL/M, and 503 ELX cameras that take AA batteries too.)

<p>They has always sold for much less, I bought two ELMs 20 years ago for about $200 each. I loved them for portraits and weddings.<br>

The battery's can be a pain, but they are great cameras....I love the instant return mirror feature while shooting candids. Great to also us the electronic release cables with them for portraits.</p>

<p>Gary,<br>

Yes, I couldn't agree more with your comment concerning age... and weight!<br>

I'm fortunate because my 553 has the 5xAA battery arrangement. :)</p>

<p>QG,<br>

:) You're absolutely spot on! The c/m is a great camera and fun to use... without the weight. :)</p>

<p>So, in summary, it sounds like it's the weight and battery setup of the 553 that is causing the lower resale pricing in the marketplace?<br>

[At the end of the day... I'm not looking to sell the 553 but this enquiry is more of a curiosity than anything else.]</p>

<p>Russ,<br>

Ah, portraits and weddings... neither of which I do! :)<br>

Thanks for your comments...</p>

The thing is, though, that i like using my EL(...) cameras. I find them quite a bit easier to hold and keep still than the models without the added box below (not that these motor-less models are bad).<br>So, for instance, my preferred small walk about kit contains an ELX with PME prism, 60 mm and 150 mm lenses and extra back.<br>Plus a cheap but pretty good radio remote, that is great fun for avoiding the Neil Armstrong effect (having been on the trip of a life time, returning without a single photo that shows you, because you were the one handling the camera - i know, i know: there's one (1!) shot made by Aldrin that shows Armstrong on the Moon), making it possible to put yourself into that "us in front of ..."-shot too.

<p>Hi Q,G.,<br>

I quite agree with you in regards to hand-holding and weight. I use to prefer holding a Nikon F3 with the MD4 battery pack as opposed to holding just the body sans motor drive. I've always preferred a bit more heft to the camera when hand-holding.</p>

<p>[My walk-around kit is a 50, 100, 150 with the stove chimney magnifier and extra back.]</p>

<p>However, these days, the hands aren't as steady as they once were. Consequently, even the 500c/m gets mounted onto a tripod when I'm out shooting. Besides that, the genre I shoot (landscapes and still-life) allows me to take the time to tripod mount the camera just as I would when using 4x5, 5x7, or 8x10 large format cameras.</p>

<p>:) Imagine him telling his wife he'd like to go back to the scene to re-shoot it! :)</p>

<p>Thanks kindly for your comments... always appreciated!</p>

<p>Cheers</p>

 

<p>Just throwing my 2 cents in. I love my 553ELX. However, as others have said it's really heavy. Also, the need for a dedicated motorized Hasselblad was obliterated when the motor attachment on cameras such as the 503CW came out. Not only is that camera much more ergonomic but I would assume lighter. I don't own one.<br>

The camera can't be beat on a tripod though. Not having to move the camera after releasing the shutter was a real boon. Also the "auto" mirror lockup was very, very helpful for long exposures.<br>

Since I got my digital Nikon the Hasselblad hasn't been used all that much. I had a Kodak digital back for a short span but sold it because the widest I was able to get was 80mm with my 60mm lens because of the magnification factor. I didn't have the funds to buy a 40mm lens so I could get a 60mm focal length.<br>

Well, that's my take.</p>

<p>Hi Nathan,</p>

<p>Thanks for your comments... I always try to shoot the 553 on a pod so weight hasn't been an issue for me (other than backpacking the kit around for a few miles!)</p>

<p>That said, the Blad kit is still a LOT lighter than my LF gear! :)</p>

<p>Cheers</p>