price of Hasselblad?

I have a Hallelblad 500C/M. It has a 12 film magazine and a waist level view finder. It is like new in box with all the paper work that came with it. I bought it new years ago and seldom used it. I would like to get a price for it so that I can insure it. The price should not include any lens, I got the prices for the lens already. But I cant seem to find any prices on the internet for the camera. Can anyone help me with a price for this camera? It is black with chrome trim and like I wrote earleir, it is like new in box. Thanks for any help. Gus.

Insurers usually prefer a reliable source for pricing: your best bet is to print out a page of available Hasselblads from a solid commercial camera broker like KEH, and attach that to your paperwork.

 

Otherwise, current pricing is very easy to determine for most cameras by doing a simple search for them on eBay, then clicking on the "Sold Items" filter checkbox on the left hand menu. Scroll down the list of sales for a couple of pages, and you'll get a good average of what people have actually been willing to pay over the past three months. You must use the "Sold Items" view for realistic figures, because if you just look at the live listings you'll get a distorted notion of how much your gear is worth. At least half the listings on eBay carry inflated, nobody-in-their-right-mind prices: the result of dealers (and private sellers) with delusions of grandeur. Other than highly collectible Leicas, Rolleiflexes and the occasional limited-production cult item, almost all cameras have a price ceiling beyond which they just won't sell.

 

In the case of Hasselblad, a camera without the lens is less desirable than one with 80mm Planar. A complete Hassy will sell very quickly at close to market price, a body without lens will eventually sell close to market price but will take longer to find a buyer. At the moment, a clean 500cm with A12 back and waist level finder typically changes hands for about $500, give or take. If you have the newest single-action WLF, you'll get more than the older WLF with four folding panels. The very latest A12 (with "A12" embossed on top near the button) might add 20%. more. A CF 80mm Planar will approximately double the value: the older C, a bit less, the CFe would add much more.

 

Of course no one can guarantee what someone would be willing to pay in a private sale at any particular moment: I've seen people lose their minds and pay 40% more, and I've seen nice complete cameras with lens go for as little as $550. Depends on what other Hasselblads are competing against yours at the precise moment someone is really intent on buying one. Note the box doesn't add nearly as much perceived value as you might think: for whatever reason nobody cares about Hasselblad boxes. Perhaps because no one really collects Hasselblads (other than the exceedingly rare NASA-modified space cameras).

 

Hasselblads don't take well to sitting unused for many years: if you truly bought it new ages ago and seldom used it, it may have developed serious mechanical problems during storage which can be blindingly expensive to repair. Its a very good idea to check the camera out completely by shooting at least two rolls of film with it a couple weeks apart before attempting to sell (buyer kickbacks could be a nightmare otherwise).

Edited June 29, 2019 by orsetto

Note the box doesn't add nearly as much perceived value as you might think: for whatever reason nobody cares about Hasselblad boxes. Perhaps because no one really collects Hasselblads (other than the exceedingly rare NASA-modified space cameras).

 

Along those same lines, my observation is that you don't really see the price gradient from "functionally perfect but obviously used a lot" to "looks nearly unused" with Hasselblad equipment as you see with other makes. Obviously there's SOME difference, but I suspect that your point about Hasselblads not liking to sit around unused works in the favor of equipment that shows obvious use.

 

I should add the caveat with that that really beat up stuff does sell for a lot less than what I'd call "user grade", but then it often has the dual issue of both being ugly and having mechanical problems.

Hasselblad has to be one of the most unpredictable value propositions in second-hand photography gear over the past 15 years I've been involved with it. Back in the heyday 35 years ago, they were simply untouchable to most enthusiasts unless they were wealthy. An Average Joe who scrimped and saved could maybe stretch to a 500cm with 80mm, but that would be your only lens because anything else cost more than some people earned in a month. Its kind of amazing they became the professional standard, because even successful professionals thought the pricing was obnoxiously high (and thats before you factor in the required, staggeringly expensive maintenance costs).

 

Digital brought Hasselblad to heel very quickly: by 2007 used prices tumbled almost 70% and have remained fairly stable since. But the spread between what sells and what doesn't keeps shifting like a floating craps table. Once upon a time, everyone dreamed of having a Distagon wide and a Sonnar portrait lens to go with their Planar. Last couple years, however, they sit and rot: sometimes for months before anyone will agree to pay anything approaching the market price floor. That price floor is being artificially enforced by sellers who don't want to take a bloodbath on lenses they bought five or six years ago: they would rather sit on a lens they paid $800 for than take $450. Sooner or later, something will have to give.

 

Meanwhile, A12 backs, 80mm Planars, and Acute Matte screens are worth their weight in gold: they've been climbing steadily for the past decade. 500cm bodies fluctuate over an incredible price spread, with no discernible pattern. The less common gliding mirror 501cm and 503cw are in the stratosphere. OTOH, the once-coveted motor driven Hasselblad is passe: today you can pick up a 500elm for practically nothing (or a 500el for literally nothing). What used to be the most sought-after lens, 50mm Distagon, is a glut on the land. All anyone wants is the 80 Planar, the 40 CFi-IF, and perhaps the 180 CF. Everything else has tanked, despite the apparent asking prices. If you're patient, almost everything in the system (aside from the core body with 80mm) comes up for grabs relatively cheap. My best bargains were a 50mm CF-FLE for $469, 80mm CFe for $345, a 120mm Makro Planar for $149, and 553elx with Acute Matte split image for $175. All are perfect: they just happened to get listed on an off day or in an off way.

 

In its prime, Hasselblad was the Leica of medium format, and priced accordingly. But today, its toppled far from its perch to become attainable to us mortals. Perhaps ironically, a victim of its own successful design, which never really changed in any significant way for the 60 years it was in production. So it has no collectibility factor: if you've seen one Hasselblad, you've seen them all (as opposed to Leica, which made 100 variations of everything they ever sold). Unlike Rolleiflex, Hasselblad never caught on as jewelry with the jet set 50 years ago or with hipsters now, which also keeps prices fairly reasonable considering the quality cachet. Hassy is now a buyers market in most respects: just keep a rainy day fund for surprise shutter repairs.

Edited June 29, 2019 by orsetto

What I am finding interesting about the Hasselblad market is the tight gap between operational gear and the totally unknown "pig in a poke" gear. From what people say, a lens, back, and body CLA will start around $500 and could run more. A "found at an estate sale" 500C with a Planar brings (on eBay) $500 - 550 and most probably will need that approximate $500 service, yet a relatively well preserved example equipped the same way will only fetch a couple hundred more. Will this tight gap continue?

 

In the vintage audio market, a Revox A77 reel to reel tape deck is a machine that most enthusiasts could only dream about. I view them similarly to a Hasselblad 500C in their attraction and mystique. A few years ago, an A77 could be had for $150. Only the rare two channel high speed A77s brought more money at $350 - 400. Whether or not it worked was the luck of the draw. Another parallel to the Hasselblad market is that the A77 was used by almost all radio stations and many recording studios. Finding one owned by a hobbyist would yield a more cosmetically desirable machine but the ones in pro use were the ones that got serviced. Many people who bought used A77s soon learned there were inherent failure points such as paper capacitors that worked fine forty years ago but that will fail as soon as they are run through a few heat cycles today. Equally, there are variable resistors that fail as well. It might still look like the beautiful Swiss engineered, German made A77 on the brochure so many of us lusted after, but it would shred your cherished vintage recordings because of braking failures, or just smell up the room with acrid smoke as it became your new shelf queen

 

The Revox market responded over the last three years and it is not unusual to have to pay $500 for a consumer level set up that has been gone through and well over $800 for a high speed deck in near perfect trim. There still are decks that can be had for $150 but more and more potential owners are realizing they are every bit the hand grenade and nothing less than a talented DIY'er or a pro will be needed to make them right again. As a result the stratification in the market offering well sorted, refurbished A77s has gotten stronger.

 

Depending on who you talk to, the Revox A77, and Hasselblad 500C/CM have very few peers or alternative competitors. Will the dust settle in the Hasselblad market and a similar situation to what happened with the A77 take place? Maybe and maybe not. Time will tell, but the desire to own a Hasselblad will continue as more and more hobbyists decide to scratch their Hasselblad itch. In the meantime the lubricants used in these wonderful cameras and Zeiss lenses will continue to get harder and harder and the ones that work as intended will be fewer and fewer.

Edited June 29, 2019 by andyfalsetta

The high cost of repairs/cla finally put me out of the 'Blad business. In my experience they don't respond well to infrequent use and, despite being a great camera I couldn't justify keeping mine "up and running." The 500CM that I used while assigned to the 165th Military Intelligence Battalion in Fulda, Germany took more abuse and neglect than any other camera in our photo-arsenal... and always performed well. Go figure! On the one hand, it is logical that an oft-used mechanical camera will be more likely to function properly than a "closet-queen" but the allure of a pristine 500 series is hard to deny.

Joel

...The 500CM that I used while assigned to the 165th Military Intelligence Battalion in Fulda, Germany...

 

Wow! When was that? I was a signal intelligence analyst with the 101st Military Intelligence Battalion in Wildflecken, Germany, about 15 miles from the Fulda Gap, in the mid 80's.

1960's - 1970's... I ran the Fulda Border Resident Office and had responsibility for debriefing refugees from Kassel to Fulda. Worked with the BundesGrenzSchutz and MAD. We shut the offices down in 1979 (as well as I can recall). Put a lot of miles on a Hassy 500CM "lurking" on the border as well as a lot of Nikon equipment with some really long FL lenses. I retired in '84 after spending my last three years teaching German at Monterey. Good years - for the most part!

Joel

What I am finding interesting about the Hasselblad market is the tight gap between operational gear and the totally unknown "pig in a poke" gear. From what people say, a lens, back, and body CLA will start around $500 and could run more. A "found at an estate sale" 500C with a Planar brings (on eBay) $500 - 550 and most probably will need that approximate $500 service, yet a relatively well preserved example equipped the same way will only fetch a couple hundred more. Will this tight gap continue?

 

In the vintage audio market, a Revox A77 reel to reel tape deck is a machine that most enthusiasts could only dream about. I view them similarly to a Hasselblad 500C in their attraction and mystique. A few years ago, an A77 could be had for $150. Only the rare two channel high speed A77s brought more money at $350 - 400. Whether or not it worked was the luck of the draw. Another parallel to the Hasselblad market is that the A77 was used by almost all radio stations and many recording studios. Finding one owned by a hobbyist would yield a more cosmetically desirable machine but the ones in pro use were the ones that got serviced. Many people who bought used A77s soon learned there were inherent failure points such as paper capacitors that worked fine forty years ago but that will fail as soon as they are run through a few heat cycles today. Equally, there are variable resistors that fail as well. It might still look like the beautiful Swiss engineered, German made A77 on the brochure so many of us lusted after, but it would shred your cherished vintage recordings because of braking failures, or just smell up the room with acrid smoke as it became your new shelf queen

 

The Revox market responded over the last three years and it is not unusual to have to pay $500 for a consumer level set up that has been gone through and well over $800 for a high speed deck in near perfect trim. There still are decks that can be had for $150 but more and more potential owners are realizing they are every bit the hand grenade and nothing less than a talented DIY'er or a pro will be needed to make them right again. As a result the stratification in the market offering well sorted, refurbished A77s has gotten stronger.

 

Depending on who you talk to, the Revox A77, and Hasselblad 500C/CM have very few peers or alternative competitors. Will the dust settle in the Hasselblad market and a similar situation to what happened with the A77 take place? Maybe and maybe not. Time will tell, but the desire to own a Hasselblad will continue as more and more hobbyists decide to scratch their Hasselblad itch. In the meantime the lubricants used in these wonderful cameras and Zeiss lenses will continue to get harder and harder and the ones that work as intended will be fewer and fewer.

Interesting you mention both the 500 C/M and Revox A77 in the same post as I own and use both.

 

I grew up with the A77 so using them has long been second nature I own two; an early one and a later with internal Dolby as well as a B77. Recapped them and they still work perfectly. All gear needs service and not just "eventually" if it is to work as designed throughout its life.

 

I've long used Rolleis - a Rolleiflex TLR and a SL66, but a friend gave me some of his 'blad gear when he retired from portrait photography due to failing eyesight. Two 500C/M bodies, two backs, 45º prism and waist-level finders and (the nicest bit) a 100 f3.5 Planar. What a lovely lens that is! Going from working with Rolleis to a Hasselblad took a wee change in approach, but not so much after a few frames.

Interesting you mention both the 500 C/M and Revox A77 in the same post as I own and use both.

 

I grew up with the A77 so using them has long been second nature I own two; an early one and a later with internal Dolby as well as a B77. Recapped them and they still work perfectly. All gear needs service and not just "eventually" if it is to work as designed throughout its life.

 

I've long used Rolleis - a Rolleiflex TLR and a SL66, but a friend gave me some of his 'blad gear when he retired from portrait photography due to failing eyesight. Two 500C/M bodies, two backs, 45º prism and waist-level finders and (the nicest bit) a 100 f3.5 Planar. What a lovely lens that is! Going from working with Rolleis to a Hasselblad took a wee change in approach, but not so much after a few frames.

 

I've not had the opportunity to try a SL66 but can imagine it is a fantastic camera with differences between it and the Hasselblad 500. I tend to think cameras at this level represent the efforts and strong feelings of a dedicated Engineer or team of Engineers. The designers weren't copying anyone's devices, they were forging their own path. Unlike Japanese engineers who just tried to duplicate an already great camera, the Rollie and Hassleblad guys had a loftier goal. If a few functions got quirky in the process, so be it IMO.

 

I too have reVox equipment and that is why the comparison came so easy for me. I have two quarter track machines and a half track high speed A77. They too have had recaps and the variable resistors replaced by me. While we are talking about "wee bits of change in our approach", can you tell me where the pause button is on the A77 ? :)

The designers weren't copying anyone's devices, they were forging their own path. Unlike Japanese engineers who just tried to duplicate an already great camera, the Rollie and Hassleblad guys had a loftier goal. If a few functions got quirky in the process, so be it IMO.

 

I think this is something that-in general-is key about a lot of Japanese products(35mm SLRs excepted, where in my mind the major Japanese makes have been the innovators). The first Bronicas, for example, were seemingly an attempt to take the "Hasselblad form factor" but make a viable focal plane camera-and you ended up with a heavy, unreliable beast with enough vibration to make it only usable in limited circumstances. The SQ series, along with the ETR and GS, were effectively Hasselblad clones that ironed out some of the quirks associated with them. I've not had a GS-1, but my experience with other Bronica cameras are that they're good and reliable, but when I got my 500C it was an easy decision to let all of it go(the S2a, SQ-A, and ETRs, and lenses for all of them).

 

Another good example I can think of from a totally different field is the Miata. The designers apparently had a couple of Lotuses and an MGB sitting in the design studio, and the first generation shows a lot of inspiration from both models. There's a lot to like about a Miata-it's tight, well built, and probably most importantly you know it will start every time. At the end of the day, though, I've never had as much fun driving a Miata as I do every time I get in my quirky, somewhat unreliable, oil-leaking, not water tight, and noisy MGB.

The designers weren't copying anyone's devices, they were forging their own path.

 

There are a number of people who think Hasselblad was copying some older medium format German designs. They did the usual Swedish thing, though, and made it better*.

NTIM, really. o_O

 

*Says the Swede

I've not had the opportunity to try a SL66 but can imagine it is a fantastic camera with differences between it and the Hasselblad 500. I tend to think cameras at this level represent the efforts and strong feelings of a dedicated Engineer or team of Engineers. The designers weren't copying anyone's devices, they were forging their own path. Unlike Japanese engineers who just tried to duplicate an already great camera, the Rollie and Hassleblad guys had a loftier goal. If a few functions got quirky in the process, so be it IMO.

 

I too have reVox equipment and that is why the comparison came so easy for me. I have two quarter track machines and a half track high speed A77. They too have had recaps and the variable resistors replaced by me. While we are talking about "wee bits of change in our approach", can you tell me where the pause button is on the A77 ? :)

Pause? Wass ist dis "pause" you speak of? Solenoids were supposed to negate the need I guess?

 

The SL66 and 500C/M could hardly be more different but for the quality of the end result. The SL66 is the more easily flexible camera (mount a lens in reverse for close-up work?, lens boards for using alternative lenses? lens tilt?), but one pays a bit in complexity and weight - not that in thirty years I've ever complained when lugging it over fields and through woods. After three decades it remains a real favourite and mine has been incredibly reliable.

I've not had a GS-1, but my experience with other Bronica cameras are that they're good and reliable, but when I got my 500C it was an easy decision to let all of it go(the S2a, SQ-A, and ETRs, and lenses for all of them).

 

At the end of the day, though, I've never had as much fun driving a Miata as I do every time I get in my quirky, somewhat unreliable, oil-leaking, not water tight, and noisy MGB.

 

I haven't tried a GS-1 either but have an SQ-Ai and its been a wonderful camera. And good analogy with Miata vs Lotus and MG Ben. I can relate to that too. To some a car is an appliance. To me, a car has to have soul (something the Brits built into almost everything they produced ). The MGB is an iconic example of this IMO and probably yours as well.

I tend to think cameras at this level represent the efforts and strong feelings of a dedicated Engineer or team of Engineers. The designers weren't copying anyone's devices, they were forging their own path.

 

To a certain degree, yes, but OTOH, there were only so many ways to configure a completely mechanical, unmetered, modular medium format SLR during the 1957 - 1970 era. Hasselblad supposedly knocked off and improved a captured German aerial camera to create the 1600F, which evolved into the iconic 500c. The success of the 500c freaked Rollei out: their somewhat bizarre response was a vastly overbuilt, equally complicated variation of the Bronica S focal plane shutter + skeletal lenses concept (but with bellows focusing and limited tilt feature). Even weirder, the SL66 lenses were a shutterless carbon copy of the Zeiss lineup for Hasselblad, minus one or two exclusives like the halo 100mm Planar. This surely infuriated Hasselblad: but they must have been contractually powerless to prevent it, given Rollei had been using Zeiss as their lens supplier for decades longer.

 

When the Japanese jumped into MF SLRs, it was more of the same. The Mamiya RB67 was a hybrid knockoff of the Rolleiflex SL66 and Hasselblad 500c, with the tilt feature swapped for a rotating back. Pentax 67 was an improved version of Pentacon 6. Kowa directly aped the 500c, but skipped the film magazine feature. And of course Bronica eventually came full circle, dropping their focal-plane S system to flat-out copy the 500c in no less than three different frame formats (but with simplified electronic shutters).

 

Of these, Rollei arguably had the worst rollercoaster ride. They bet the farm on the SL66, but it barely put a dent in Hasselblad sales. The entire run of SL66, SL66E, SL66SE and SL66X came to slightly less than 10% of Hasselblad's 500 series unit sales (not including the SWC or motorized ELs). Granted, Rollei went thru more inept management shakeups during that time than Apple Computer did in the '90s, but still: one would expect the advantage of the same Zeiss lenses would have brought in more customers than the short-lived, unloved 'blad 503cx.

 

Rollei did make other valiant attempts at a premium MF SLR, with varying degrees of success. The advanced, fully electronic SLX of 1977 kicked off what evolved into the 6000 series. The SLX had more innovations in a single camera than the entire MF industry had managed in the previous 20 years. Electronic leaf shutter AND shutter-priority AE aperture control in every lens, AE metering even with WLF, built-in motor control of the entire mechanism, ambidextrous film backs with built-in rolling dark slide and straight flat film path, etc etc.

 

Too bad they flatlined before they could get their fabulous Hy6 digital/film hybrid camera properly launched. The most amazing modular MF camera ever, but unfortunately also the most stupefyingly expensive, with too many competing companies involved. Given the rapidly tanking fortunes of medium format digital, the window of opportunity closed before they could get their act together. Today, what remains of the "new" MF market is divided between Fuji on the low end and Phase One at the nosebleed high end. Hasselblad wandered off to become MIA recently, and nobody seems to know what happened to Pentax.

Edited July 3, 2019 by orsetto

To a certain degree, yes, but OTOH, there were only so many ways to configure a completely mechanical, unmetered, modular medium format SLR during the 1957 - 1970 era. Hasselblad supposedly knocked off and improved a captured German aerial camera to create the 1600F, which evolved into the iconic 500c. .

 

Supposedly the Ross HK7 was the camera that was initiated from someone else's idea (the German aerial camera you mentioned), so definitely, Hasselblad was building what people today would call a "tribute" camera in their earliest days. What followed were focal plane shutter, interchangeable backs, a more sophisticated film advance, and yes even more "tributes" like the WLF, double exposure protection, interchangeable lenses, etc. I guess the saying "there is nothing new under the sun" is true to a degree.

To me, a car has to have soul (something the Brits built into almost everything they produced ). The MGB is an iconic example of this IMO and probably yours as well.

 

What some call "soul" others call "frustrating obsolete designs"...but then the same could have been said of a Hassy 503 made in the 2000s.

 

Still, though, I wouldn't trade the MGB for anything. I actually gave a BMW Z4 serious consideration back in January as a possible replacement/supplement. There was a lot to like about it, including the fact that it could actually still accelerate in top gear, but I also felt just to disconnected driving it. The steering wheel took no effort to turn and it was almost like the car was thinking about it before responding. The gear shift "clicked" into place really nicely, but the throw was so short and light that I almost felt like I was operating a video game controller. Plus, BMW repair bills scare me-unlike a Hasselblad, MGs are cheap to fix and I can do most everything myself(Have a transmission problem? Someone will probably give you a non-OD one for the asking, and the last time I needed to do it a friend and I did it in a long weekend) while the BMW owners I know with ones more than a few years old seem to have trouble getting away from the garage for less than $1K.

A Z4 next to an MGB would be a laugh. The BMW looks more like a well remembered nightmare than a sports car. I have a friend with a Z3. The intake manifold had to be removed, along with a lot of other items, just to remove the starter. Really? Comparatively, I think you can remove the starter on an MGB while sitting in a beach chair.

 

Trying to get this back on topic, when I think of something having "soul" it is usually due to controls or characteristics that stimulate me or produce pleasurable results. Having to add oil to an SU carb and getting smooth acceleration in return is an example. The way a 500C sets the shutter, returns the mirror, and advances the film, all in one smooth effortless motion is another.

Hassie film gear are all on the used market now. I have a 500CM I don't care about insuring it. Your high end phone would cost more than a used (market value) Hassie. Is the insurance company gonna pay you on market value or on agreed value?

 

Here in New Zealand our film cameras are worth a bit less than the USA. I got my in the USA at KEH for about $1200US 500CM with one back and 80mm lens and the WLF. In NZ they go for maybe $1,000US, the other day I saw a 503CX went for $1,200US with the 80mm and one back and WLF. Even used Hasselblad H3D with a 30 odd MP back and a zoom lens goes for $3,000US and each time no buyers. Equally Mamiya 645AF with 3 lenses failed to sell for $1,800US which is with the ZD back.