Recommendations for a Second Hasselblad for Everyday Carry Around Use?

Im using a 501C with mostly an 80mm lens for most of my fine art work. I also own the 150mm lens which seems

better for exterior photos where as I use the 80 for interiors as my "normal" lens. I tried the 50, its just too wide for

my style. So I am happy to own just those two lenses.

After exploring the possibilities of a different camera (fuji, bronca) for everyday use, something to knock around

with, put in the car, etc, I decided to stay with the same system and maybe add on to it. But having just one body is

probably not the best idea anyway, always good to have backups.

 

The 501C that I bought was in mint condition and hardly used as was the lens, so it wasn't cheap. And being the

fanatic that I am, I still had it professionally serviced.

 

So for a body to bang around with, maybe with the 150mm lens living on it, what would you recommend? Should I

look for another 501 or should I go down a step to the 500?

 

Even though I say its to "bang around" I still need something reliable and of high quality. The 501C that I have is

more for the indoor portraits and this added body would be for outdoor stuff.

 

Thanks!

My suggestion is the 500CM. You could go down further to the 500C which is still a terrific camera, but with the CM, you still maintain the advantage of focus screen interchangeability and the likelihood of easier servicing due to parts availability. I am like you with having a back up, but my system includes the CM body as my main and the 2000FCM for back up and special applications when I want the focal plane shutter.

Anyone of them that you can afford (to use as a "knock around" camera). They are all equally good, because for the biggest part the same.<br><br>In my own small "grab bag" i carry a 500 C/M or (more often) a 553 ELX, with metering prism, a spare magazine, plus 60 mm and 150 mm lenses. There's still room for a 40 mm lens or teleconverter (rarely used) that extend the capability of the kit. Oh, and for film, of course. ;-)<br>The EL(...) is big and weighs a bit more, but i find these models very nice to use. And they allow the use of the cheap radio remote i got from China.

Barry cool video.

But I could never understand the need for the winder. It seems like it adds alot of extra weight and

bulk. It just seems better to work the crank, imo.

 

I notice he was using a prism with no meter. right now I have been happy with the standard finder, but

I do plan to add a metered prism for the outdoor work.

I'd get exactly the same camera as you already have, or newer. And consider the excellent 60CF lens as

an everyday carry lens, it is excellent, as is the 100CF.

I had the 50CF and thought it to be a little wide for my interiors. It seemed to distort at times with

people. The 60 may be an option, although very close to the 80.

Indeed very close, Jon.<br>But in the range of subjects that is covered by these 'near normal' lenses, i find that the lenses in such a close focal length grouping all have their individual use. The 60 mm and 80 mm lenses are more different, with each their own application, than their focal lengths might suggest. There is so much variety in what we encounter in the 2 - 5 meter range, much more than in that range that is covered by either wide angles (to cram in as much as possible of the world) or teles, requiring a much finer 'resolved' set of focal lengths.

I absolutely believe in having a backup

and both the 500 C and CM are great.

I've used the ELM but didn't like it as

well for some reason.

 

Rick H.

If you're really keen on the 150mm then a model with a floating mirror such as a 501cm would be a better choice as the

view through the finder won't cut off like it would some on a non floating mirror model. I remember using a colleagues on

a shoot one day and found it quite annoying.

<p>I would go UP with a 500C/M. I say "up" on purpose as the 501C was a downgraded 500C/M to reduce the production cost. The 501C does not have the body "ready" indicator which is a major source of problems as you do not know instantly when mounting a magazine (or a lens) if the body is cranked or not. In addition, the main crank is fixed on the 501C instead of removable on the 500C/M. Even worse, the 501C does not have a lock on the shutter button, making long exposures more difficult than the 500C/M.<br>

In general, there is also a price advantage as (for dubious reasons) the 501C is more expensive than a 500C/M. For the same price you might get a 500C/M in better condition than a 501C and get a better camera as a well maintain 500C/M is a superior camera than a 501C.<br>

I would personally not get a 500C. Not being able to change the screen is a major disadvantage. In addition, the 500C's are in general much older and more prone to problems.<br>

My personal recommendation, to summarize, upgrade to a as recent as you can find, good condition 500C/M</p>

<p>+1 for the 500C/M. When I decided to add a backup to my one 500c/m, I simply bought a bare-bones body with nothing on it. I already had a WLF plus a prism, and several lenses. So for the price of the body alone, I effectively added a second complete camera, for very little money (a used 500C/M body sells cheap these days).</p>

Reality check time again.<br>The 500 C/M is not a superior camera. The 501 C is at least every bit as good.<br><br>- There are some differences, that turned the 501 C into the entry level camera, compared to the 503 CW. Neither have the 'body ready' indicator the 500 C/M has. No 500 series model from the 503 CXi onward has it. I don't know why they dropped it, since it was a very simple thingy, but there of course is another 'body ready' indicator: the mirror and shutter. There will be no viewfinder image until you have the camera and shutter cocked, the film wound on. You will have to look to see, just as you would have to look to see the indicator.<br>- The folding crank/knob is fixed, because there is nothing you could put on there instead should you remove it.<br>- The shutter release button T-lock was dropped (also on all models from the 503 CXi onward), because when doing long exposures people tend to (because it is advisable) use a cable release, not the shutter button. The shutter release button lock did not work on cable releases (only on the button itself).<br>So to call those disadvantages is rather strong.<br>And did you have any complaints about these "downgrades" so far, Jon?<br><br>In general, if there is a free choice, you cannot go wrong getting the most advanced camera, which in this case is the 503 CW. It offers the most, but whether you need the extras? Dave mentioned the longer mirror, and though viewfinder vignetting with the 150 mm is not at its worst, it's there, and a 501 C<u>M</u> or 503 CW with their longer mirror would be a good choice.<br>The 503 CW also offers TTL-flash control and will take the add-on Winder CW. If you don't need those, the 501 CM would perhaps be the best choice.<br>But if the goal is to get a camera you don't have to worry too much about knocking it around, something cheaper will probably give more ease of mind. Then, and if you can put up with the viewfinder vignetting as you have done with the 501 C, a 500 C/M in decent shape would be good.

I have a 501C here that is like brand new. I use a 60mm and 100mm on it and it is a very excellent camera. But it has the

older mirror style as the 500CM, so when I use my 180mm lenses I use them either on a 501CM or 503CW which have

the floating mirror and the bright screen is easy to see and compose shots. That's specifically why I recommended the

501CM (or 503CW).

<p>You should have at least one body with a gliding mirror. The cutoff with longer lenses (or extension tubes) is distracting, even if it doesn't affect the final image. The 501CM, 503CW, any 200 series or the ELD555 (possibly other EL models). The "backup" body will probably become your primary.</p>

<p>My "backup", now primary body is an ELD555. The automatic wind is very convenient, even with a a digital back, and the back is electronically coupled to the body so you don't need a sync cable. When shooting portraits, I use a 10' remote release. It's electric, so the length doesn't matter. That lets me attend to the subject, rather than be tethered to the eyepiece. It takes inexpensive AA batteries (5), which seem to last forever. I just changed a set I installed in 2010, even though the battery test was OK. The ELD is a BRICK, but I manage, even in the woods.</p>

<i>"[...] or the ELD555 (possibly other EL models)"</i><br><br>The 500 ELX was in fact the very first 500 series camera that had the larger mirror, some 12 years before the 503 CW and later 501 CM. The later 553 ELX and 555 ELD of course also had the larger mirror.<br><br><i>"any 200 series "</i><br><br> ... or 2000 series. The very first V System model that had the large mirror was the 2000 FC, some 7 years before the 500 ELX and 14 years before the 205 TCC, the first 200 series camera. The 2000 FC/M, 2000 FCW and 2003 FCW of course also have the large mirror.<br>So plenty choice, unless it must be an unmotorized 500 series body. Then indeed only the 501 CM and 503 CW will do.

<p>Jon, I regularly use a 500C with 40mm or 80mm lens on the street. And, 150mm for portraits, and tripod work. I've never used any other model because the 500 is enough for me. If I could get another as a back up, I'd go with the best quality for the cost. I absolutely love my 500c, and if I had 20 minutes to evacuate my house, that would be one of the cameras I took with me (along with the wife and kids).<br>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/11991634-lg.jpg" alt="" width="665" height="699" /><br>

500c with 80mm</p>

<p>Q.G. Reality check:<br>

- The body ready indicator is not a "very simple thingy". It is a quite complex mechanism and was suppressed to save cost.<br>

- To say "The folding crank/knob is fixed, because there is nothing you could put on there" is hilarious (to be polite) and shows the author's inability to grab even very simple notions like cause and effects. The 500C/M, 503CW and other models had winders because it was possible to remove the crank and adapt something, not the other way around as Q.G. pretends.<br>

- The 501C is a reduced cost 500C/M, not a reduced cost 503CW like Q.G. says. That does not mean in any way that it is a bad camera: it is indeed a very good camera.<br>

- I agree with many posts recommending a 501CM. As Edward says, the 555ELD is also a superb machine, probably the most reliable of all.</p>

<p>The 150 doesn't seem to cut off in the finder, but the 120 Makro and 180 do.</p>

Paul,<br><br>The body ready signal was a not a complex affair, but a simple thingy. Extremely simple indeed. As complex as a latch on a barn door or garden gate.<br>They did away with the body ready signal on the 500 EL model already (all EL models have a mock signal: a white patch behind a little window. A reason to call those inferior products?<br><br>The knob on the older cameras was removable, so that you could attach a motor winder. A motor winder that was planned back in the early 1950s, but never apeared, until 40 years later. The motor winder that was eventually offered will not fit the old style fitting.<br>Apcam did offer a motor winder for the 500 C/M. How good hat thing was is reflected by the number of them that were sold and may still be available used. Not an option.<br>They did offer a knob with selenium cell light meter, but that was discontinued 20 years ago.<br>And you could switch the knob for a crank. Since the knob was changed to the folding knob/crank 30 years ago, no need for that either.<br>So there was nothing to put on the 501 models, would you be able to remove the folding crank.<br><br>Your assertion that the 501 C is an inferior 500 C/M is nonsense. The reasons you gave are that too. The 501 C is the simpler camera (less features) compared to the 503 CW. Hence cheaper then the 503 CW. (It costs more than a 500 C/M).

FYI I went with a 501C/M from David Odess. It was listed in like new condition, and he refurbs them

anyway. So that will probably become the main camera and the current 501C will become the back-

up.

I thought it was better to spend a few extra bucks for the latter model, and since he gives everything a

CLA it just made sense.

Good choice. Congrats!

<p>Hi Q.G.<br>

About using a remote on my 555ELD. <br>

>>The EL(...) is big and weighs a bit more, but i find these models very nice to use. And they allow the use of the cheap radio remote i got from China.>><br>

I have a Pocket Wizard I use with my Nikons. Do you think I could use it on the EL with the right cable? For example, like this one from Samy's Camera:<br>

HBM3 Motor Drive Cable Hasselblad EL, ELM & ELX to Miniphone - 3' (Part #: 804508).<br>

Conversely, do you have a link for the Chinese model and did it come with the DIN cable or did you make it yourself?<br>

Thanks,<br>

Carlo</p>

Hello Carlo,<br><br>I put a DIN-plug on the remore receiver unit myself. Easy enough.<br>I don't have a link, boyght them a while ago, but they are units branded Yong Nuo, and should not be hard to find on eBay.<br>The units are sold for all sorts of cameras, most have an AF lock (or something like that) and a shutter release circuit. That means two modes of operation whih can be used with the EL(...) cameras too: in one mode the thing works like a normal release (press to release, release to advance), in the other mode the thing works like a T-release (one press to release, another press to termnate and advance). Very handy.<br>I have two or three of them, bought quite a few years ago (5?), never paid more then (the equivalent of) USD 10 - 15, including shipping.<br><br>As long as a remot allows for a contact held as long as the remote's release button is pressed (i.e. not a single short pulse with every press of the button) it could be used with an EL(...), yes. Al you need to do is, if more than two contacts available, identify which to short when you press the remote's release button, and connect those to the correct pins* of a DIN-plug. You can do that using an adaper cord, with the DIN-plug on one end, the correct counterpart for the plug on the PocketWizard or other remote of choice on the other end.<br><br><br>* You need to short pins 1 and 3 as shown in the diagram:<br><img src="http://home.tiscali.nl/qnu/PN/ELM-circ.jpg">

<p>Thank you Q.G,<br>

Exceptionally well informed and thorough reply, as usual.<br>

I am in Jaipur, India right now on my way to Bangkok, Hong Kong and hopefully Tokyo. Can't wait to get back to Amsterdam and try out the Pocket Wizard with my 555ELD.<br>

Carlo</p>

<p> </p>

Now if only i could learn to type without spelling mistakes... ;-)<br><br>Hong Kong should be the ideal place to shop for cheap remotes. So maybe bring back a few cheap, extra ones you can tinker with without endangering an expensive Pocket Wizard?