Wanting to get started with Hasselblad system

I didn't find a lot on this subject when I searched (although my searching skills are not that great) so I thought I'd ask it here. I'm looking for used (not abused) Hasselblad body with waist level finder and the A12 magazine. I would start with the 80mm Planar. Any recommendations on the camera body? Up until now my medium format SLR experiences have been limited to the Mamiya RB 67 and the Mamiya 645. I'm ready to try 6x6 format with something more than a fixed lens TLR. Thanks in advance for the advice.

I re-entered the Hasselblad "stable" a couple of years back. I bought a nice 500 C/M which had been recently CLA'd by a reputable repair shop. It came with the silver 80mm f/2.8, and since then I've added a different 80mm f/2.8, a 50mm W/A, a 120mm macro, 150mm tele, and a 250mm f/5.6 tele. I've also added a metered prism, although I usually meter with a Pentax digital spot, or my Sekonic L508. I've also added an additional 120 back.

 

I like my choice and it provide great results, as long as I do my part. I also have Mamiyas, including the RZ67, M645 Pro Tl, and a C330s. I also bought a Bronica SQ-A, and it makes images difficult to separate from my Hassy images. The Bronica and Hassy both have similar setups.

 

That stated, I'd probably go with a 503 C series if starting again. They're newer, probably with more repair parts available, if...

The 503CW is the best (and latest) V-System body with many useful upgrades, perhaps the most important of which is the "gliding mirror" that allows full frame viewing without vignetting when using longer lenses. But a great alternative is the 501 CM, which has many of the same upgrades but lacks the TTL flash control included on the 503CW. As far a first lens I love the 60mm CB or CF lens, which is a somewhat wider alternative to the 80mm. And try to get a recent A12 back that has the dark slide holder in back. Good luck!

Thanks. That is what I wanted to know.

Mike,

 

Should you decide to look for a 503 CW (good camera), you could be tempted to get one that comes with the add-on CW-motor drive. (Though i find it not easy to attach the thing, i do like that motor drive, and the fact that, unlike the motor of an EL(...) model, it comes off whenever i do not want to use a motor).

If you do, make sure that the manual wind crank is also included in the deal. There are quite a few 503 CW offered for sale with motor drive attached, that do not include the wind crank. And those cranks are not that easy to find, and really expensive when you do find one.

Thanks, Q.G. I will watch out for that.

I have had qualified camera techs tell me that the motor drive is problematic and very difficult to fix.

The basic Hasselblad "light tight box" hasn't changed much since it was introduced in the 1950s, and the V system is likely the most forward and backward compatible system around.

 

As a quick run-down-the 500C bodies are probably the most affordable manual advance bodies, but are the oldest and the very oldest could have somewhat cantankerous mirror brake systems. When they work, they work great, and in fact a 1961 500C is my primary Hasselblad body.

 

The 500C/M is more or less the newest iteration of the 500C with interchangeable focusing screens. A good portion of them have the plain glass black cross screen, which is far from unusable(in fact in the right conditions the contrast and focus "snap" is superb) but many folks use to newer cameras will quickly tire of the dark corners and how dark it is even under the best conditions. There are brighter alternatives available. The official Hasselblad options can easily cost as much as the body itself. Funny enough, Rick Oleson can actually provide an easy to install BrightScreen for the 500C but not for the C/M(he fitted one for me into a Hasselblad frame while I sat in his office/workshop, and said when it was over and done with that he would most likely never do another).

 

Newer bodies do have several advantages, including less likelyhood to drift if the foam under the mirror decays, and a larger mirror that won't vignette with long lenses.

 

I've had good luck with the earlier non-A backs, which can save money over the A types. They are less convenient to use, however-they require you to advance the film while watching the backing paper through a port in the back, and then manually starting the film counter. Whatever back type you end up with, light seals are a DIY operation with a bit of work, and a set of seals costs less than a roll of E6+processing-change them if at all in doubt.

 

All of my lenses are chrome C type. These are the earliest lenses. Optically, they are fine and capable of results as beautiful as the later lenses. If building a system from scratch, however, I would suggest looking for newer lenses. The Synchro-Compur shutters are sometimes considered a ticking time bomb, and although they work perfectly when properly maintained, parts and know-how to service them are getting in short supply. These shutters by default are locked into using the EV system, which I personally like(or rather have learned to work with) but many people find it frustrating and prefer later lenses that don't have this. In addition, these early lenses aren't always the most comfortable to use. The focusing ring is thin scalloped metal that ranges from difficult to painful to turn. The focus handles make a big difference, but also can get in the way if you want to use flash.

I've had good luck with the earlier non-A backs, which can save money over the A types. They are less convenient to use, however-they require you to advance the film while watching the backing paper through a port in the back, and then manually starting the film counter.

Sounds worse than it is. The newer backs require you to advance the film while watching the backing paper until a mark on the insert lines up with a line across the paper, then, after putting the insert into the shell, wind the film on to the first frame. It is more convenient, yes. But not that much different.

Yet, old, non-automatic backs - even the latest - are very old by now. Most automatic backs are old by now. And the backs wear more than any other part of the system. So it is highly advisable to get the newest back you can find.

 

As far as bodies are concerned, i think Arthus's advice is very sound. A 503 CW is the latest and most versatile. If you do not need the TTL-flash control or the ability to attach a motor, the 501 CM is a good choice. Both have what i find the most desirable modification since the introduction of user changeable focussing screens: the larger, non-vignetting mirror.

 

But yes, the older ones still do fine as well. You do learn how to work with/around the viewfinder vignetting, that occurs with longer lenses (120 mm and up, though the 150 mm shows a bit less vignetting than the 120 mm) or when using extension to get close ups.

Edited April 12, 2020 by q.g._de_bakker

It bears mentioning that Hasselblad gear is meant to be serviced and that is both good and bad. Good in the sense that they usually don't wear out; they just need to be cleaned and "calibrated". Bad in the sense that you need access to someone who is handy with Hasselblad gear to do the servicing. As with old cars, the best one to buy is one that has already been "put right". The cost of buying something on the cheap and then having it serviced usually ends up with you being upside down regarding total expenditure vs resale value. Having said this, someone who is used to repairing pocketwatches and mechanisms of similar complexity/fragility can learn to service his own Hasselblad gear to a good result. My go-to is a '58 500c with chrome lenses and I love it.

All the tips and advice are very helpful. I'm looking forward to getting started.

When choosing the Hasselblad camera body model, if budget is a concern it can be helpful to first take a step back and look thru your existing work with the Mamiya kit you already own.

 

How often do you use lenses longer than portrait length (150 on the M645, 180 on the RB67)? Do you shoot a significant number of closeup or near macro images that require a macro lens and/or extension tubes? If the answer to both questions is "no", then you can save an appreciable amount of money by opting for the more common and plentiful standard 500cm. It does have a small mirror which very slightly vignettes the top edge of the viewfinder when the 150 or 180 lenses is focused very close, but it isn't intrusive enough to disrupt comfortable viewing / focusing. The money saved on the less expensive body can be put toward an additional or newer lens, film back, or brighter Acute Matte focus screen.

 

While age is not nearly as important as operating condition, its probably a good idea to seek a 500cm whose serial number begins with R or E, indicating its year of mfr as 1980s or 1990s. A well-maintained 500cm made in 1972 is just as good, but I've had better luck with newer examples. Thats in terms of random purchases where I did not know the provenance or history of the camera: if buying from a reputable dealer who certifies the camera has been properly serviced, I would happily take an older 500cm (my oldest 1974 body came with a service slip from noted 'blad tech David Odess, who verified it for me via email). All body models in the 501 or 503 range are newer, from 1988 or later, most I've seen are from the '90s.

 

If you often shoot a lens longer than 180mm, and/or do a lot of close work with extension tubes on the M645 or the bellows cranked to max on the RB67, you will be happier with the more expensive "gliding mirror" 501cm or 503cw. These are much more pleasant to use with the 250mm lens and longer, or at large closeup magnifications. The 501cm and 503cw are the youngest bodies, introduced around 1996. Do be careful not to confuse them with the 501c, 503cx or 503cxi: those last are slight updates of the 500cm that do not have the larger mirror. Fine bodies in their own right, but not effectively different in normal use from a cheaper 500cm: if found at an attractive price, worth considering if you want a guaranteed-newer 500cm.

 

Focus screens are a contentious subject. Suffice to say the brighter Acute Matte screens have become a goldmine for sellers, to the point they are usually removed even from the later camera models that originally included them to be sold separately at a higher profit. If you buy a Hasselblad with one of the original darker screens, you may find it slightly less pleasant to use than your Mamiya cameras with their somewhat more modern appearance. If so, you can add an Acute Matte later (at considerable cost). Personally, I think a better strategy today is to look for a body that includes an Acute Matte screen for a reasonably higher cost (less than buying body & screen separately). You could then buy one of the older darker screens (plain ground glass, ground glass with large microprism, large microprism with checker grid) for just $40 - $50, and compare at your leisure. Some users find the older screens easier to focus, and worth the lower brightness: if that proves true for you, it is very easy to sell an Acute Matte screen you don't want at no $ loss.

 

Its a good idea to handle a Hasselblad in person at a dealer or user meetup before purchase, to get a feel for the C vs CF and later lenses. The old silver or black all-metal C lenses are exquisitely well made, but can feel prehistoric to a photographer used to contemporary systems. The focus ring grip is a quarter inch band of sharply serrated metal, with tremendous drag (turning effort is way more than a Bronica SQ or M645 or the knobs on an RB). This can quickly become tiresome if your fingers are sensitive. These lenses also have the weird '50s-era "EV" coupling, which locks the aperture and shutter speed rings together by default. If you change the shutter speed, the aperture changes with it: to make independent aperture setting, you have to pull back on a metal tab and use the tab to move the aperture ring. Annoying for many modern users, and again uncomfortable.

 

The later CF, CB, CFi and CFe lenses look and feel like contemporary lenses: rubber focus rings, and separate aperture and shutter speed rings. Turning effort on the CF focus rings is about as heavy as with the older lenses, but more comfortable since it isn't digging into your fingertips. All the later CB, CFi and CFe lenses have beautifully smooth easy focus feel, but are dramatically more expensive than CF, so CF remains the best price/handling compromise of the various lens series. Optic designs for most of the common focal lengths did not change at all when moving from C to CF and later, just the barrels. The few exceptions are the 50mm wide, which is available in an improved floating element version, ditto the 40mm, and 120 Makro which went from f/5.6 to f/4.0 max aperture. The CB 80mm has one less element, the 160mm CB was exclusively CB. The superb 180mm is not available as an older C lens, it debuted as CF. Its unlikely you're interested in the huge 350mm or 500mm teles, but if you are they were improved in later versions.

 

Sooner or later, most lenses and film backs will require an overhaul, and it isn't cheap. This is where careful consideration of budget can help you apply the initial outlay where it will bring the most long term benefits. If you really don't need the larger mirror of the costly 501cm or 503cw, you can apply the savings toward a certified recently serviced lens and/or film back. This is worthwhile for the peace of mind knowing your kit is good to go for at least several years. Buying random backs and lenses of unknown service history is more economical short term, but its a bit like playing a slot machine: they may work perfectly for six years, or hit you with a hefty service bill in six months. A lens overhaul from a top 'blad technician runs $400, a back overhaul $150.

 

There is one typical issue with the film backs that is fairly easy to self-service: the foam + mylar seal for the dark slide slot eventually decays or flattens, causing light leaks on the film. Replacement foams and mylars are available for about $15, often you can make your own for pennies. Demonstrations for replacing the seal are shown in multiple youTube videos, a photo tutorial is posted at the Hasselblad Historical site: Hasselblad Historical - How to change light seals in Hasselblad film magazines

Edited April 18, 2020 by orsetto

Hmmm. I have a 500c body which I've never used until just now- mounted a 32 ext tube and the 50mm lens onto it and shot an extreme close-up. I have 2 frames left on a roll of Superpan 200 so maybe I'll finish off this roll with the 500c.

 

Mike, I've been advertising this body around in various places for over a year, without so much as a nibble. It is in what I'll call very good condition, all around. The waist level viewfinder on it has a bit of brassing, it is an older style (different from my 500cm's finder) and has that old glass screen in it with the black "cross". The serial number begins with "T" & "U". Hasselblad Historical marks it as production year 1967. I don't really want to part with any lenses or film backs but if you wish to enter this venture inexpensively with a decent camera body, shoot me a PM and I'll provide photos of it. If not, no worries but I thought I'd put it out there.

Best luck in your quest!

Tom