jammed hasselblad please help me

[paul_gardener]

Gentlemen time changes everything!

We are talking about equipment that can be up to 37 years old in case of a 500CM.

Try to imagine what a body has been through in the hands of a pro

who shoots what, an average of 10 films a day for the 10 years that he keeps his Hasselblad body?

I now there are bodies that will survive this kind of mileage without service.

Even when used from new by an amateur with a modest amount of films compared to a professional certain parts like mirror foam will need replacement.

To claim bodies over 20 years old can function well without being serviced is not realistic.

 

Sad story:

A young professional shows me his recently acquired 500 CM.

He is very excited about MF and asks me what I think of his camera.

I see the auxilary shutter is slow, the top part of it does not open completely etc.

I recommend a good CLA. My friend has his camera serviced and goes to Paris to do a shoot in the Metro.

He has made four shots when the body seizes solid.

 

A small broken spring that should have been replaced with a full service turns out to be the cause.

The spring costs just 6 USD but was not replaced because the guy who

did the job does not have any spares in stock.

 

In my book this still comes under human error.

With a service by a qualified technician who does jobs according factory standards this would not have happened.

I was able to help my unlucky friend in Paris by arranging another camera through a colleague who lives in the area.

[q.g._de_bakker]

Let's not continue this </i>in italics.<br><br>Paul,<br><br>It's not a claim, it's a matter of fact that some bodies over 20 years old do function well without ever being serviced. (And yes, the mirror is still fine, with perfect focus, and not even a fear that it might shatter.)<br>But yes, it may be too much to claim to be true as a general statement. But even so, it's not as hugely inaccurate as Antonio's <i>"Hasselblads have a tendency to jam"</i>. Not, by a quite considerable distance (how many miles is it again from here to the Moon and back?) ;-)

[q.g._de_bakker]

</i></p>Just testing. Now?

[q.g._de_bakker]

Now! People, mind that you close opened HTML-tags!

[antonio_garcia_russell]

All I said was that they <i>could</i> have a tendency to jam, which is clearly correct as

many people have reported cameras that <i>did have a tendency to jam</i>. I really

don't understand why certain folks get so hot under the collar about this. It is a know

issue with Hasselblads that they can have a tendency to jam.

<p>

I never said it was a frequent ocrruence. In fact I did not comment on how big an issue it

really is. I have no idea. It was actually David Odess who listed it as a frequenty asked

question, and - with respect to those of you who have never had a problem - he is better

placed than most to comment on such matters as he services the cameras for a living

and must have handled thousands of them over his lifetime.

<p>

Another Hasselblad repairmen, David Knapman, actually told me that the factory did not

always tighten and adjust a particular screw setting properly, and that this was often the

cause of the problem. I guess you could call that human error, but that is different from

user error as the above poster has suggested.

<p>

Lets face it, Hasselblads are know for 2 things: excellent zeiss lenses and a jamming up.

<p>

Christopher Hevanet summed it up very succinctly on his <A

HREF="http://www.hevanet.com/cperez//hasselblad/500cm.html"> website</A>

<p><i>

Several years ago I bought a fabulous Hasselblad 500CM kit with 80mm and 150mm

lenses. I paid top dollar for it. It was in mint condition. It was lovely to hold. It was lovely

to use. It felt great to use. Until it broke. It broke 4 times in 6 months. I was very upset,

sold the 'blad, and bought a Mamiya RZ system for a fraction of the cost of the 'blad. And

the RZ has proven to be utterly reliable through several years of use.</i>

[dave_wilson1]

When I switched from 10+ years of Bronica SQa use to Hasselblads, I jammed several different cameras, but one especially (501cm) several times. I went directly to Hasselblad in NJ, 40-50 minutes from my house, and went over this with their technician who had great patience with me and gave me great insight on how this camera worked different from my Bronicas. I had a habit of leaving my finger on my shutter release and sometimes pressing it ever so slightly while I was working so as to anticipate action shots or moving shots so I could shoot and wind quickly. This was tripping the lens but not the body causing a jam. I did this on several bodies close to 6-8 times making me crazy. I learned not to touch the shutter till I was ready to shoot and to make one precise movement of my finger. Thousands of exposures since then it never happened again. This is an actual factual story and it really happened, so although my fault, they jammed. He also explained to me they can be similarly jammed while mounting a lens which I also did twice, but have not had any problems in recent times now that I am fully familiar with this equipment.

[antonio_garcia_russell]

Dave,

 

What you are describing are the symptoms of a badly adjusted camera. A properly adjusted

camera should not display this behaviour. Hasselblad NJ were just being lazy - they should

have fixed it for you.

[paul_gardener]

Antonio,

 

Incidents do not make a rule.

A camera that broke, jams? 4 times in six months is not normal.

I presume you were not the first owner so who knows what this body has been through before you got it.

Also who did correct the problems with that body?

 

Of course David Odess mentions problems like jamming as a frequent

cause for trouble.

Ask any cardiologist what is a common complaint and he will say heart problems. These guys mostly see patients with problems.

 

I am willing to make a bet with you that any of the Hasselblad cameras I own, starting with the 1000F till the latest 503CW, will function well if selected for a long day shooting using 20, 30 rolls of film.

How is that for a camera that has a tendency to jam?

 

I have strong faith in the man who services my gear.

40+ years of experience servicing Hasselblads will tell him just by touching and listening to a body what sort of problems there are.

What leaves his workshop after a full service will perform better than a new body meaning any brandnew equipment holds the surprise of

failure. As soon as it passes the first months of use without problems

the reliability chances are improved.

It is unfair to qualify Hasselblads as cameras that have a tendency to jam especially if this is based on a one time experience.

 

If that were true no pro would ever do a job without carrying a spare body.

[q.g._de_bakker]

Antonio,<br><br>That's just it: Hasselblads are not (!) known for jamming up.<br><br>This is a thing that does the rounds, yes. But it is reported lots and lots more than it happens.<br>And mostly by people who do not like Hasselblads, and think that in the fact that even (...!) Hasselblads do sometimes fail, they have found a suitable stick to beat them with. So they harp on about how Hasselblads are not infallible, pointing to the one thing they could find to point to.<br>Ignorant (and this is important) of the fact that what they have found to point to is that Hasselblads are not 'idiot-proof'.<br>And they indeed are not. Just like they are not infallible (you might even say that not being idiot-proof is a fault, and not be entirely wrong too).<br>But this "known for jamming up" thing, if true about something, it is about Hasselblad users who did not read the manual. Not the hardware.<br><br>Apropos "hot under the collar". I don;t think we are. I'm certainly not.<br>But this Forum is a place where people who do not know come to learn from people who do. And i'll be damned if i let misinformation and desinformation pass unchallenged. It's so easy, after all, to get it right. All we have to do is draw on our own actual experience (both with the gear, and with what we know about what people like to say about the gear), and not just repeat what we may have heard other people repeat on whatever place on the WWW...<br>;-)

[antonio_garcia_russell]

<i>It is unfair to qualify Hasselblads as cameras that have a tendency to jam especially if

this is based on a one time experience</i>

<p>

Yes, I agree it would be unfair to say that. But that is <i>not</i> what I have said. What I

actually said was that they <i>can</i> have a tendency to jam. That is, it is

<i>possible</i> for them have a tendency to jam up. Many people have reported

experiencing this tendency. I have suffered it myself.

[antonio_garcia_russell]

<i>Of course David Odess mentions problems like jamming as a frequent cause for trouble.

Ask any cardiologist what is a common complaint and he will say heart problems. These

guys mostly see patients with problems.</i>

<p>

Your analogy is misleading. If you must compare then it would be like a Doctor saying that

the most common cause of death is heart disease. He is ideally placed to comment

[antonio_garcia_russell]

Clearly the issue of Hasselblad reliability is not a new one to these forums, I am not the

first do comment on it. In fact back in 1998 <A HREF="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-

a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00088j"> this</A>poster wrote:

<p>

<i>I have just read the Hasselblad related postings and was shocked to find so many

postings on dead, jammed, DOA, etc. cameras. My perception of Hasselblad ( never

owned one, but was interested in buying one soon) was that they were reliable. Is the

older equipment better made? Some people think Leica's older stuff had better build

quality, is there a similar sentiment with the Hassselblad owners? How can these cameras

cost so much and have so much problems? Is Hasselblad no longer the Rolls Royce of MF?

Should I reconsider acquiring a used 500/501 CM outfit?</i>

<p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

Antionio,<br><Br>Congratulations! You have indeed noticed how people like to talk about (!) jammed Hasselblads a lot.<br><br>Now take a good and hard look at the "never owned one" bit.<br>Ater having gone trough all the trouble to find the message you think illustrate your believe that the "issue" is indeed with "Hasselblad reliability", and not with people liking to repeat what they heard other people repeat, etc.,not too much to do.<br>Ad while thinking anyway, think a it about how poster in 2008 might understnd your emphatic attempts to have us all believe that there ineed is an "issue" the way the quoted poster from 1998 has understood (and as misguided by) this silly talk.<br><br>And please stop using that i-didn't-say-that-they-do-but-only that-they-can defence. If you think the cardiologist-analogy is misleading, imagine how this defence comes across. Indeed: also very silly.

[antonio_garcia_russell]

I would ask the Moderator to consider taking action against the person posting as Q.G. de

Bakker. I have made it clear to him that I wish to have nothing to do with him on account of

his past abusive behaviour. Since then he seems to follow me around these forums and ake

up arguments against me for no other reason that to spite me. I realise photo.net is an

open forum that accepts a range of opinions but surely if you have asked to be left alone by

a poster then surely this should be respected? It is becoming an online version of

harrasment!

[Vlad Soare]

OK, so it's (almost) always user error, but then could it be that Hasselblads are a little too prone to user error? If mounting an uncocked lens is a big and definite no-no and is guaranteed to jam the camera, then surely they could have designed it not to accept an uncocked lens at all, couldn't they? If a slight and incomplete press of the shutter button can trip the lens but not the camera, that's another design flaw in my opinion. The camera and lens must work together or not work at all. This safety feature should not depend solely on a delicate adjustment. Also, having to keep the shutter button pressed until the exposure is over is just another thing the user has to worry about, and which is easy to overlook if your experience is based on less sensitive cameras.<br>

I'm sure Hasselblads are great cameras, but I believe that a more careful design would have avoided a lot of user errors and saved Hasselblad a lot of this "easily jammed camera" reputation.

[q.g._de_bakker]

Antonio,<br><br>I'll keep it short and civil:<br>You are nuts if you think i follow you around. But like i said before, "i'll be damned if i let misinformation and desinformation pass unchallenged."<br>If you keep persisting this scaremongering, i'll keep pointing out to people looking for valid advice that what you right is not it.<br>So do not flatter yourself, thinking that anyone would be interested in you, and begin to understand that in a Forum like this, false and misleading information should not (!) be left alone. On the contrary.<br><br><br>Vlad,<br><br>A Hasselblad is indeed made such that you simply cannot mount an uncocked lens already.<br>But you're right: a Hasselblad is not designed to be fool proof. You do need to read the (short) manual. And if you do not forget what it says, you'll enjoy decades of trouble free Hasselblad photography. ;-)

[q.g._de_bakker]

Uhm... "right" is not right, but should read "write".

[dave_wilson1]

Notice, that once again after all this ad-nauseum, at times assanine discussion, we haven't heard again from the OP?? Is it that they get scared off after the first several replies or that they just don't need this information any more. Antonio, Q.G. is witty man, just send him some of your best verbage and get on with it. We all get on each others nerves here, that's half the fun of it, what do you want from a bunch of "artists", it will never be normal here. Do what I do, tell them to go have a beer, then go have one yourself.

[antonio_garcia_russell]

Dave, thanks for the advice. If only it were true! The guy is a moron.

[q.g._de_bakker]

And there mr Garcia Russell goes again...

[antonio_garcia_russell]

Reminds me of 2001 - A Space Odyssey:

<p>

HAL 9000: <i>Well, I don't think there is any question about it. It can only be atribuable

to human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before. And it has always been due to

human error.</i>

<p>

Frank:<i> Listen HAL, there has never been any instance at all of a computer error

occuring in a 9000 series, has there?</i>

<p>

HAL 9000: <i>None whatsoever Frank. The 9000 series has a perfect operational record. </i>

[antonio_garcia_russell]

Hal 9000: <i>I know you and Frank were going to disconnect me, and I am afraid that is

something I annot allow to happen. </i>

[kparratt]

Most mechanical devices need service. When buying a car, or a camera with complex mechanics, one should simply budget in as part of the aquisition, a thorough service. Hasselblad have perishable components, and springs which may eventually give up after 100s of 1000s of cycles. They have parts that need lubricating. Simple.

 

As Q.G. says, It's not a Hasselblad problem. For Heaven's sake ....

 

Janelle, this is not aimed at you, but there are some folk who really are the "mechanically challenged", those for whom automatic transmission vehicles are recommended, because they crash gears, and have the experience of Hasselblads jamming a lot.

 

I bought a cheap, spare 500C a while ago, being advised that it sometimes jammed, and so it did. So what. If I were over in the US I'd send it down to David O. But I'm closer to Gothenburg, so I'll post it to Hasselblad and pick it up when passing. They'll give it a thorough overhaul.

 

Cheers, Kevin.

[paul_gardener]

Advice for users of pre owned gear:

 

Have your recently acquired camera/lenses/backs checked and serviced by a qulified technician.

It gives peace of mind and lots of good pictures as well.

 

Professionaly used equipment should be serviced every year.

Less heavily used and amateur equipment will benefit from a service every 3-5 years.

 

I just repeat the good advice from David Odess, a qualified factory trained technician.

[bengt_ljungkvist1]

Sorry to see the debate going infected with personal misgivings and even attributions! But: If jamming is caused by careless pressing the release button, the 503CW with the winder attached would never get jammed, would it? Mine has not. And: A Hasselblad technician told me when asked about service interval: "-Only when the equipment starts fouling up!". How about that?