Need help. Should I buy this 503cw kit?

[paul_loveteck]

<p>Marc,<br>

When a seller marks an item as no longer available it does not mean it did not sell. In fact, it means the opposite as most companies (like the one which sold 360453894440 ) have different venues for selling, so 99.99% of the time, no longer available means it sold on a different place (web site, Craigslist, store, whatever).<br>

I am kindly correcting you as I know for sure that this camera sold!<br>

I also know that this camera which sold for $2,795 was NOT an ISO 3200 model.</p>

[marc_batters]

<p>The one bid on the camera kit you're looking at is from a...First Time...Zero (0) Feedback...Newcomer.</p>

<p>Absolutely and Clearly, I am not making any accusations here, but please read-up on 'Shill Bidding/Shill Bidders.'<br>

(Zero feedback bidders that immediately bid on an item after you have contacted the seller, sends me a big Red Flag warning signal).</p>

<p>Zero feedback newcomers can also jack/bid-up prices to ridiculously high levels/amounts, and then get buyers remorse and back out. <br>

Those two cameras that sold for $2,550 & $5,000 both closed MAY 10th. Too early to see if the buyers have backed out yet.</p>

<p>I've already expressed my thoughts of this camera being overpriced at $2,500. That still holds true, even at $2,225.<br>

Your minimum price, now, for the camera is $2,225. - plus $20. shipping.<br>

(The seller has bumped the shipping $5. from his first/original listing, too).<br>

At $25 min bid increments, plus, bidding against a rookie, prices on this camera could quickly/easily go to $2,400. or more. </p>

<p>My call, would be to wait for a better deal...a seller that allows returns, and gives you a couple weeks to check the camera out.</p>

<p>The difference between a 10 year old camera, and a 15 year old camera...in the grand scheme of things...not much of a factor on it's own. <br>

The 10 year old camera could have been used daily/weekly, while the 15 year old camera was a seldom used, back-up.<br>

The final decision, whether or not to purchase anything, is yours.<br>

Also, again, have you ever handled a Hasselblad before? A lot of money to spend, only to find out later it doesn't comfortably fit your needs.</p>

<p>Marc</p>

 

[ondebanks]

<p>Speaking of shill bidding - Does ebay still allow "Second Chance" sales? I came across this policy a few years ago, and it reeked of opportunity for shill-bidders to dishonestly make money at the expense of genuine bidders. Here's how the scam would work:</p>

<p>* You're a genuine bidder and you really want to try to win a particular auction. While you cannot be forced to bid more than your own self-imposed limit, you do hope that you will win the item for considerably less than your maximum bid. Statistically of course, you nearly always do win items for less than your maximum bid (hence you "save" some money); and if the bidding hits your maximum bid it's nearly always because you've been outbid by someone else, so you won't be paying for the item anyway.</p>

<p>* So there's normally a gap between the final sale price, and the maximum bid entered by the winner. This gap would be extra profit for the seller, if he could somehow drive the final sale price right up to that maximum bid. Enter his buddy, the shill bidder (ominous music sounds...)</p>

<p>* In cahoots with the seller, the shill bidder, just before the auction ends, enters a huge bid. This leapfrogs the final sale price over the highest maximum bid of the genuine bidders. That's the whole point: it flushes out the top genuine maximum, which then changes from being a hypothetical maximum to an actual, legally binding (but losing) bid.</p>

<p>* The shill bidder then "pulls out" of the sale. Under ebay "Second Chance" rules, the seller can now offer the item to the next highest bidder - the top genuine bidder - <strong>at the price of their maximum bid</strong>, not the lower bid which they would have won at, had the shill bidder not been involved.</p>

<p>Anyway some years ago this situation arose for one auction where I was the underbidder, and I was highly suspicious: the time interval between the auction ending and the seller offering me the "Second Chance" seemed much too short for there to have been real engagement between the seller and a non-paying auction winner. So I declined the "Second Chance" offer, and I would always decline them.</p>

<p>Maybe the rules have been changed since, to prevent that possibility for abuse?</p>

<p>This is not to say that I have any problem with ebay per se - I have made hundreds of purchases of which only ~ 1% had any problem, and most of those were sorted out ok. I wouldn't want anyone to avoid this fantastic global marketplace; just be aware of such things.</p>

<p> </p>

[zack_zoll]

<p>Personally, I just plain wouldn't buy a 503-series Hassy, unless the money is burning a hole in your pocket and you have absolutely nothing else to spend it on.<br /><br />The 503-series has the gliding mirror, which reduces vignetting through the viewfinder in longer lenses. Like others, I've never had a problem with this.<br /><br />The 503 series is newer. Then again, you can get 500 or 501 series cameras made as recently as (I think) the late 90s, and a lot of them are still in pretty good nick.<br>

Most of the cost of the 503 series is because it supports TTL prisms, autowinders, and electronic backs that write exposure data into the edge of the frame. These are all $200+ accessories, and if you don't buy them, then you've basically just bought a 500C/M with a much higher price tage. Supporting TTL flash is nice, but let's be honest: if you were going to walk around with a camera and a TTL flash, would a Hasselblad be your first choice?<br>

<br />There is one (single, in my mind) advantage to the 503s. Reportedly, they work better with a digital back than the older models do, due to the more advanced connections for the electronic film backs. So if you're going to spend several thousand on a digital back, then you might as well pony up for the more expensive body. But the film photos will be identical (assuming you use the same lenses), and without said digital back the only real advantage is that you can buy more fancy goodies.</p>

[qtao]

<p>I may contribute little bit different opinions.<br>

I bought a 500CM instead of 503CW. I paid attention to 503CW for almost a year, the kit sold from USD 1800 to 3400 USD, some included a nice motorized grip, even one seller included a meterted prism sold at USD 2700. so my view is that you need to take several months at least. if 2500USD wont sell soon, you have time to wait. I prefer to buy from an individual saler instead of 'a stock seller'.<br>

if you have potential to use both digital back and film, I think a 500CM or so may be a good start. I bought my 500CM kit (grid screen, CF 80, A12, WLF) for 895 USD. then I bought a used sinar emotion 75LV(33MP). currently on ebay, there is a new sinar emotion 75LV on sale. there will be more different brands of digital back appear on ebay, leaf, phase one, sinar, ...<br>

I gave up 503CW, mainly because with a digital back, I dont need many 503cw accesories. most time just carry a light meter, or just guess then look at histogram :). same time, I alway carry a film back, put in a roll of kodak E100VS as a backup.<br>

so my pont is to wait, and may just get a 500CM or 501C kit, try couple of films. then decide to have a 503CW or not. resale your 500 kit wont lost several hundred dollars, but resale 503cw might take a while. <br>

dont worry about ebay return policy, even you want to return a new kit, even saler say no return, ebay still on your side (some buyer just said sorry, my mistake, then ebay still favor buyer, I had such experience from several buyers).</p>

[qtao]

<p>I may contribute little bit different opinions.<br>

I bought a 500CM instead of 503CW. I paid attention to 503CW for almost a year, the kit sold from USD 1800 to 3400 USD, some included a nice motorized grip, even one seller included a meterted prism sold at USD 2700. so my view is that you need to take several months at least. if 2500USD wont sell soon, you have time to wait. I prefer to buy from an individual saler instead of 'a stock seller'.<br>

if you have potential to use both digital back and film, I think a 500CM or so may be a good start. I bought my 500CM kit (grid screen, CF 80, A12, WLF) for 895 USD. then I bought a used sinar emotion 75LV(33MP). currently on ebay, there is a new sinar emotion 75LV on sale. there will be more different brands of digital back appear on ebay, leaf, phase one, sinar, ...<br>

I gave up 503CW, mainly because with a digital back, I dont need many 503cw accesories. most time just carry a light meter, or just guess then look at histogram :). same time, I alway carry a film back, put in a roll of kodak E100VS as a backup.<br>

so my pont is to wait, and may just get a 500CM or 501C kit, try couple of films. then decide to have a 503CW or not. resale your 500 kit wont lost several hundred dollars, but resale 503cw might take a while. <br>

dont worry about ebay return policy, even you want to return a new kit, even saler say no return, ebay still on your side (some buyer just said sorry, my mistake, then ebay still favor buyer, I had such experience from several buyers).</p>

[paul_loveteck]

<p>Marc (Batters),<br>

Yes, you are right, there is always a risk that in an auction the price is artificially pushed up. However, nobody can force you to bid more than what you want.<br>

For having sold a 500C/M to a zero feedback buyer, I know a good explanation for the reason of so many first time buyers buying an Hasselblad on eBay: they are older folks, they are not used to Internet but . . . they had the dream to get an Hasselblad for many years and they can finally achieve it today because of the price drop and because after retiring, they have the time!<br>

First time buyers are an important part of the market and you cannot ignore the price they pay under the pretense that they have zero feedback. They count as much as a buyer with 5,000 feedback to "define" the value of an item.<br>

Regarding your remark on the difference between a 10 and 15 years old Hasselblad, if what you say is true in general, it is NOT TRUE for the 503CW because Hasselblad modified the 503CW over the years without changing its denomination. A more recent 503CW with ISO 3200 is worth $1,000 more than a 503CW with ISO 800 specially if, for example, the owner plan to use a digital back in the future or fast films and TTL. Hasselblad should have called the more recent models something like "503CW-a". So there IS a very significant difference between a 10 and 15 years old 503CW.</p>

[qtao]

<p>I am not aware of different ISO versions of 503CW, although heard of it little. <br>

most digital backs dont provide usable ISO above 800, so any advantage of 3200 version of 503cw vs 1600 version of 503cw?<br>

Kodak film provides ISO 800 Black and white film now, so if using ISO 800 film, one can push up two stops.</p>

[paul_loveteck]

<p>Qi Tao,<br>

With the TTL/OTF system, the light is measured as reflected by the film. When you use a digital back, the light reflected is much higher than it is with film. This means that you need to increase the ISO setting on the camera and, if you have one of the older 503CW, you are out of luck. For example, if your digital back is set at ISO 100, you might need to set the camera on ISO 3200 on some backs.</p>

[qtao]

<p>Paul, thank you for pointing out the difference. now i think it is important if I want to upgrade to using a 503cw body with TTL. </p>

[pengtao]

<p>Marc, thanks for your wholehearted suggestions. You are correct I haven't handle a Hasselbald or any MF before. After thinking about it for a couple of days, I feel that I might be overexcited, since it looks like a good time to jump in MF field (equipments are rather affordable and I really crave for the image quality).<br /><br />Ray, thanks for the interesting info. on Shill bidding and second-chance sales. I almost experienced one of those sometime ago. :)<br /><br />Zack, thank you for the comparision of 503 and 500. I am totally new to MF. Probably I should do more research/reading (just bought a couple of Hasselblad books) before I decide.<br /><br /><br />Thank you Qi Tao for the information. I haven't decide on digital back yet. It is quite far down the road. Can you share more experience with 500cm, how is it compared to 503cw? Thanks.<br /><br />Paul, thanks for your suggestions and opinions.<br /><br />I think twice about it and feel it might be too early to buy a Hassy although I wish. Probably a wiser idea is to rent one and try out first, and also find out the local film development service? Any thoughts? I came across some online rental recently (didn't save the links and can't remember). Are they reliable? Any one knows a good online place to rent Hassy, like 503cw?<br /><br />Thank you all very much for your time and kindness, gentlemen (I assume there are more gentlemen than ladies here LOL. Maybe I am wrong. Let me know then :)! I do appreciate it.</p>

[marc_batters]

<p>Pengtao, If everyone here knew where in the world you live, it would be easier to suggest rental resources.<br>

Secondly, I feel you have made a wise decision in continuing your MF research. Also, try to seek-out camera clubs in your area.</p>

[pengtao]

<p>That's right Marc. I forgot to mention that I live in Northern California, about two hours to SF, San Jose and Sacramento. Thanks!</p>

[ken_wayne1]

<p>Just picked up on this thread. I've been selling Hasselblad gear for 10 years now on eBay. I can't tell from the photos how "chipped" the paint is on the body but from what I can tell it looks nice. The biggest point on the body of any Hasselblad to check cosmetically speaking is on the rear of the body where the magazine attaches. Most all of them show at least some wear due to attaching and removing magazines. This one shows little to no wear. This "could" be an indication that it hasn't been used a great deal or it could mean that the guy hardly ever removed the magazine when he loaded film. Not likely but possible. The body is a 2003 model. The magazine is a 2002 model but they may have always been together. Sometimes they sold kits with successive years in the kit but typically you will not find a kit sold new that would have a magazine and body that were made two or three years apart. </p>

<p>Bodies rarely go bad and when they do it's usually a main spring which ( if my memory serves me correctly...cause it's been a while since I had to have one repaired ) costs somewhere between $150 to $300 depending on who does it. Also, the body has the 3200 ISO dial and the early 503cw bodies only went to ISO 800. So this is a plus for this body too. It also has the microprism with split Acute Matte D screen in it which is one of the more desired focusing screens so that's good as well...but those were standard many times.</p>

<p>The magazine has it's matching insert which is good. Being newer it is highly doubtful that the light traps are bad in the magazine which is one of the few problems usually ever encountered with a Hassy magazine.</p>

<p>According to Q.G.DeBakker's site www.hasselbladhistorical.eu the lens shows to have a 1987 manufacture date. I see significant wear on the bayonet mount on the end of the lens so it's clear this lens was bought separately and has been used a bunch. The rubber focusing grip on this one is dirty but can be removed easily and cleaned. The 80mm CF lenses are notorious for having a cracked plastic ring under that rubber grip which causes it to stay loose and to slide off all too easily. Those cost under $40 to replace. Maybe his is fine. It's not often that speeds are bad on a CF lens but it does happen. I would ask him to test it at 1 second and if the speeds are constant without pause at 1 second they're typically always good on the other speeds. Sadly, some people don't even know how to test this though.....if they're selling for others or haven't used the camera but a few times and really don't know how to use it.<br /><br /><br /><br>

A cost for a Hasselblad 503cw body with 3200 ISO will hover around $800 to $1200 depending on condition. A 80mm CF lens can be had for around $400 and a newer type magazine like his for $250 to $300. His body is on the high side condition-wise, his lens on the middle to lower end, and the magazine looks to be nice.<br /><br /><br /><br>

So if you bought the pieces separately and put them together to make your own kit you'd be looking at $1700 to $1900 or thereabouts plus shipping costs for each piece. The black paint 'blads do have a bit more demand out there if they're nice but as an owner you have to be more careful with them if you want them to stay nice. You chip the paint on them and it begins to devalue the camera considerably relative to how bad you've chipped the paint on it.</p>

<p><br />I wouldn't even consider the film in this auction. Film is film and it's most likely expired. The shade he has with it is a knock off too and not a Hasselblad brand.</p>

<p>Then you want to know if the lens glass has cleaning marks on it ( which many 80mm lenses do ) and he mentions nothing about these things. I would want clarification about speeds, functions, and guarantees that all is working well.</p>

<p>In regard to protection at eBay I can assure you that they have made it very much a BUYER friendly marketplace. The one thing you have to always look for is the "e" shield sign and the words beside it which say "Ebay buyer protection covers your purchase price plus original shipping." If it says that on the page of your seller then you're covered. They don't cover every seller, however, so you best make sure your page says it. If the seller sent you a camera that's faulty you contact ebay/paypal and they will have you ship it back to them with "PROOF" that you shipped it and they will refund your money. But to qualify you have to pay THROUGH the ebay listing. If you send someone money through paypal directly and not through the eBay listing then you have NO coverage. And they do give you your money back quite easily so it's a good place for buyers to shop these days. Here is a link to their return policy: http://pages.ebay.com/coverage/index.html</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

A few notes:<br><br><i>" A more recent 503CW with ISO 3200 [...]"</i>, <i>"Also, the body has the 3200 ISO dial [...]"</i><br><br>The ISO range runs from ISO 64 to ISO 4000.<br><br><br><i>"Being newer it is highly doubtful that the light traps are bad in the magazine [...]"</i><br><br>Both camera and magazine appear to be used very little. There are two things that deteriorate light seals: age itself (the material is not stable), helped by compression. Light use might mean lots of time with the dark slide inserted, i.e. the foam compressed.<br>So i would expect the magazine would need new light seals. No big deal though.<br><br><br><i>"According to Q.G.DeBakker's site www.hasselbladhistorical.eu [...]"</i><br><br>Though i can't deny being involved (not that i would want to), it's not 'my' site, but a community project.<br>The data feeding the lens dating applet, for instance, are supplied by Richard Nordin (everyone should get his books!)<br><br><i>"It's not often that speeds are bad on a CF lens but it does happen"</i><br><br>Indeed.<br>Not just will the slow speeds go sticky, but "B" and "F" can go bad too. So include those in the test.<br><br><br><i>"If the seller sent you a camera that's faulty you contact ebay/paypal and they will have you ship it back to them with "PROOF" that you shipped it and they will refund your money. [...]"</i><br><br>Or they will ask you to send them a document attesting that the item is not as it should be, signed by what they call an authority, someone they (!) will accept as someone they trust.<br>Can be tricky, that. I know of a case of a copyrighted text being sold and bought, turning out later to be a photocopy. Even the author of it submitted his evidence that what was sold was not an original nor an authorized copy. Yet eBay/PayPal ignored it, let the seller get away with it, did nothing.<br>nb short: there's always a risk involved. You're never (!) 100% sure of the promised protection.

[john_stockdale2]

<p>I don't know much about Hasselblads, but am I correct in thinking that one of these two cameras for sale has only a 220 back? If so, would that preclude the use of 120 film, which is readily available. 220 film is fast disappearing from the marketplace.<br>

<br />I nearly bought a Rolleiflex SL66SE until I noticed a 220 film (only) back on it.</p>