Hasselblad 500 EL/M

[orsetto]

One other thing: in this and other threads, the impression is given that Hasselblads need more service than any of their competitors. While they do indeed benefit from regular service (as much as any mechanical device does, as a function also of how much it is used), they really do not 'need it, or else...'.

 

YMMV.

 

Apparently you have virtually never, not once, been kicked in the nuts by a $600 repair bill from David Odess or Hasselblad NJ to repair a 50mm Distagon that is worth just barely $400 in good working order. Nor have you ever had the body barn doors decide to sporadically hang open just enough to ruin the best pics on a roll, then mysteriously work absolutely perfect for KEH or B&H inspectors when you try to return it. Nor, it seems, have you ever, not once, had your mirror tray pads evaporate overnight, throwing your focus off enough to ruin multiple rolls before you realize what happened. And pay the astronomical replacement fee.

 

And of course, as you have sworn here multiple times: not, once not ever, not even in your dreams, have you experienced the "infuriatingly inexplicably finicky body that just doesn't like some lenses, so jams them so solid they're welded to that body, requiring a staggering service fee to separate them, after which there is absolutely no guarantee it won't happen again in a month" syndrome.

 

And that, by the way, from half a century of personal experience with quite a few (some would say: too many) of them. Which was why a good many of them only knew sporadic use.

 

Very very fortunate indeed. But the odds of finding another with such luck to make a pair of bookends is virtually zero (tho Ed_Ingold comes pretty close to your perfect Hassy experience track record).

[Ed_Ingold]

The 555ELD uses five ordinary AA batteries, which last a very long time. Older models use obsolete battery packs or hacked replacements.

 

I don't recall what I paid for the CFV battery extension bracket, but it's worth the money to work without dangling sync cables from the lens.

[q.g._de_bakker]

No contradiction here with what I stated above: the ELD contacts can come in handy in with non-Hasselblad backs in some narrowly specific circumstances (i,e,, the studio shoots it was intended for, or if you have some particular fetish to shoot motorized medium format tethered at slow speeds as if it was a Nikon D6, so require the back to clairvoyantly communicate its readiness to shoot at a blazing 0.8 fps). Otherwise, ELD still needs a sync cord to the lens with anything but the Hassy backs for every other use case, which puts it on par with all the other V cameras.

 

Well, yes and no again, Orsetto.

Whether body contacts communicating with a digital back are usefull or not does not depend on thethered studio use, or slow speed shooting.

 

Myself, i do not engage in 16 fps photography, no. And even if i would, that's not what Hasselblads are made to do, obviously. So even if, i wouldn't turn to a Hasselblad for that. But that's beside the point: are those contacts useful? Yes, they are. Not very much, but still.

I do indeed use 555ELDs (and motorized 503CWs and ELXs) with digital backs outside the studio. Why wouldn't you?

The 503CW does not communicate with the back, and that does make a tiny difference. I also use formentioned SWC with digital backs, and then i also need to ratchet between shots. Not a big difference either.

Overall, the contacts allow you to pay just a little bit less attention to the shooting process. Not much. But still, a tiny bit. But i wouldn't buy an ELD just for that, no. There are other tiny things that add up to making it a slightly better choice than an ELX.

 

And yes, you still need a synch cord, just like when using other Hasselblads. It would have been nice if that wouldn't be necessary. But not a big deal.

[q.g._de_bakker]

YMMV.

 

Apparently you have virtually never, not once, been kicked in the nuts by a $600 repair bill from David Odess or Hasselblad NJ to repair a 50mm Distagon that is worth just barely $400 in good working order. Nor have you ever had the body barn doors decide to sporadically hang open just enough to ruin the best pics on a roll, then mysteriously work absolutely perfect for KEH or B&H inspectors when you try to return it. Nor, it seems, have you ever, not once, had your mirror tray pads evaporate overnight, throwing your focus off enough to ruin multiple rolls before you realize what happened. And pay the astronomical replacement fee.

 

And of course, as you have sworn here multiple times: not, once not ever, not even in your dreams, have you experienced the "infuriatingly inexplicably finicky body that just doesn't like some lenses, so jams them so solid they're welded to that body, requiring a staggering service fee to separate them, after which there is absolutely no guarantee it won't happen again in a month" syndrome.

 

 

 

Very very fortunate indeed. But the odds of finding another with such luck to make a pair of bookends is virtually zero (tho Ed_Ingold comes pretty close to your perfect Hassy experience track record).

 

Well, i don't know. Buying good stuff to begin with helps quite a lot. There's too much handed around that is doing the rounds just because noone wanted to pay for a repair to begin with.

But yes, i also had to pay for a few repairs during that half a century. F-lens diaphragms, a few times. No mirror pads. No barn doors.

Jams? Well, some. Due to (you have to buy good thingies to begin with) sloppy rings and a faulty bellows unit. easily fixed. But no, nothing like that long-named syndrome you mention. Just as light traps, nylon stops. The most annoying and most frequent fault i had to deal with were and are those plastic clip rings below the focussing rubber on CF lenses. That was a pretty bad design.

 

Apart from buying good stuff to begin with, much also depends, i like to think, on not maltreating an already battered bit of equipment. That was my other repair: someone forced a jammed camera. needless to say to any wise person: do not do such a thing!

[ben_hutcherson]

So, typical Q.G. operation-we're now told that anyone who has EVER had a Hasselbad problem must be because of junk equipment and it can't POSSIBLY be due to a finicky, complex design.

 

For my part, most of my Hasselblad kit came from the same owner and was barely used before I had it, and the only lock-up I've ever experience was before I knew what I was doing. With that said, perhaps it's indicative of a systematic equipment problem when it's now derided as people using "battered equipment" when I can point to cameras like Nikon F2s that look like they're run over by a proverbial truck but still work fine. The only F2 problems I routinely run into are jumpy meters, the occasional "off" high speed, and-horror of horrors-the dreaded film advance whine that doesn't actually affect operation. .

[q.g._de_bakker]

So, typical Q.G. operation-we're now told that anyone who has EVER had a Hasselbad problem must be because of junk equipment and it can't POSSIBLY be due to a finicky, complex design.

So typical PNet. It was and it still is a real pleasure to share...

 

I wasn't deriding anything or anybody. Just sharing my thoughts on why i think i never had any serious problems with Hasselblad gear.

That Hasselblad design was and is so finicky that NASA trusted it to use on critical occasions. It has served many professionals for 70 years, gaining and keeping a reputation (and a reputation based price- "Why", the then CEO was asked in an interview once "are Hasselblad cameras that expensive, compared to other brands?" "Because we can ask that much", he replied). Must be, i trust, Ben, because these thingies are so finicky.

Are they perfect? Do they never fail? Of course not. But not as much as we are made to believe reading PNet comments. I know. I used them quite a bit for about half a century. That's what i was saying. Your Mileage May Vary.

 

I'm sure that a lot of bad experiences using Hasselblad equipment nowadays are due to the amount of really bad cameras and other bits of equipment that is for sale today.

It always was a matter of knowing what to buy, what to look for, because you could (and still can) ask and get quite a lot for gear that needed service or even repairs. So it is tempting to find a buyer for something that really deserves to put to eternal rest. And not every seller was or is that honest about what they are selling.

And now that Hasselblad cameras aren't used that much by professionals anymore, a lot of the gear that is doing the rounds hasn't seen service for quite a while, etc.

 

You experienced a lock-up, Ben, "before you knew what you were doing". Are you deriding everybody who had a lock-up, because they do not know what they are doing?

And what happened ever since, Ben, using those finicky machines?

[pieterdekoninck]

So typical PNet. It was and it still is a real pleasure to share...

 

I wasn't deriding anything or anybody. Just sharing my thoughts on why i think i never had any serious problems with Hasselblad gear.

That Hasselblad design was and is so finicky that NASA trusted it to use on critical occasions. It has served many professionals for 70 years, gaining and keeping a reputation (and a reputation based price- "Why", the then CEO was asked in an interview once "are Hasselblad cameras that expensive, compared to other brands?" "Because we can ask that much", he replied). Must be, i trust, Ben, because these thingies are so finicky.

Are they perfect? Do they never fail? Of course not. But not as much as we are made to believe reading PNet comments. I know. I used them quite a bit for about half a century. That's what i was saying. Your Mileage May Vary.

 

I'm sure that a lot of bad experiences using Hasselblad equipment nowadays are due to the amount of really bad cameras and other bits of equipment that is for sale today.

It always was a matter of knowing what to buy, what to look for, because you could (and still can) ask and get quite a lot for gear that needed service or even repairs. So it is tempting to find a buyer for something that really deserves to put to eternal rest. And not every seller was or is that honest about what they are selling.

And now that Hasselblad cameras aren't used that much by professionals anymore, a lot of the gear that is doing the rounds hasn't seen service for quite a while, etc.

 

You experienced a lock-up, Ben, "before you knew what you were doing". Are you deriding everybody who had a lock-up, because they do not know what they are doing?

And what happened ever since, Ben, using those finicky machines?

I have a couple of thoughts on the matter of Hasselbad's reputation. As a former advertising art director, I expected the photographers I gave jobs to to have current, pro-level, reliable equipment and back-ups. Those professionals usually had experience with that equipment and knew what was necessary to maintain it. A failure on the job did not bode well for the photographer, me or go over well with the client and talent involved. Hasselblad equipment (bodies, lenses, backs , etc.) were readily available from rental houses to provide additional equipment as needed. Not that there weren't other brands available, just Hasselblad was the best-known.

[tom_chow]

The only weakness in the design of the Hasselblad system was the location of the key release pin on the lens. When you mount a cocked lens on an uncocked body, the body's key is in a position such that it's inner tip can trip the release pin on the lens. And if you mount the lens quickly (like you normally would if you were doing it all the time), the key slot on the lens rotates and captures the pin on the body (the pin that is suppose to release the lens!), and this is the (bad) jammed state. Mount the lens slower, and the key slot rotates before reaching the pin, and is blocked from mounting. This usually only happens when there is a little wear on the pin guard (and you happen to have an uncocked body with no lens...). All other jams and issues I've see are wear and abuse related.

 

NASA did not allow the lenses to be removed during the early space missions. They also had new and serviced equipment.

 

Where I grew up, you could rent Hasselblads, but not Bronica (but they were 1/2 the price, so you could get 2...)

 

Hasselblads were professional equipment because they came 1st, and were reliable - though not at first, they had to go though a few cycles to get there, but they got there before there was any competition. And they provided professional support.

 

In the hand, they had a solid finely machined feel, and were the smallest and lightest 6x6 SLRs for most of their lifetime.

 

There are good reasons professionals stuck with them, and are still popular today.

[orsetto]

q.g., you really aren't in disagreement with ben or me or anyone else: you're just averaging out your positive Hasselblad experience to include the era when the system was in its prime, far more widely used, and when second-hand examples tended to be in better shape overall. You very correctly advise that shopping wisely is crucial, and condition of the item is paramount. We all agree with you there.

 

When ben and I or others caution newbies to the system today must be prepared for issues, that is because today most of the Hasselblad lenses, bodies and backs available second hand are in a very different state than when you began using the system decades ago. This stuff is at least 20 years older, much of it hasn't been operated at all in that time, and sitting inert at the bottom of a closet is death to the V system, esp the lens shutters. German craftsmanship is impressive in one sense, not so hot in others: anything with a Prontor or Compur leaf shutter in it is guaranteed to require an expensive PITA repair job soon after purchase in 2020, unless bought from a dealer or tech who warrants it was recently overhauled already.

 

The types of people buying second-hand Hasselblad now are also very different to 20-25 years ago. Back then, it was aspiring pros or well-heeled enthusiasts. They were paying a heck of a lot more money, they were more aware the system might need routine maintenance by service techs, and those techs were in every major city so the waiting times and fees weren't quite what they are now.

 

Many of the photographers jumping on Hasselblad today have no clue just how quirky it is, how commonly the aging examples on eBay now need repair, how frightfully expensive those repairs can be, and how often the repairs can only be done by techs far enough away that shipping and long wait times are standard. They're coming straight from modern DSLRs or 35mm film cams, where hardly anything breaks. Spending $999 for an average-condition 500cm with A12 and 80 Planar is huge investment for them (double the ask for a similar Mamiya RB67 or Bronica SQ), and they assume for that kind of money (and the sterling reputation) they'll get a perfectly-running camera they can simply use without a care in the world. Then the lens shutter fails ($400+), the body flaps or mirror go out ($250) and/or the nylon stop in the back goes out ($150). Umm, surprise? Not quite what they expected from a "living legend".

 

Hasselblad is a fantastic system with great lenses, but many examples floating around at attractive (or even high) prices today are going to need work to get them up to snuff. Budgeting half again for that service will prevent disappointment, buying directly from a tech (if at all possible) would be even better. Just as with Rolleiflex and Leica, European legendary craftsmanship and optics often comes with hidden costs beyond the upfront purchase price. Don't expect the sort of buy-it-and-done experience you're accustomed to with, say, Nikon or Canon, and you won't be shocked or disappointed.

 

The Hasselblad rep of the '60s thru '80s doesn't really apply to the used eBay or KEH choices of today and is no guarantee of anything. That rep was earned when Hasselblad was a widespread contemporary professional tool, and none were left sitting to rot for ten or twenty years before being bought second hand by a rank amateur for a sixth the original price (before digital, you were lucky to get barely 30% off new price if buying used 'blad gear). There was a much higher percentage of functional vs gummed-up Hassy gear in the field and at used camera depts.

 

Also, much of the "rep" came from happenstance. Hasselblad was the first to offer a modular medium format SLR, and for almost a decade had no direct competition that could match all its features. Voila, instant legend, ala its 35mm equivalent the Nikon F. Adding to its desirability was its exclusive Zeiss lenses: their scarcity widely forgotten today, that was probably Hasselblads single biggest selling point. For many years it was the only remotely serious and usable SLR camera with Zeiss lenses: every camera Zeiss itself offered was an obsolete fiasco, and unlike today Zeiss did not yet make interchangeable lenses for other popular Western camera systems. You wanted Zeiss rendering, you sold your child to buy a Hasselblad: there was no other alternative (aside from the then-moribund fixed-lens Rolleiflex TLR, or the huge bizarro-world Rollei SL66 SLR which offered the same Zeiss lenses without the leaf shutter required by most medium format pros). The Contax RTS didn't arrive until fifteen years later, the Contax 645 took nearly forty years (and the rise of Hasselblad H) to appear.

 

The NASA/Apollo thing is a total distraction with no bearing on real-world used Hasselblads today: the space Hasselblads were modified (actually gutted) beyond recognition to eliminate nearly all the typical failure points. Mirror and reflex viewing/focus: gone. Barn doors: gone. Complex shutter/diaphragm sequence: gone. Lens interchange was frowned upon or impossible: gone. The space cameras were simplified into very expensive box cameras, fortified against launch g forces, temperature extremes and vacuum environments. A couple of "ordinary" 'blads like Wally Schirra's 500c notwithstanding, most of the space 'blads were bespoke creations funded by unlimited govt largesse. Incredibly tough and durable, yes, but none of that specialized construction is shared by earthbound standard Hasselblads. And I wouldn't place any bets that even the most recent NASA-spec Hasselblad MK70 kits available for $20K from some dealer/collectors don't need an overhaul as badly as any random eBay 'blad.

 

Long story short: Hasselblad is not now and never was a "bargain" for dilettantes and dabblers. It was a very very expensively made system that has suffered massive second-hand price depreciation due to the digital photography transition. The initial buy-in price has become attainable to many who couldn't even dream of owning Hasselblad previously, which is wonderful. But don't be complacent: like any vintage mechanical contraptions, they can and do fail. And when they do, repair costs will not be trivial. That $600 Planar lens or $400 500cm body can easily double in cost if you factor in likely potential repairs. So do factor it in, before deciding you can "afford" Hasselblad instead of the newer less-complex Bronica SQ or Mamiya RB67: that is the only point us Hasselblad Cassandras are trying to make.

Edited February 24, 2020 by orsetto

[dan_lindsay]

The first thing I recommend to the buyer of a 500 EL/M or any of the later models with the Palpas anti-reflective coatings is to treat them with that Aerospace 303 stuff. It keeps the cracking from getting any worse. I have no idea why Has had to introduce that stuff and not really do their homework first.

 

I have both a 503CW and the 500 EL/M and aside from the size, the 500 EL/M is quite handy! With today's 9V battery adaptors, they perform quite well. One thing to be cautious of is the battery compartment latch. They can be damaged easily and then you need to call Hassy in NY to send you a replacement latch--nearly $40! But it does save a nice EL/M.