Advice on Hasselblad purchase

[eric_.]

Dear all,<br><br>

 

Ever since I started photographing I have been using the 35mm format,

Leica M mostly. I am very interested in trying out medium format and

I would like your advice/opinion on the following:<br>

I am offered a Hasselblad kit consisting of a 500 C body, A12

cassette, Planar 80/2.8 and a Distagon T* 50/4.<br>

Untill now my type of photography focusses on portraits and

landscapes. Do you think that this is a good set to start with? What

are details that I should pay attention to when purchasing it? Can

you indicate a reasonable price for this kit?<br>

A puicture of the kit can be found <a

href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/image-display?

photo_id=2108834&size=lg">here</a>.<br>

Thanks alot!

[ken_kuzenski]

After 12 years of 35mm, I decided to try MF a couple of years ago, and after an inexpensive TLR to get my feet wet, I wound up buying a very similar 500c/m and 80mm; I've added the 50 and 150mm lenses since then. I am VERY pleased with mine; I find the Hasselblad a genuine pleasure to use. It's solid and well made. I bought a C, not a C/M, at first, but that one had a light leak in the back and I paid a bit more to replace it with the C/M. Maybe more experienced Hassy fans can tell you more about the C specifically. I love the 80mm lens; the 50mm (at least, mine) shows a little distortion--not uncommon in wide-angles. I haven't done any portraiture, but you'll find that the bigger negative is WONDERFUL for your landscapes, and I use the 50 for that often. Price is a hard thing to gauge--you might look at similar kits on ebay, at the websites of KEH and Midwest Photo Exchange, to give you an idea of current prices. Good luck!

[jay_.]

<<I am offered a Hasselblad kit consisting of a 500 C body, A12 cassette, Planar 80/2.8 and a Distagon T* 50/4.

Untill now my type of photography focusses on portraits and landscapes. Do you think that this is a good set to start with? >>

 

I strongly advise against buying that kit unless the whole thing is offered at less than US$1000. Here's why:

 

500C is the oldest of Hasselblad's accepting the current lenses. It has a very dark focusing screen which is not user-interchangeable. You can have an aftermarket screen fitted, but unless you're handy or lucky to find a repair tech willing to cut the frame of the current Acute-Matte screen you'll have to settle for a Beattie or perhaps worse, a Maxwell. My advice is to look for a 503CX, which is the last of the really-well-built Blads (comparable to a Leica M4, before both companies started cheapening things to cut costs and increase profits)and the first to come standard with the Acute-Matte screen.

 

A12 film back: these have been produced in two designs (2 variations of the current design, the latest with a bulky plastic keeper for the dark slide)and parts for the older version are scarce and they did not keep film as flat.

 

Planar 80/2.8 and Distagon T* 50/4: Repair parts for these older 'C' lenses are getting scarce. The shutters are more trouble-prone than those in the CF and CFi/CFe line. The aperture and shutter rings are normally locked together, you need to sprad them apart to turn each independently. The focus rings are scalloped metal and quite sharp and uncomfortable. The 50/4 has been superceded by one with a Floating Lens Element which has a separate ring to optimize performance depending on the focused distance. I suggest CF versions of both these lenses, with the 50 being a CF-FLE (there was a non-FLE CF also).

 

Prices on used Hasselblad have never been lower, and are dropping continuously. Availability is at an all-time high and rising. I see no need to buy trouble when you can get a much newer and more user-friendly kit for not that much more money.

[Ed_Ingold]

I would pass up a 500C in favor of a 500CM or newer model, primarily for the interchangeable viewing screens. It is also easy to mount a winding crank on the CM, to replace the winding knob. You should refer to "Hasselblad System Compendium" by Richard Nordin, ISBN 1-897802-10-2, to identify models and options.

 

Older A12 magazines have an open port in the back for aligning with numbers on the backing paper. This is a potential light leak. Newer versions have a "12" engraved on the release button, and have a solid back with a holder for the film box end-tab. Newer ones yet have a dark-slide holder.

 

I've had good luck finding service (Hasselblad, New Jersey) for "C" lenses. They've been out of production for 20 years, so I'm holding my breath. Optically, they're fine, especially if they're black, with the T* (multilayer) coating. I don't care for the coupled shutter/aperture rings, but then an Hasselblad requires a contemplative approach to photography.

 

The lens combination you suggest is a good start. Its good for at least 90% of the landscapes you might want. Medium format lends itself to broader landscapes with more detail, consequently wider angles. The 80mm itself is relatively wide, like a 40mm for a 35mm camera after cropping to a square format. a 150mm is better for portraits, especially of children, than the 50 or 80. You might consider the 150 your next acquisition.

 

Even before another lens, you will probably want a better viewing screen. The Acutte-Matte D is on of the best choices, with some 3rd party versions also in contention. A prism finder is also high on the acquisition list, because it allows edge-to-edge composition in all environments, and is easier to use with eyeglasses.

 

The body (C or CM), A12 magazine, waist-level finder and 80mm C T* is available for $800-$1100, depending on condition. A 50/4 C T* runs $700 to $1200 used.

 

Medium format is expensive! It's like running downhill. You'll have to find a really large camera store to find film and processing, or use mail-order. By the time you have three or four lenses, a prism, an extra back and other goodies, you will have $4000-$5000 invested. How about a scanner? An extra body?

[Robin Smith]

Eric

 

I think it is a good kit. I actually have the same lenses. The chrome 50 C T* are rather rare. Sometimes people try to charge more for them for that reason. In NYC I have no problem with keeping C lenses running, and actually I tend to prefer the older C lenses - they are cheaper and essentially offer the same performance and they are just beautifully constructed. Certainly the FLE 50mm is better at close focus than the original, but I like the 50mm it is a great lens with a useful angle of view. The hood/filter arrangement on the 50mm Cs are a bit painful. You may want to change the screen and on a 500C this can often be done, but not always. For this reason a 500CM is perhaps better. But check it out and decide yourself.

 

I think you would be very lucky to get that kit for $1000 or less even today. Most 50s sell for 800-1200 on their own: the FLE versions are more.

[evan_dong1]

The 500C can be upgraded to se the cute-matte screen. The cost for instalklking an Acute-matte screen ranges form $50 to 75 TOPS. Brad Sherman of Precision Camera Service, David Odessa in MA?, John Kovacs of Hilton Command Exposure, AND Hasselblad USA can installed an Acute-Matte screen for you. With a good CLA and a new Rewind crank, the 500C will last a lifetime. Otherwise, you can buy a later 500CM Classic, 503CX, 503CXi and 503CW (newest model). For lenses, I would try to stick with CF lenses. The C T* are good, but parts again is the main issue. Backs, try to get the A model (Automatic). This kit in CM, CF lens, and A-12 sdhould run in the neighborhood of $1200 to $1500 TOPS for a Mint condition system.

 

 

Evan

[berg_na]

I now have a 500C with the 80mm lens and I find it a joy to use, it's a nice change of pace compared to shooting with my 35mm equipment. Mine came with a viewfinder screen that has a split image window in the center, it's quite bright, and I don't have any problems focusing, even under low light conditions. I also have a focus handle so I don't have to grab the ridges of the focus ring. The photo in your link shows that this camera has one of the newer, automatic A12 backs, the non-automatic ones don't have a crank. It looks like it's in good shape. I think that the 500C is actually better constructed than the newer models. I used to have a 500C/M (before it was stolen), it had more plastic parts and the fit wasn't as good. The old C lenses also come with a self timer which can come in handy sometimes.

 

This camera, with the 80mm lens, is probably worth $700 and the 50mm by itself, at least another $700. It's definitely a good buy if you can get the whole kit for less.

[jay_.]

<<Older A12 magazines have an open port in the back for aligning with numbers on the backing paper>>

 

No, those are 12 backs, not A12's.

[jay_.]

<<The chrome 50 C T* are rather rare. Sometimes people try to charge more for them for that reason.>>

 

And also for that reason there are a lot of chrome non-T*'s that people have transplanted the front retaining ring from a junker black T*. Check the serial #, somewhere on the 'net there was a list of acceptible serial #'s for chrome 50 T*'s.

[raymond_tai]

I would say $1000 for the whole thing sound OK if the pieces are in ex+ condition.

However I would start with a 500CM, A12 and CF80 for about the same money and then

save up for a CF50. Nothing against the 500C and chrome lenses but stuff this old will

need work done and it might be a better idea to go with newer versions. I haven't held the

kit and I don't know so you should ask the seller when was the last time they were checked

over.

[cxc]

Have you tried shooting The Square yet? It's a big change from the 35mm rectangle, especially for landscape.

[john_wehlitz]

The 500C is still a great camera, and the focusing screen isn't all that dim. There are plenty of parts available for older cameras and lenses, both from junk lenses and because Hasselblad expert repair people will often be able to modify or fabricate a part.

 

I love my 500C and older lenses.

[eric_.]

Thanks guys.<br>

I will take the advice most of you gave me seriously and start looking for a C/M body. The kit I displayed sold before I could make an offer anyway.

[pawel1]

A few additional thoughts - first, I believe the 500C has the older mirror system, so if you used any lenses 250 or longer (or is it 180? I am not sure, since I have the 503cw, not the 500C), you will not get a complete image on the viewfinder - there will be some vignetting. Honestly, probably not a problem, but something to be aware of.

 

On the positive side, if you haven't had experience with a square format, I predict you will love it - it is very versatile.

 

Have fun!! and keep on shooting....

[godfrey]

<center>

<img src="http://www.bayarea.net/~ramarren/photostuff/PAW2/large/24a.jpg"><br>

<i>Stair - Hasselblad 500C/M + 80/2.8</i><br>

</center><br>

Eric, <br>

Sounds like you're on the right track. A more recent 500C/M body and CF series lenses

would be my preference ... Newer, less likely to require service, easier to get parts for in

the event it's necessary. I'm fairly picky about the condifiton of the camera and paid a bit

of a premium to obtain one that satisfied me, but it was worth it. <br><br>

I had one of the 500C/M Classics from about 1992, it was an excellent camera. I didn't like

the Acute Matte screen it came with very much, swapped to a Maxwell Bright Matte Grid

screen which I found easier to focus with. I also found that the standard focusing

magnifier with diopter 0 wasn't the best for my eyesight, switched to a -1 and it was

perfect. <br><br>

The 80mm and 50mm are both excellent lenses for normal to wide view photography. I

found myself always wanting wider, though, and in the end realized that I used the

903SWC about 10x as much as the 500CM. I let the 500 kit go to a good friend, who uses

it constantly. <br><br>

Godfrey

[waqas]

From what I hear the older chrome lenses are better built than their modern equivalents, all glass and metal! I mean for color people it might make too warm of an image from what I hear but for b&w guys, its great!

 

The only problem is that if you do want to purchase an Acute Matte screen it's a real pain(by pain i mean its hard to find cheap) especially if you want a center microprism and no grid (Acutte Matte D 42215).

[q.g._de_bakker]

Waqas,<br><br>C, CF, CFE etc. lenses are all made very well. No problem there. They differ mainly in ergonomics, which gets increasingly better with later versions.<br>They all deliver the same image quality too. You can't tell a C-lens result from a later lens's result. Even when you know what lens made what, you can't tell.