ulrik_neupert

Can't comment on the Apo-lens. The 500 C-lens is no dog, you just have to keep in mind that it was designed in the early 1960's. In those days it was phantastic. Today it is still able to produce contrasty sharp pictures, but if you look closely it shows colour fringing around dark/bright contours.

Keep in mind that there are two versions of the Apo-Tessar with differrent minimum focus distances. The newer one goes down to 5m if I remember it right.

Ulrik

Here is an interesting lens comparison, involving lenses from Carl Zeiss Jena, Kiev lenses and Carl Zeiss Oberkochen lenses for Hasselblad including the Vivitar 2x converter: http://www.pentaconsix.btinternet.co.uk/LensTest.htm

Ulrik

Maybe I am not overcritial, but I used the Vivitar 2x converter with Hasselblad 150 and 250 mm C-lenses and the slides were contrasty and sharp. You can get these converters for about 150 Euro/US Dollars used so try it out yourself, its a cheap experiment.

Ulrik

The Digisix is as accurate as other more expensive meters. It is just smaller and has fewer options like spot or flash-metering. I have one and would like to have a dozen more for every photo bag.

Ulrik

It is bright enough and it is useful. I had to file away a little of the ground plate so that the film magazines fit tightly to the camera body. The ocular optics are not coated, so maybe it is not 100 % as bright as the Hasselblad NC2, but I have no comparison. From my experience however this prism is much more ergonomic than the old metered CDS-prism from Hasselbad. Buy it, test it, if you don't like it, sell it via an online auction. There is nothing to lose.

Ulrik

Brian,

the 500 CM was in production for about two decades. So there are many minor differences that have nothing to to with black and chrome. Early 500 CMs have a flash sybchro contact for the rear auxilary shutter, the contours of the boyshell and the WLF changed slightly, the hinges for the film back attachment are different and appear more substantial on later bodies... All these differences are very minor, buy a camera in good condition, preferably one that has been serviced recently by a Hasselblad expert.

Ulrik

If you work handheld and use flash, go for a Hasselblad with TTL flash metering (503CX, 503CXi, 503CW...). Or what about the Hasselblad H1, much faster to use, might be better for weddings.

Ulrik

At the age of 19 (in 1987) I bought a Seagull 4B1 to see if I like the square format. The answer was "yes", so a Hasselblad 500 CM followed one year later. (now its 2x 500 CM, 2x 500 ELM, 1x 2000FC and 1x SWC).

Ulrik

The most versatile camera of that sort is the Hasselblad ELM. The by far most underrated camera on the used market, bodies are extremely cheap.

Ulrik

The NC-2 and its Kiev clone are not very useful because you have to use them without glasses (I have the Kiev one, its o.k.). Of course you can put diopters into them so that your wife can focus but then you can't. Another solution would be to buy two Kiev finders, one for your wife and one for you. The only single finder I know of that would be useful for you is the Hasselblad PM-45 or PME-45. Unfortunately somewhat pricey.

Ulrik

I use 45 CL-3 and 45 CL-4. To illuminate the angle of the 40 mm lens you can put the Stofen Omnibounce onto the flash. That's what I do with my SWC (38 mm Biogon).

Ulrik

I would offer 2000 Euro/US Dollars (I assume everything is from 1978, so all the lenses are black T*). You will need some money for a CLA of all the gear.

Ulrik

Jon,

the availability of correction diopters for prism finders is not an issue. Especially when your eyes suffer from astigmatism you have to go to an optician who can make a special diopter for you. This is what I did today. In fact I gave an old eyeglass which was grinded to the right size that it fits into my ukrainian NC-2 copy. Prism and diopter together cost me 75 Euro. This is a reasonable low budget route. (The best of the Hasselblad prism finders to my taste is the PME-45 though which can be used with glasses)

Ulrik

I have a magazine 12 made in 1955, one of the first that can be used with Hasselblad 500C cameras and it's successors, and it has already the two notches.

Ulrik

May I introduce myself as another member of your Hasselblad-Olympus-Club. My main cameras are Hasselblad 500 CM and Olympus OM-1N, chosen for similar reasons (I shoot a lot on outdoor trips). Battery independent, lightweight, compact, reliable, superb design and built quality, good lenses, sexy shutter sound.

Ulrik

Andrea,

if you can live with the bulky but lightweight chimney hood for the Hasselblad, this is the best tool to make focussing easier. If the budget allows, add a split image focussing screen.

I prefer the Acute Matt D split image screen because it has a horizontal (or if you turn it by 90 degrees) vertical split, the latter option being helpful for portraits when you focus on the eyes. My old type split image screen had a diagonal split which really needs getting used to.

Ulrik

Even the 350 mm lenses of C- and CF-type had no tripod collar. Your Hasselblad will not have a problem with the 180 mm lens. My own experience is that the 250 mm lens + 2x converter gives no problems (alignment of all my camera bodies has been checked recently, so I am sure). My 500 mm lens has a tripod collar.

Ulrik

Better internal reflection coating was introduced with the Hasselblad 553ELX (1989), 503CX (1989) and 2003FCW (1988), well before the 200-series cameras arrived on the scene.

Ulrik

The first test report in a German photo magazine about the Rollei 6008 AF showed that the autofocus did not work properly which was said to be only a problem of this pre-production sample.

I had the Hasselblad H1 in my hands at the Photokina and played with it for a while. It seems to be the perfect camera for those who want or need a fast 6x4,5 AF SLR. Why do all people complain about this camera. It is a great piece of equipment. If you need it-buy it, if you don't need it, stay away from it.

When you buy a camera, chose the format first, then whether SLR or Rangefinder, the rest is simple.

Ulrik

The old SWC (before SWCM) is smaller because the newer models have distance plates between body and viewfinder and between body and tripod plate to accomodate polaroid backs. So my SWC uses less space in my photo backpack. I can't decide which viewfinder I prefer. The new type viewfinder shows some of the area outside the frame. I prefer CF and CFi ergonomics, the handling of shutter speed ring, aperture ring, filters and shade is better. So for me the perfect camera would be the 905 SWC minus the distance plates at the bottom and the top plus distortion-free viewfinder.

Ulrik

I once saw a motor driven second hand Hasselblad SWC for sale at a photo show. It was not more expensive than a standard SWC. It is not very attractive for the average user. Imagine how to handhold it with the bulky motor drive. You cannot hold it like other SWCs. And its dead ugly.

Ulrik

Robert,

do not mix things, there are the following SWC models:<p>

SWC non T* with chrome barrel and C-lens<p>

SWC non T* with black barrel and C-lens<p>

SWC with T* with black barrel and C-lens<p>

SWC/M with T* with black barrel and C-lens<p>

SWC/M with T* with black barrel and CF-lens<p>

903 SWC with T* with black barrel and CF-lens<p>

905 SWC with T* with black barrel and CFi-lens<p>

You will be happier with a T* lens because wide angle lenses are sensitive to flare, also the SWC. I have a SWC T* and it is wonderful.

<p>

Ulrik

According to Rick Nordin's book black 500 CM bodies became available in late 1972. Serial numbers of this year are approximately between UH 120000 and UH 134000.

Ulrik

I have a black barrel 150 mm CT* lens with a much earlier serial number. The serial number of your lens would fit to a CF lens from the 1980s. Something is wrong here. Anyway, enjoy your lens and take photos with it, whether or not it is a T* lens.

Ulrik

John,

consider also the Hasselblad 203 FE, its measurement characteristics might be more suited for your applications. And do me a personal favour and spell it "Rollei", not "Rollie" this is really annoying as it happens so often on this list.

Ulrik