Hasselblad EL/M

[Hassasin]

You are incorrect.
The "D" version of Acute Matte was introduced in 1996, followed by other variations in 1997. The 553ELX, on the other hand, was introduced in 1988.

Noticed in mean time

 

[Alexander6x6]

Well, I may be wrong on D being originally supplied with 553ELX. I got it with D screen in new condition some 6+ years ago, boxed etc. so yes I assumed that.

The most likely scenario is that you have a 553 ELX that was upgraded by the previous user.

I have both D and non-D, there is a difference. I can say that.

Could you tell me how exactly to see the difference between the two screens? I have a D and a non-D, but I could not see a difference at all.

Back to your $600 deal, screen aside, I misread your post. Not sure what "functional" means. Motorised bodies were a stable of professional studios. Many got abused to no end. SO am not sure what that functional relates.

There are a lot of nonfunctional motorised bodies on eBay that are offered as "no batteries included" or "not tested"

 

[Alexander6x6]

Here is the picture that helps me a lot to identify the Acute Matte D and non-D screens

 

[Hassasin]

The most likely scenario is that you have a 553 ELX that was upgraded by the previous user.



Could you tell me how exactly to see the difference between the two screens? I have a D and a non-D, but I could not see a difference at all.



There are a lot of nonfunctional motorised bodies on eBay that are offered as "no batteries included" or "not tested"

I meant what kind of suffering the body went through. One thing it functions, another how used is it. Some are at a verge of collapsing from wear in pro use. I typically check back plate and lens mount. Both show condition of black coating, good for me to stay away from some examples.

 

[Hassasin]

The most likely scenario is that you have a 553 ELX that was upgraded by the previous user.



Could you tell me how exactly to see the difference between the two screens? I have a D and a non-D, but I could not see a difference at all.



There are a lot of nonfunctional motorised bodies on eBay that are offered as "no batteries included" or "not tested"

You're not the only one who can't tell the difference between D and non-D. I can't explain it either way. As is the case with some who have difficulty focusing Hass with any screen, or AM one vs. older variety etc. same for D vs. non-D, and I think it can only be noticed under specific conditions.

The difference would show in how image comes into focus, the very point of focus.

I'll be frank saying I use screen with split image, and that split is what gives me confidence. And do not believe overspending on D screen, or even on first AM is worth the current asking price. But it will help in dim light, that I won't question.

In the end AM screens have a market value above all others, so it can be easily sold at probably non loss or better. So I think it is prudent do look for one, try it, then exchange for something else, perhaps more useful.

 

[MARTIE]

It's pretty much impossible to tell some of the screens apart, also in-hand, without having known reference screens at hand.

I think, I have a good understanding of my screens by using a combination of;
The various Hasselblad screen catalogue pictures.
A camera and known screen/s, such as the D screen.
A light table.
A bright halogen type light source.

Even with all of the above, it can still feel like a bit of a gamble.

On a positive note, IMHO, there is negligible difference in-use between the 'plain' variety of screens, with or without markings, apart from price!
So, the greatest risk is being ripped off, sadly.

 

[Alexander6x6]

I have noticed that many auctions have the title "Acute Matte" in an original box, but the standard screen 42200 is put in instead of the Acute Matte. This is what a typical user would do by swapping the screens.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

As a potential buyer and a newbie, would you be willing to pay $600 for an original 553ELX or would you rather pay half of that for a functional body with an old screen?

I would much rather pay the $600 with the original equipment. Cheap is often not cheap in the long run.

 

[Alexander6x6]

I would much rather pay the $600 with the original equipment. Cheap is often not cheap in the long run.

you say that because you are not a newbie. A young enthusiast would pay rather a half or even less having no idea why Acute Matte is so expensive.

 

[Arthurwg]

My 555 came with a 42215 D.

 

[MattKing]

Vocabulary change:

So if it doesn't have one, some scum bag has cannibalized it to maximize his slimy profit rather than sell the package the right way.

@Kodachromeguy ,
Moderator hat on:
Please tone down the language here.
Particularly as you don't know anything definitive about how this camera got the way it is.
Or about who sold it.
For example, have you ever dealt with an executor selling assets from an estate that they aren't particularly familiar with?
Or someone who swapped the screens in wo cameras so there favorite had the best screen, an the backup was fine for occasional use?
Measured comments/complains about trends in the marketplace are fine.