I want A Hasselblad. Talk Me Out Of It!

You'll be endlessly asked, "Is that a Hasselblad", and you will NOT be able to snicker on this site because you were shooting with a Speed Graphic. It will ruin your life and make you bitter...

David R Williams said:

...the shutter release button not only fires the mirror, lens shutter and aperture, when it's depressed it holds the secondary shutter open (at the back of the body, which prevents light from getting to the film when the lens shutter is open for viewing), so an overly quick release of the main shutter button may allow this shutter to close before the lens shutter has completed it's timed exposure at long exposure times. These exposure times are generally marked with an orange line on the shutter speed ring on more recent lenses to act as a subtle reminder.

Work methodically, think about what and how you're shooting, and it'll rarely/never happen.

Click to expand...

And I have plenty of experience working methodically with my LF cameras! Cheers!

bdial said:

If mirror blackout is a concern, get an EL version, the newer ones, 553 ELX, for example, use AA batteries, no worries about adapters for worn out nicads.
Mirror return isn’t as fast as a 35, but you won’t get bored waiting to see through the viewfinder between shots either.
The EL’s are cheaper too.

So, lighter and much smaller than your RB.
No parallax to contend with when working close like the TLR’S.
The biggest downside, compared to what you’re used to may be the lack of a bellows, for getting close. For that you need a Rollie instead.

Go for it, you know you want to.

Click to expand...

Yes, the 553ELX was the last body I bought and I really like it a lot. It was actually cheaper than a well used 500C.

Don_ih said:

Get one, but make sure it's been recently serviced (and not by a clown).

There's no better medium format camera.

Be prepared to spend too much on lenses.

Click to expand...

The one I have my eye on has been serviced by a guy who knows what he is doing.

You've been saving up for a Hasselblad for decades. You just didn't know it. You're retired, so guess what, there isn't anything to save up for any more. It won't be too many more years before you won't want to be toting that beast around Riverview, so get it now.

MattKing said:

As I think your camera source friend is also my friend, I guess I better encourage you to get it Andrew

Click to expand...

You nailed it. I've know him for a long time, too. Before I got hired permanently in the district, I subbed for him. You also introduced him to the guy who serviced his camera, correct?

Andrew O'Neill said:

You nailed it. I've know him for a long time, too. Before I got hired permanently in the district, I subbed for him. You also introduced him to the guy who serviced his camera, correct?

Click to expand...

Sounds like a done deal!

mshchem said:

Sounds like a done deal!

Click to expand...

We shall see!

Andrew O'Neill said:

And I have plenty of experience working methodically with my LF cameras! Cheers!

Click to expand...

If you can operate an RB67 then the Hasselblad will be like switching to driving an automatic transmission car. Of course I guess I should be telling you that I don't think you can handle operating the terribly complicated and trouble prone Hasselblad and you should just stick with your RB67. Is that what you wanted to hear?

mshchem said:

If you don't care about ttl the 501cm is lovely, the kit lens 80mm CB is fantastic.

Click to expand...

Arthurwg said:

Also recommend the 60mm lens, as your first, either the CB or CF versions, which are optically identical.

Click to expand...

Actually, they are slightly different in several ways. CB is the budget lens with 1 fewer lens elements and less internal reflection coating. It still is reported to be a decent performer.

Edit: This is not correct. Applies to 80mm, not 60mm lenses. My profound apologies.

John Wiegerink said:

If you can operate an RB67 then the Hasselblad will be like switching to driving an automatic transmission car. Of course I guess I should be telling you that I don't think you can handle operating the terribly complicated and trouble prone Hasselblad and you should just stick with your RB67. Is that what you wanted to hear?

Click to expand...

No!

Andrew O'Neill said:

As the title of this thread states... Sirius Glass, stay out of this!

Click to expand...

I own two bodies, three backs, and five lenses. I also worked for a large pro rental place for a few years and saw how these cameras wore with heavy use. I know whereof I speak.

PRO

• You buy these for the optics. Period. There are way slicker bodies and MF systems, but the breadth and quality of 'Blad lenses is without peer, at least not with any camera that you can currently get serviced. (The Rollei SL66 used many of the same lens designs but try getting one of those repaired.)
  
  
• My experience is that they are very reliable when treated properly and work beautifully in temp extremes
  
  
• No electronics to fail, at least on the 500, 500C, 501C/M bodies

CON

• Mirror blackout
• Weight
• Cost
• You have to be able to "see" properly in square format

Just buy one already. You want one, you know you want to. Feeeeeeeeel the GAS ...

Thank you, chuckroast!

Andrew O'Neill said:

And I have plenty of experience working methodically with my LF cameras! Cheers!

Click to expand...

I know, as your videos have been a nearly endless source of inspiration and reconsideration of my own processes in shooting.

BrianShaw said:

Actually, they are slightly different in several ways. CB is the budget lens with 1 fewer lens elements and less internal reflection coating. It still is reported to be a decent performer.

Click to expand...

Actually, that's the 80mm that differs between the CF and CB - the 60mm CB and CF are optically identical and the 60CB incorporated the improvements that subsequently became part of the CFi updates.

Andrew O'Neill said:

Thank you, chuckroast!

Click to expand...

YW

A few other thoughts. If you buy one, these cameras thrive on use, and get grouchy with lack of use. Once every couple months or so, I fire every lens at 1' and 1/500 using both bodies and every back in the process. This will reduce the likelihood of the lubricant packing up.

(I similarly exercise every other single camera and shutter in my stable.)

When you do need service, Barn Owl Cameras in the US took up the business from the most accomplished 'Blad guy around when he passed away, David Odess. I don't know how repairs are treated under the current tariff situation, but they do good work. They rebuilt my 100mm f/3.5 to pretty much perfection.

If you only want to start with one lens, I cannot recommend the 60mm f/3.5 Distagon enough. It's just a razor sharp, contrasty shooter. My next choice would be the 120mm f/4 Makro Planar. If you don't already have the 80mm AND you don't need the extra lens speed, I'd prefer the 100mm f/3.5 Planar over the 80mm f/2.8 Planar. The 100mm is better optimized for medium and long distance and is probably the sharpest lens Hassy ever made (although the 180mm comes close).

Here is the 100mm at work - Scan of sliver print:

FYI, regarding camera in-hand weight:

501C/M with focusing hood, Planar CFE 2.8 /80 mm, film magazine A12: 1565 g (3 lb 7 oz) = quite comfortable on a shoulder strap or in-hand
Camera body only: 590 g (1 lb 5 oz)

By comparison, my digital bludgeon/brick:
Z9 + 50/1.2 or 35/1.2: 1340g + ~1060g = strong forearms

Andrew O'Neill said:

You nailed it. I've know him for a long time, too. Before I got hired permanently in the district, I subbed for him. You also introduced him to the guy who serviced his camera, correct?

Click to expand...

I expect so - when we last conversed about it, the offer to service it had just been extended.
If you came to more Group meetings Andrew, you would have met him too

David R Williams said:

By comparison, my digital bludgeon/brick:
Z9 + 50/1.2 or 35/1.2: 1340g + ~1060g = strong forearms

Click to expand...

Hot (slightly off topic) take: most complaints about camera weight are more a complaint about the strap or ergonomics. My mamiya with a "small" lens weighs in at around 2600g and even that is surprisingly comfortable to wear around with a nice wide strap. Meanwhile my 1500g Sony a7iii with lens can kinda suck with the included strap.

thinkbrown said:

Hot (slightly off topic) take: most complaints about camera weight are more a complaint about the strap or ergonomics. My mamiya with a "small" lens weighs in at around 2600g and even that is surprisingly comfortable to wear around with a nice wide strap. Meanwhile my 1500g Sony a7iii with lens can kinda suck with the included strap.

Click to expand...

Absolutely!

...and generally, even the relatively narrow factory Hasselblad strap is a pretty nice carry with most open-carry setups within this system, with a nice and secure downward pointing position. Adding a prism can become a bit much and does change its balance.

Andy, you will find that there's about a 50/50 split between those who love their Hasselblad and those who loathe the camera. People have spoken about the features they find cumbersome and the various design aspects they find unworkable. For those people, they are legitimate complaints.

I have owned a mid-1980s 500 C/M for about a decade and I'm one of those who loves this camera. But then I spent a lot of time in commercial studio settings between 1985 and 1995 using the 500 C/M, so I'm very familiar with it and know what its strengths and weaknesses are. But the camera fits my personality and working habits to a T. (or should I say T* ?) I would say that if you've handled one and like how it works, then go for it. Working with a 6x6 SLR is pleasant business, and the Planar (and other) lenses are as good as they get.

John Wiegerink said:

If you can operate an RB67 then the Hasselblad will be like switching to driving an automatic transmission car. Of course I guess I should be telling you that I don't think you can handle operating the terribly complicated and trouble prone Hasselblad and you should just stick with your RB67. Is that what you wanted to hear?

Click to expand...

Why do you consider them "trouble prone". I've owned three different ones personally and seen dozens more in a rental shop abused by pro photographers day in and day out. They were pretty much utterly reliable. At some point, the do require service, but I never saw anything remarkable in frequency of repairs vs. anything else.

Beyond the usual CLA and light trap replacements for the backs, the only problem with the older bodies was that that back baffles have to be replaced after many years because the flocking material starts to come off.

The only other problem I've seen is people who can't be bothered to read the manual and try to forcibly mount or unmount an uncocked lens or body with each other. But that's user error.

Waaaaiiiiit!

Take the 2000fc/m off of my hands.

Hasselblad...
Hmmmm. Pass.

The 500C/M with an 80mm Planar was my first (dented, bruised and squeaky) MF camera in 1988. The photography group I was a member of at that time had a few other accomplished users of Hasselblad, and the image quality of pinned up enlargements held audiences in rapture at group exhibition nights. Personally I found the nudes troubling, as the lenses showed up every little fold, every big bulge and every serpentine wrinkle.

In the landscape genre, the square frame can be restrictive, although many accomplished practitioners using the Hassy system do exploit this restriction. I do too, as a user of the Zero Image multiformat pinhole cameras where the 6x6 format in have set forces me to re-examine and re-fit scenes thst were so easily photographed with a larger format.

So it is true, essentially the camera is asking you to set the subject to one frame dimension. If you get a bigger format, like 6x7, you can easily crop the image to 6x6 or 6x4.5 – I crop a lot of images from 6x7 to 6x6 (I call it the "petite frame"), but some vast open or close-in detailed scenes require the fill size of 6x7. I suspect that you, as a large format user, will appreciate the flexibility and liberty of cropping from larger frame sizes. I see no real advantage to interchangeable backs, but that is my very long voice of experience speaking. YMMV.

True dinks, all early 500C/M Hasselblad bodies are getting on, and few will escape scrutiny of heavy use use and abuse, advanced wear, hack repairs and in the more concerning cases, a re-mitre of the mirror box post-event (which could be anything, but a heavy fall (or an exasperated toss from an irritated user...) is a prime suspect).

My Hassy was sold in 1990 as I could not warm to it's quirky design and only able to afford the one lens (back then, as a uni student!). It was replaced by a Horseman 45FA (gifted to me from the estate of a veteran photographer who mentored me in the early 1980s to late-1990s); that camera proved much more useful in the landscape discipline and educational too, in understanding the effect of movements.

If you want one and you can afford it, you only live once.