I would like YOUR opinion.....

I have several medium format cameras, but NOT a Hasselblad. I'm now pondering the idea of
getting a Hasselblad. I'm familiar with the camera and I'm looking at getting either a
500 C/M or a 503 C/W. I'm also looking at the prism heads for either one. They have a versatility
like my Mamiyas, i.e. switchable backs, with or without prism heads and lens.

I've been to the Hasselblad Historical site, looked over the manuals and all. But, it's just like
when I was learning how to fly a plane; you can learn all you can from the books, but when
you actually FLY the plane, it's a totally different thing.

I really like the idea of the 500c/m being all mechanical, but I'm not sure if I want to limit myself
with it and NOT be able to maybe go digital one day, therefore I'm looking at the 503c/w. These
two cameras are in my price range on eBay.

To help me, I'd like to hear from those that have/had either camera. What do/did you like about
the 500 c/m or the 503 c/w? If you had to decide between the two, what would sway your
thinking into making your decision? What experiences have you had with the camera, good and
bad?

I know it all boils down to what I decide, but I'd like to hear from those that have owned/used
the cameras before and what you're likes and dislikes are about them.

I appreciate your help and information.

Steve

I was in a similar quandary a while ago. I ended up renting one for a week and using it everyday. I liked it and it produced excellent results but, in the end, I realized it was not the camera I was looking for. You need to date one before making the commitment....and there is no reason not to get intimate before marrying one either!

Dating Service....

Unfortunately, where I live, there is NO "dating service" for these cameras.

I'd too would be interested in what others have to say. I continue to think about getting a 500 C/M someday, but for the same amount of money I could get a number of lenses for my existing Bronica and end up with a more versatile system.

I wouldn't base my selection of a film camera on the ability of forward compatibility with that other stuff. The cost makes what you would spend on a 500 amount to chump change. Pick the one that you like for other, more immediate benefits.

spb854 said:

Unfortunately, where I live, there is NO "dating service" for these cameras.

Click to expand...

Find a friend who has one and is willing to loan it to you. If your friend is married to his and won't let you borrow it ask to go along on a shoot.

Best,

RT

spb854 said:

Unfortunately, where I live, there is NO "dating service" for these cameras.

Click to expand...

Call Keeble and Shuchat here in Palo-Alto. Talk to them. I think they might actually rent you a full Hassy kit for a week or two, send it to you via FedEx all for a fairly reasonable price.


http://www.kspphoto.com/



disclaimer: I have absolutely no connection to the above mentioned business...just a happy customer.

1-900-hot-hassy

The 'Big', important differences between the 500 C/M and 503 CW are:
- the 500 C/M's mirror vignets the viewfinder (and only the viewfinder - the top edge darkens) when longer lenses are used, or when lenses are used with extension tubes or bellows extension.
The 503 CW's mirror does not.

- The 503 CW offers TTL flash metering, when combined with a flash unit and SCA adapter that matches the system.
The 500 C/M does not.

- The 503 CW will take an add-on motor winder.
The 500 C/M does not.

Apart from that (and a few minor differences), and apart from age, obviously, they are the same.
So decide whether any of the above features are worth the extra money you need to pay for a 503 CW.
If so, it is the choice for you. If you can do without all of them, a 503 CW would still be nice , but a 500 C/M would do as well.

I have a Hasselblad 503 CX and I am really happy with it.

See if you can find:
Wilde, Ernst, The Hasselblad Manual, fifth edition, Focal Press, Boston 2000, ISBN 0-240-80385-X
in a local library or college library.

Steve

I have a Hasselblad 501 CM and I am really happy with it.

You can put a digital back on a 500C/M if you really thought you needed to blaspheme

I bought a "Hasselbladski" Kiev 88 outfit years ago to see if I would like the "feel" of that size, shape camera. I found the feel comfortable enough that I eventually bought a nice, clean, used 500C. The "C" is a bit quieter and also smoother. I shoot them both.

spb854 said:

I have several medium format cameras, but NOT a Hasselblad. I'm now pondering the idea of
getting a Hasselblad. I'm familiar with the camera and I'm looking at getting either a
500 C/M or a 503 C/W. I'm also looking at the prism heads for either one. They have a versatility
like my Mamiyas, i.e. switchable backs, with or without prism heads and lens.

I've been to the Hasselblad Historical site, looked over the manuals and all. But, it's just like
when I was learning how to fly a plane; you can learn all you can from the books, but when
you actually FLY the plane, it's a totally different thing.

I really like the idea of the 500c/m being all mechanical, but I'm not sure if I want to limit myself
with it and NOT be able to maybe go digital one day, therefore I'm looking at the 503c/w. These
two cameras are in my price range on eBay.

To help me, I'd like to hear from those that have/had either camera. What do/did you like about
the 500 c/m or the 503 c/w? If you had to decide between the two, what would sway your
thinking into making your decision? What experiences have you had with the camera, good and
bad?

I know it all boils down to what I decide, but I'd like to hear from those that have owned/used
the cameras before and what you're likes and dislikes are about them.

I appreciate your help and information.

Steve

Click to expand...

why wouldn't you be able to use a dig!t@l back on a 500cm? the v-mount is a universal mount, so any 500 series, 200 or 2000 series camera can be used, AFAIK. i personally use mamiya, and i hate that i have to get an adapter plate for my rz67, but its alright.

the 503cw just has the contacts, so if the back you are using has the appropriate contacts, it can record the metadata (shutter speed, aperture<if the lens has the digital contacts as well>) within the digital file on the back.

otherwise, i have worked for a few photographers who just connect the digital back to the lens's sync port via a cable. works flawlessly

the 500cm is a nice way to get into the hasselblad system, its a brute, can take a beating, and will still work. the 503cw has the electronic bits, and is more designed for the digital user. BOTH are mechanical cameras, they use the same lenses, but the 503cw has the newer mirror(same as the 501cm), so it doesn't vignette with some lenses, as the 500cm does. might be something to think about, if the thought of it bothers you that is

its all up to you though. i've used both, owned neither, loved both and hated both (i prefer 6x7), but in the end, you have to weigh what options the 503cw has versus those in the 500cm.

if i were you, I'd go with the 503cw. you can add a motor winder if you wanted to later, you have those contacts if you want the metadata, but personally, i'd look at the glass the most. that will be the most expensive part of the purchase over time. especially if you plan to use digital on it eventually.

-dan

A 500C/M is indeed compatible with several digital backs, most notably Hasselblad's CFV, which is designed to match the look and feel of the V-series. But lets be honest: you weren't really planning on getting a digital back, were you?

E76 said:

A 500C/M is indeed compatible with several digital backs, most notably Hasselblad's CFV, which is designed to match the look and feel of the V-series. But lets be honest: you weren't really planning on getting a digital back, were you?

Click to expand...

If you want to be an MF film snob, then the choices are Hasselblad or Rollei.


Come on, you know you really want to ...














Steve

Remember, it's not the bodies that empty your wallet but the lenses. Even today, most of the Carl Zeiss lenses sell for premium prices.

elekm said:

Remember, it's not the bodies that empty your wallet but the lenses. Even today, most of the Carl Zeiss lenses sell for premium prices.

Click to expand...

Buying one Hasselblad lens is like eating one potato chip.


...



Now the proud own of 28 mm [SWC 903], 50mm, 80mm, 150mm, 250mm, four extension tubes, and a 2x extender.

Steve

Sirius Glass said:

Buying one Hasselblad lens is like eating one potato chip.


...



Now the proud own of 28 mm [SWC 903], 50mm, 80mm, 150mm, 250mm, four extension tubes, and a 2x extender.

Steve

Click to expand...

....once you've started, the next problem is stopping!

I still haven't stopped after .. (oh, wait the wife is coming, better not write out the list )

Steve - Is the 28mm a custom fitment to the 903?

DanielStone said:

the 503cw just has the contacts, so if the back you are using has the appropriate contacts, it can record the metadata (shutter speed, aperture<if the lens has the digital contacts as well>) within the digital file on the back.

Click to expand...

I'm afraid that is not so.

The 503 CW does not have any contacts, no Databus.
(The 503 CWD doesn't have any either.)



There are two types of contacts found on some Hasselblads.

The first type is the Databus. It can not be used to record metadata.
It is used to transfer the aperture setting from the lens to the metering electonics in 200-series cameras. And the line coming in from the front stops there.
It is also used to transfer ISO data (and Zone settings) from the film back to the metering electronics inside those cameras.
It is never used to transmit anything back to whatever is behind the camera.

The other type is the one found on the 555 ELD.
These contact are used to synchronize camera and back. And for nothing else.
There can't be anything else, since the ELD has no electronics that knows anything about apertures or ISO settings. The shutterspeed ring does not even have a sensor, so it would be impossible to transmit shutterspeeds to a digital back.

For a while, the factory offered to turn the Databus on the rear of some 200-cameras into synchronisation contacts. That helped using the CFV back on those cameras.
But still no transfer of metadata for a back to record.

DanielStone said:

[...] the 503cw has the electronic bits, and is more designed for the digital user.

Click to expand...

So that it is perfectly clear: no. It hasn't and it isn't.


When considering using digital backs, any (!) model from the entire 500 C(...) series is exactly (!) the same as any other model from that series. From the oldest 500 C to the latest 503 CW.

And they all need to synchronize the back with the shutter through a flash synch cord, except when a Hasselblad CFV back is used.

The 500 EL(...)s are the same too, with the single exception being the 555 ELD.
That camera has contacts, but still can't use them for anything else but synchronisation, so it is not necessary to run a cord from flash terminal on the lens to the back. But that only works, of course, with digital backs interfacing with these contacts. Else you still need the cord.

If you want to do the try out thing, both Samy's in Los Angeles and Calumet can rent you a camera and ship it.

mpirie said:

....once you've started, the next problem is stopping!

I still haven't stopped after .. (oh, wait the wife is coming, better not write out the list )

Steve - Is the 28mm a custom fitment to the 903?

Click to expand...

ROTFLMAO!

In software this is called an "off by one" error. This happens when I use a laptop instead on my own desktop computer.

Steve

Steve,


Here is my spin on this:

I have a 500 C/M and a 500 ELM, one a 1975 series, the other 1976. Both are over 30 years old, ancient by today’s standards, but with TLC and a good CLA, they still function and will continue longer than I will.

The C/M as you know is manual, the ELM is motor driven. Love them both; use them both about 50-50!

Both the C/M and ELM have that issue with the smaller mirror, so there is some vignette problems with longer lens and ext. tubes… trust me in about 30 seconds you will get used to it.
Neither have TTL/OTF, I don’t need it, as I use hand held meter and when I use flash, a flash meter which gives me much more precision in establishing lighting ratios and exposure settings.

The ELM, without the battery(ies) and fuse, well you have a nice conversational paperweight!

The reason I got a ELM was not because I was a lazy SOB and found it a bother to wind the crank, but rather when film was plentiful, the motor drive allowed me more freedom with rapid shots and more spontaneity in a shoot. Well that was then, this is now. While 120 film is available, 220 film is harder to find (TXP 320 is the only 220 B&W film still around, C-41 and E-6 films are somewhat more plentiful), 70mm for a Hassy is no where to be found…. IMHO, don’t even consider a “motor driven” body unless you plan on using a A-24 220 film back, or at a minimum an A-16!
If you use a A12 (120 back) and your on “A” or “AS” (Automatic) you will be changing backs 4-5 times a minute, as most of the motor drives shoot about a frame a second. Changing backs that many times kinda takes the fun out of things. Shooting single frames, (O mode), well that’s a different story, but then why use a motor driven body unless you are too lazy to wind the crank.

Just to make clear, the 503 C/W is not a motor driven camera per se, the winder is optional and expensive.

The 500 C/M or the 503 C/W can take a digital back, and as others have said, are you sure you want a digital back? …. I’m asking not because this is an analog forum, but have you checked the prices of digi backs for a Hassy… don’t know about you, but I would rather pay my rent/mortgage and electric bills. Digi backs are expensive!

As for prism, are you going to use a hand held exposure meter, if not then you will need a metered finder, are you going to shoot 645, then you will need a 90 degree prism, unless you will only take horizontal shots. If you take vertical shots, well without a 90-degree prism, and unless you enjoy spending hours twisting and turning the camera body and/or yourself to compose the shot, trust me you need a 90-degree prism.

I have the standard waist level, the old Mag. Hood and a PM5 and a PM90 finder. None are metered as I use a hand held meter. The PM90 I use only when I shoot 645 (A16), otherwise I use the PM5 (45 degree finder) 85% of the time, I find that the PM5 magnifies more, so it appears brighter.

So once again, the 500 C/M or the 503 C/W can take a digi back, the 503 C/W can take an optional winder, if you use a hand held meter, or flash meter, TTL/OTF metering may not be necessary….

My opinion save yourself a lot of money, get a used 500 C/M, or if you really want a motor drive get a 500 ELM. Going newer to some extent, get a used 500 ELX, or a 553 ELX. The ELX series has the larger mirror and the TTL/OTF metering capability, and they too can take a digi back.

Hope this helps

All Hasselblads can take digital backs , I use Phase one backs with a small sync lead and it works perfectly ,depending on what you need and your budget I would start with a 45% prism ( the waist level finder might put you off Hasselblad for ever)and a 500CM , if you do decide to upgrade later then it is always handy to have a spare body ,the next question is lenses and from the point of optics there is not a massive difference between the old C lenses and the newer CF and CFi options, though the ergonomics are certainly improved in the later models you might well get a very decent price for the old T*option without sacrificing too much on the quality front

Well, I have to say that I've at least stimulated some brains with my inquiry.

I got a Hasselblad 503CX with an A12 back on it. According to the serial #,
it was made in 1993. It looks very pristine and, to me, beautiful. The back
was made in 1998 and is spotless. It came with a waist level finder on it.

Now I KNOW that beauty is only "skin" deep and the definitive decision as to
whether I've made a good purchase will be when I shoot a roll with it.

I also got an 80mm Planar 2.8 lens and a PME90 prism finder for it. I got a couple
of other things (i.e. lens hood, etc.) I thought I'd like too.

Now.....here's where I screwed up. I got a Winder CW for it. I was SO excited
about putting all these things together, but I was disappointed when I realized
that the winder will NOT fit it. Bummer! I'll probably keep it; never know when
a bargain for a 500C/M might show up.

The prism finder and the winder are pristine and they both work flawlessly. I know
the test with the prism finder will be when I shoot that first roll.

I even got the adapter for my Qflash for it.

I bought the book you suggested, Sirius. However, I bought it BEFORE you had
suggested it. I bought another book, "Medium Format Photography" by Mr. Wildi, years
ago and really like it, so I just searched Amazon for his name, did a little research
and found which edition I thought would be the best for what I was looking for.
Must have been kizmit, huh?

Oh, I also bought a Hasselblad case for the camera and gear. Looks like a small
suitcase.

Anyway, I can't WAIT to shoot a roll through it. And, BTW, I STILL love my Mamiyas
(got 2 of them) and my Pentax 6 x 7 and my Koni-Omega Rapid M.

This will probably be my last camera purchase for quite a while. I've got plenty to play
with, a deep freeze FULL of film (mostly BW), a Jobo processor and plenty of chemicals.
All I need NOW.....is the time to play.

I guess I'll go and update my profile and add the Hassy now. lol

Thanks to ALL that have given opinions, advice and contributed to this thread. Whether
it ends now......or it's continued.....I'll keep my eye on it to glean ANY wisdom
that might appear.

So, as I've said to several dates, "Let's go in the darkroom and see what develops!"

Steve