Older Hasselblad lenses--possible service issues?

[Moopheus]

So I seem to have just acquired a Hasselblad, a 503cx with the usual 80mm lens. At some point I will likely want more lenses for it. I see that some of the older lenses generally sell for less money than newer lenses, and wonder if it is worth buying them. In particular, I wonder if lenses with Synchro-Compur shutters are going to be serviceable. With large-format shutters, Synchro-Compur parts have become scarce and a broken shutter may be unrepairable. Is the situation for Hasselblad lenses the same?

 

[Sirius Glass]

If you stick to CF or later lenses, almost all of those lenses use B60 filters while the C lenses use mainly B50 filters. Therefore if you stick to CF or later lenses you only need one set of filters for almost all lenses except for a Skylight or UV filter for each lens.
It may be harder to get parts for C lenses, especially the spring. In some cases you may need a lens to sacrifice for parts.
I have all CF lenses, including the 903 SWC, except for the f/8 C 500mm lens, since I got it for such a good price, less than $400US while a CF lens of similar quality would have been over $1700US.

 

[bdial]

It is true that a broken shutter in the older series lens MAY be unrepairable. But not all service requires new parts or even any parts.
Some of the repair specialists have stocks of common parts.
Buying the older lenses can be a way to save some money, OTH, it's perhaps a "you get what you pay for" situation. New parts are currently available for the newer series lenses (so I understand). They are generally slightly better optically than the older counterparts, and the filter rings are sized consistently, which makes life easier for obtaining filters. Many people like the ergonomics of the newer lenses better as well.

I bought a 80mm C T* lens a few years ago at a good price, had it serviced successfully, and I'm figuring that it will continue to work well for me for some time to come. In my kit, I have two C series, one CF, and lots of filters.

 

[Moopheus]

Oh, I know--as long as a shutter can be kept going with a CLA, you're good to go. But the camera came with a CF type, and sounds like it would be advantageous to stick with the same type as much as possible. Now I also face the serious aesthetic conundrum of whether I can have a black back to go on a chrome body.

 

[Jerevan]

Concerning the aesthetic issue: if you use it well enough, the ensuing paint loss will reveal chrome underneath. At least from what I have seen of older backs.

 

[bdial]

I have the same problem the other way around, a black body, but only chrome backs.
Sometimes I just close my eyes and make a leap of faith.

 

[Alan Gales]

Since you have a later 80mm why would you want older lenses that take a different filter size? Two sets of filters for Hasselblad gets expensive and robs you of savings buying the older lenses.

One exception might be the older chrome 150mm lens. They are said to be not as biting sharp as the newer 150mm and desirable for portraiture. The only filter you might want would be a Softer 1 for portraits of women of a certain age.

 

[Moopheus]

Concerning the aesthetic issue: if you use it well enough, the ensuing paint loss will reveal chrome underneath. At least from what I have seen of older backs.

I'd presume what is revealed is bare metal and not chrome. Painting over chrome would seem like a wasteful manufacturing procedure, resulting in a more expensive product, not less.

 

[frank]

A critical part that is no longer made (I was told) is the main shutter spring in C and C T* lenses.
Hasselblad no longer services these lenses, but independent repair shops will and some have an inventory of necessary parts.

 

[Jerevan]

I'd presume what is revealed is bare metal and not chrome. Painting over chrome would seem like a wasteful manufacturing procedure, resulting in a more expensive product, not less.

Perhaps - it was a while ago I handled one of the earlier backs, but it at least looked shiny/chromed - I remember it because it seemed odd to me. Ideas about what is efficient or not in manufacturing has no dobut changed over time. Perhaps it was the nickel I saw.

 

[shutterfinger]

I'm not a Hasselblad person and am not familiar with them or their lens other than the lens were made by Zeiss.
I have serviced many Compur, Compur Rapid, and Synchro Compur shutters for large format cameras. The same shutters were used on many medium format folders also.
Compur shutters in all their versions are very reliable and will only need parts or replacement under 2 conditions.
Condition 1: the shutter was run until it stopped working. It may return to working status with 1 to 2 stop slow fast speeds and/or the slower speeds being 1/3 to 1/2 stop off, usually slow.
Condition 2: the shutter has been maintained but has 10,000,000 or more cock/release cycles in which case it is worn out.

A good Compur shutter will have speeds from 1 second to 1/100-1/125 in tolerance and no more than 1/2 stop slow up to 1/250 with 1/400-1/500 up to 1 stop slow. Speed tolerance for Synchro Compur shutters is 15% for all speeds up to 1/125, 20% for speeds over 1/125.

 

[JOR]

Mainsprings on older Synchro-Compurs are an issue. They have to withstand being cocked for years (see separate threads on whether to release them before storage). But I heard a rumour that a workshop somewhere in India manufactures springs to (apparently) the original specification, heat-treated. I asked around for the source but, if it's true, it's a closely-guarded secret.
We must presume that mainsprings on Prontors in later lenses will ultimately become a problem. Military users typically specify that spares will be available for fifteen years.