Troubleshooting a 500CM

[LMNOP]

My 500C/M, 501C, and 553ELX have no foam on the little tabs that support the mirror (and my photos are sharp). As far as I can tell, there has never been foam there.

The lowering of the mirror is probably damped somehow, probably with foam, but I can't see it.

So - is the conclusion your photos really are sharp after all and it's just a scanner issue?

The scanner conclusion is not... conclusive, yet! I have a PM about a potential dark room connection in my area, so that may prove extremely helpful. I think printing from the negative is the only way to find out. That and I want to see how this foam is looking.

 

[canuhead]

can't recall if it's been suggested but I would try using a loupe on the ground glass as a test. someone mentioned the ruler test right ?

 

[Luis-F-S]

I cant find any mirror foam info on the forum or online. Anyone have input?

Maybe there isn't supposed to be any? You don't use a scanner to look at negatives you use a loupe and a light table.

 

[LMNOP]

Alright,

I have done closer inspections of the foam, etc and have another two rolls on my hands. I am starting to believe that the issue was with the scanning after all. I won't get into details, but I have tried some new things and I am starting to see something sharper. Luckily, I think the camera is fine.

 

[film_man]

One thing I learned with scanning things myself is that if you really want to see what a camera can do, unless you can wet print the only way to get a true measure is to send the film to a pro lab that can scan proper (and not many pro labs can do that). When I got my first film back from my current lab it was as if I bought a new camera, brain and pair of eyes. In the end, no amount of playing with a flatbed at home will get anyone anywhere close to something like a Noritsu or Frontier scan.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Or making a contact print does not require a lot of equipment.

 

[darkprints]

Can anyone describe where the mirror foam would be seen?

KEH told me that I can pursue repair but they want me to check that out first because they said due to its age that part should be replaced by now if it hasnt been already, making me think that KEH believes it is likely defective.

I cant find a tutorial on this inspection.

The mirror is set in a metal frame. The foam is between the mirror and the frame and helps to damp the mirror when it goes up. When the foam disintegrates, the mirror is no longer in the precise position it should be.

The metal frame has tabs that hold the mirror in place - bend the tabs (carefully) and the mirror will come out and you can replace the dead foam.

I had the same problem - shots no longer in focus. The clue was that I could hear a rattling sound when the mirror was down....

 

[HiHoSilver]

Can anyone describe where the mirror foam would be seen?
...

I cant find a tutorial on this inspection.

I posted once or twice about the problems I had w/ 500 when first purchased. There were a couple of things, but one was the mirror foam, which is not alway visible between the mirror & the very light metal frame it rides in. When speaking w/ Bill Maxwell, he had me take a Q-tip & gently press at the corners, bottom & top of the mirror. It was supposed to have a very slight 'give', not to be confused w/ the bending of the arms that swing it up & down. The arms on mine would bend before there was any give. Then, when the tech measured the body for squareness on a factory jig & Starrett dial indicator, its variance from square was about twice the factory limit. Both Bill, and the local Tech (Paul at Associated Camera in Portland, OR) have been factory service for blad for 30 yrs. Bill called Paul to talk about my camera - knowing one of his costly screens were going in. Since the service, any soft focus has been my old eyes.

One member posted that with decades of use, he still finds the blad a bit harder to nail focus on. I appreciate him saying that. Practice has made it easier, but I find crisp focus easier on other cameras. 'Love the blad, but like any tool, its a compromise. My ideal would be a Mami 6 that took the 43mm lens from the Mami 7 and was built as well as the blad.

 

[phil1inamillion]

focus:

There have been some excellent suggestions on the thread, but the most likely explanation in focus error (as other posters have metioned) is that blad's are very hard to focus! i have used many different medium format cameras over the years and they are by far the hardest to get in focus reliably. I have being using a bad for 10 years now, (and love it) but at the start .... I found it took about 10 rolls before I got the hang of focusing it reliably. (and I had spent years using other medium format systems prior to this) ...there just seems to be a lot of play in the in the 'in focus range in the viewfinder' that you don't get with other systems. Also, as the Zeiss lenses are so amazingly sharp when in focus, any slight error is very noticeable. the most reliable way is to use a tripod (plus pre-release on medium-slow exposure times) and the magnifier with the waist level finder, and practice, you do develop a feel for the focus in the eventually.

rattling noise:

I had a strange rattling noise, which developed on by 500cm body, was just about to take apart and investigate when I realised it was just the shutter button sliding in and out slightly due to gravity! hold your finger over the button to check this before you get the screwdrivers out!

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hey APUG,


Thank you to everyone who had input on the "4th roll with Hasselblad" thread. I've learned a lot this month about the 500CM and I am more excited to shoot with this thing than ever. I'm on my 8th roll, still have some negatives I have yet to see, but I am about ready to throw the towel in on this one. I've yet to see anything superbly sharp, and in some cases it seems that I am close, but no cigar. At first I thought that the focus was just slightly beyond where I would like it to be, but I am starting to think its not completely sharp anywhere. I spoke with KEH today, and they said it could be the way the focusing screen is shimmed, or the foam that the mirror rests on. They did not provide any trouble shooting or solutions that could avoid mailing this back to them. The thing I realized today is that it could somehow be my scanner, though I have no other way of seeing these negatives. I am not here to discuss scanning methods, as that is not what APUG is for, but if anyone has something related to that they'd like to share, please PM me, I would appreciate it. Other than that, I wonder if there is a way I can examine the sharpness somehow and determine what I am getting exactly.


I'm looking for any tips you may have. Any way that I can rule out one thing or another, without wasting much more film. If I need to pursue repair, that is fine, but this could all be my own fault somehow.


Thank you in advance, or maybe I'll just quit complaining.

The Hasselblad500 series are wonderful cameras and Zeiss made quite a few excellent lenses for it. The only issue with them is that they are not the easiest to focus.All I can recommend is to get a good and well-mounted screen and try different finders to see which works best for you.Most lenses for the Hassy have their sweet spot at around f/11.stopping down further gets you into diffraction blur.observe negatives with an 8x loupe on a simple lighttable.