If you plan to use longer focal length lenses, I suggest looking into the 501 or later series of cameras. The older cameras will cut off the image in the viewfinder,
and even though it doesn't affect the image on the film, still it is difficult to compose when part of the frame is not viewable.
Hmm, I've read for years and years about cutoff with longer lenses on older Hassey bodies. I use a 250mm on my 500C/M, PM45 prism, acute-matte screen, and the only thing I've ever noticed is a slight darkening in the upper corners. The entire image can be seen, tough. Perhaps it's because I don't typically focus longer focal lengths on close objects? Just curious...are you all saying the image is literally cutoff? As in you can't see it at all?
The thing with Hasselblad is that they are often used by pros who will run them into the ground. Collectors take care of their cameras, because that's what they care about. Pros abuse the hell out of them, because they only care about the getting the shot.
You are absolutely correct. And that's a good tip to assess wear. I shouldn't have been so hyperbolic. I was just stating that they are expensive cameras, and as such more likely to be owned by a professional. And a lot of professionals (but certainly not all) tend to wear out their gear and replace them a lot more often than most hobbyists and collectors.This is not a universal truth though.
I have been using Hasselblad professionally since 1988 and I have always taken care of the gear. One of the reasons for this is that if you abuse your gear in the so called modality of "Getting the Shot" you may very well not get the shot at all. All my Hasselblad gear is very well maintained, especially now it is no longer made...this is one of the reasons I have not 1-2 501CM bodies but 4 and some dozen A-12 backs.
One of the first things my mentors taught me in the early days in looking for Hasselblad gear in good condition was both lens mount and film magazine wear on the body. If it was all banged up, then you have a pretty good indicator of overall wear and tear since it either takes years of regular use or carelessness to make that happen. Specifically, if the ridge that is part of the light seal on the rear of the camera body is more than just paint worn off but shows lots of dings in the metal, that shows the film backs were hastily put on and taken off. You can always re-paint the ridge, you can not build it back up again once the metal has been shaved off.
My two cents.
Wow, thank you everyone for your comments and advice. I have inspected the 503CX and it looks like a pretty good camera. With very minimal signs of use around the body and the back. The lens is in a fantastic shape too. I was hoping to get it for around £1100, but the seller was pretty firm on the £1250. Do you guys think that it's a good price for a very good condition 503CX with 80mm CF lens. Both are made in the late 80s. The back has the matching serial too. The camera was previously purchased from a camera shop in France , but there are no records of past CLA.
I think the prices are too high, checkout KEH.com
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?