Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Camera Building, Repairs & Modification' started by Mustafa Umut Sarac, Apr 30, 2011.
Thank you Stuart Walker for your help.
Hasselblad Flexbody Detailed Pictures 1
Is this something you made??? If so very impressive!
Edit: nvm I didn't know this existed
very nice. but why? are you selling?
What a lovely piece of kit! I didn't realize Hasselblad had made such a beast.
No , Neither this is not my camera nor I am selling. I am dreaming a similar camera making project and I posted this as a document and information source. I will try to find help to draw this camera to computer and than put a STL file to the forums for anybody wants it , order a rapid prototyping print from ABS or Epoxy. Rapid prototyping machines print plastic layer on layer and make it produce any very complex plastic working part cheaper.
These are for reverse engineering.
The cost of reverse engineering and manufacturing will exceed the cost of buying the system.
Such a pity the run of these was short before being discontinued.
Anyone know the reason?
Was it poor sales or compromised image quality not up to Hasselblad's stringent standards?
Yes , it is difficult but finding an freelance engineer from India or China nowadays costs few hundred dollars.
I wanted to reverse engineer the Luigi Colani America's Cup yacht design for 6 meter scale model and I asked to a Turkish Firm cost 1000 dollars and two weeks. I found someone from India from engineering forums , He modelled the boat in one day and cost was only 100 dollars.
RP is cheap for small to medium sized objects too.
I dont see any reason to cost of product exceed 1/6 , if you are lucky and if you have will to send write tons of e mails to the engineer. They pay these engineers 15 dollars or less daily.
May be final part to part precise drawing could be done at Ukraine and similar cost with a broken Kiev as a guide.
Possibilities are endless with these prices , thats what American Companies do.
If possibilities are endless, why is reverse engineering needed?
I always figured once you put Horseman rollfilm back (with a winding lever on it ) and a lens with some coverage to use the movements, there would not be much "Hasselblad" to it anymore
Always thought I needed one... just the coverage of the lenses I use isn't much.
I'm not getting your point?
Why bother? I have better things to think about.
Actually now I see the wind crank. For a while there I thought they had marketed that for the digital crowd. Now I see it is a film camera.
Here are some color pictures of the 'Flexbody' and a list of the movements available with various lenses:
Well the "Flexbody" allows use of the Zeiss glass for hasselblad & filmbacks that some already own. Although movements are indeed limited.
I believe it used a smaller image area by way of a mask but you could remove the mask it desired to get full 6x6. (I'm not 100% sure of specifics on this so please no one flame me on this, I got enough of that on the Cindy Sherman thread)
Okay I'm kindding about the flame remark. When someone that knows specifics please set me straight.
Now the "ARCbody" indeed uses a Rodenstock lens that affords a lot more movements.
I would image the Flexbody would still be awesome for portraiture but maybe not architecture.
Looks like a very nice project.
Just ni case you need ideas, here's a link to a less ambitious project, built by a member of the French LF forum :