Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,956   Posts: 1,522,906   Online: 1178
      
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456
Results 51 to 57 of 57

Thread: Doomed?

  1. #51

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    near Ottawa, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    215
    Quote Originally Posted by Antje View Post
    Wow, thanks a lot! That answered a few burning questions I had. Another one just popped up: Do you think it's worth getting a CM over a C? The difference is the interchangeable screen, isn't it?

    Antje
    Yup, it's mostly that and the 500 CM's are a bit "younger". Although, changing the screen is not totally impossible with the 500C (but it's definitely NOT userfriendly and better left to a repair person). The 500CM appeared in the 60's, and there are even a few "C" marked Hassy's which are really CM's (from the transition periods). Later followed the 501 C/M, which AFAIK added the gliding mirror mechanism. They are all fine machines and basically it all boils down to the amount of cash you are willing to spend. Heck, my 500C of 1959 vintage is working perfectly fine and is tough as a rock. The 503 cameras are a lot more expensive (having TTL capability for dedicated flashes and accept motorwinders). I have a 503CW (which I bought in one of those moments of temporary insanity), but it really isn't that much more camera than the 500 (aside from it's ego boosting powers ).
    I don't really know how the current prices for used equipment are in Germany (I left the home country some ten years ago ). But aren't Rollei's not more common in Europe? Maybe they would be another alternative for your entry into the world of 6x6 SLR cameras.

    Quote Originally Posted by mikebarger
    But I actually like the old peep holes (12 back) better. I think it is a little faster loading since you don't have to lline up the arrow, just wind until you get to the number 1 on the paper backing looking through the peep hole.
    To each their own I guess . I could never stand the bullet hole versions, and am actually much faster loading the newer backs (years of assisting in a commercial studio hones the skills ).
    [SIZE=1]Tiptoeing through life's grand theater - and falling down flat.[/SIZE]

  2. #52
    André E.C.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Finland
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,520
    Images
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by big_ben_blue View Post
    But aren't Rollei's not more common in Europe?.
    Where the heck this assumption came from?

    Rollei is as common as Hasselblad, Pentax, Contax, Mamiya, Bronica or any other MF brand in Europe.

    Cheers

    André

  3. #53
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,240
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    435
    I would definitely get the CM over the C - the reason being age, and repairability. The C cameras are essentially non-supported by Hasselblad now, and are dependent upon local repair folks who have the ability to either scrounge parts or recreate them. Same with the non-A series film backs, and the chrome C lenses. Many C- model camera bodies are over 50 years old, and that increases the probability that they've been used by a pro (or not-so-pro) wedding photographer at some point in their career. The probability of your needing a repair at some point in your ownership of it that will cost more than what you paid for the camera is high. I used to have a 500 C (10+ years ago) that developed dry rot in the internal rubber bushings, and the light baffles behind the mirror wouldn't open fully for short exposures, and for very long exposures, they could flop back down again. This was a repair in the neighborhood of $500 USD.

  4. #54
    Bromo33333's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    669
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera View Post
    I would definitely get the CM over the C - the reason being age, and repairability. The C cameras are essentially non-supported by Hasselblad now, and are dependent upon local repair folks who have the ability to either scrounge parts or recreate them. Same with the non-A series film backs, and the chrome C lenses. Many C- model camera bodies are over 50 years old, and that increases the probability that they've been used by a pro (or not-so-pro) wedding photographer at some point in their career. The probability of your needing a repair at some point in your ownership of it that will cost more than what you paid for the camera is high. I used to have a 500 C (10+ years ago) that developed dry rot in the internal rubber bushings, and the light baffles behind the mirror wouldn't open fully for short exposures, and for very long exposures, they could flop back down again. This was a repair in the neighborhood of $500 USD.
    I second this - we upgraded from an older 500C to a 501CM for this very reason. The 500C was working fune, but we didn't want to have repairs being difficult and expensive going forward. I know the shutter blades for the 80mm C lens is hard to get as of right now. A properly done CLA for the camera will be more expensive.
    B & D
    Rochester, NY
    ========================
    Quiquid Latine dictum sit altum viditur

  5. #55
    Rolleiflexible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,274
    Images
    31
    Antje, I just went over to pbase.com, and realized you were the same Antje who commented on my Rolleicord photo of the Brooklyn Bridge (http://www.pbase.com/image/24081111). Small world, eh? I am sorry to say that Rolleicord has disappeared. It was a fine camera. Thank goodness I still have a few other Rolleiflexes around the house. :-)

    Sanders

  6. #56
    Antje's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Near Erlangen, Germany
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    478
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Sanders McNew View Post
    Antje, I just went over to pbase.com, and realized you were the same Antje who commented on my Rolleicord photo of the Brooklyn Bridge (http://www.pbase.com/image/24081111). Small world, eh? I am sorry to say that Rolleicord has disappeared. It was a fine camera. Thank goodness I still have a few other Rolleiflexes around the house. :-)
    I loved those series... Your photos kind of sold me on the Rolleicord, which then convinced me to get the Hasselblad which arrived today and which - well, I hope this ends here, but frankly, I have little hope.

    Antje

  7. #57
    Rolleiflexible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,274
    Images
    31
    Oh no!!!! My fault!!!!!!! :-0

    At least it is a pleasant addiction. Let us see what you make with the Rollei.

    Sanders.

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin