Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Hasselblad 500C/M "LATE"
Hasselblad 500C/M "LATE"
I have seen several references to a 500C/M "Late" model. I know that
Hasselblad went to a crank winder as standard on later models of the
500C/M. Is there anything else that distinguishes a given 500C/M as a
"Late" model?
Bob Kirkpatrick
I have seen several references to a 500C/M "Late" model. I know that
Hasselblad went to a crank winder as standard on later models of the
500C/M. Is there anything else that distinguishes a given 500C/M as a
"Late" model?
Bob Kirkpatrick
Re: Hasselblad 500C/M "LATE"
Bob Kirkpatrick wrote:
>I have seen several references to a 500C/M "Late" model. I know that
> Hasselblad went to a crank winder as standard on later models of the
> 500C/M. Is there anything else that distinguishes a given 500C/M as a
> "Late" model?
The way the trim curves round the camera ready signal window: round on the
old model, more angular on the later model.
The tripod quick shoe and lower magazine hooks: two quite separate things on
the old model, one metal part, running as a fork from underneath the tripod
shoe to the hooks on the late model.
The molding/surface of the rear baffles: hard to describe though.
Not all changes will have been made at the same time.
The cable hook hole on the camera's left side, for instance, disappeared
before other changes were made.
Bob Kirkpatrick wrote:
>I have seen several references to a 500C/M "Late" model. I know that
> Hasselblad went to a crank winder as standard on later models of the
> 500C/M. Is there anything else that distinguishes a given 500C/M as a
> "Late" model?
The way the trim curves round the camera ready signal window: round on the
old model, more angular on the later model.
The tripod quick shoe and lower magazine hooks: two quite separate things on
the old model, one metal part, running as a fork from underneath the tripod
shoe to the hooks on the late model.
The molding/surface of the rear baffles: hard to describe though.
Not all changes will have been made at the same time.
The cable hook hole on the camera's left side, for instance, disappeared
before other changes were made.
Re: Hasselblad 500C/M "LATE"
"Q.G. de Bakker" <qnu@tiscali.nl> wrote:
> Bob Kirkpatrick wrote:
>
>>I have seen several references to a 500C/M "Late" model. I know that
>> Hasselblad went to a crank winder as standard on later models of the
>> 500C/M. Is there anything else that distinguishes a given 500C/M as a
>> "Late" model?
>
> The way the trim curves round the camera ready signal window: round on the
> old model, more angular on the later model.
> The tripod quick shoe and lower magazine hooks: two quite separate things
> on the old model, one metal part, running as a fork from underneath the
> tripod shoe to the hooks on the late model.
> The molding/surface of the rear baffles: hard to describe though.
>
> Not all changes will have been made at the same time.
> The cable hook hole on the camera's left side, for instance, disappeared
> before other changes were made.
When did the "T" coating get replaced with "T*"? Was that before, during, or
after the 500C/M?
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
"Q.G. de Bakker" <qnu@tiscali.nl> wrote:
> Bob Kirkpatrick wrote:
>
>>I have seen several references to a 500C/M "Late" model. I know that
>> Hasselblad went to a crank winder as standard on later models of the
>> 500C/M. Is there anything else that distinguishes a given 500C/M as a
>> "Late" model?
>
> The way the trim curves round the camera ready signal window: round on the
> old model, more angular on the later model.
> The tripod quick shoe and lower magazine hooks: two quite separate things
> on the old model, one metal part, running as a fork from underneath the
> tripod shoe to the hooks on the late model.
> The molding/surface of the rear baffles: hard to describe though.
>
> Not all changes will have been made at the same time.
> The cable hook hole on the camera's left side, for instance, disappeared
> before other changes were made.
When did the "T" coating get replaced with "T*"? Was that before, during, or
after the 500C/M?
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
Re: Hasselblad 500C/M "LATE"
David J. Littleboy wrote:
> When did the "T" coating get replaced with "T*"? Was that before, during,
> or after the 500C/M?
Cameras, like the 500 C/M, do not have T- or T*-coatings...
The coating on the C lenses was changed during a period of years, with not
every lens type changing at the same time. The period spanned from
(approximately) 1970 - 1976.
The 500 C to C/M change was in 1969-1970.
David J. Littleboy wrote:
> When did the "T" coating get replaced with "T*"? Was that before, during,
> or after the 500C/M?
Cameras, like the 500 C/M, do not have T- or T*-coatings...
The coating on the C lenses was changed during a period of years, with not
every lens type changing at the same time. The period spanned from
(approximately) 1970 - 1976.
The 500 C to C/M change was in 1969-1970.
Re: Hasselblad 500C/M "LATE"
In article <4728a6e7$0$29655$dbd43001@news.wanadoo.nl>, Q.G. de Bakker
<qnu@tiscali.nl> wrote:
> The coating on the C lenses was changed during a period of years, with not
> every lens type changing at the same time. The period spanned from
> (approximately) 1970 - 1976.
> The 500 C to C/M change was in 1969-1970.
I bought my first Hasselblad in 1971. It's marked as a 500C, but is
really a C/M (as the screen is removable). It's probably a transition
model.
In article <4728a6e7$0$29655$dbd43001@news.wanadoo.nl>, Q.G. de Bakker
<qnu@tiscali.nl> wrote:
> The coating on the C lenses was changed during a period of years, with not
> every lens type changing at the same time. The period spanned from
> (approximately) 1970 - 1976.
> The 500 C to C/M change was in 1969-1970.
I bought my first Hasselblad in 1971. It's marked as a 500C, but is
really a C/M (as the screen is removable). It's probably a transition
model.
Re: Hasselblad 500C/M "LATE"
Mr. Strat wrote:
> I bought my first Hasselblad in 1971. It's marked as a 500C, but is
> really a C/M (as the screen is removable). It's probably a transition
> model.
Pobably.
Have you checked the date code, and if so, what's the year it was
manufactured?
Mr. Strat wrote:
> I bought my first Hasselblad in 1971. It's marked as a 500C, but is
> really a C/M (as the screen is removable). It's probably a transition
> model.
Pobably.
Have you checked the date code, and if so, what's the year it was
manufactured?
Re: Hasselblad 500C/M "LATE"
In article <4728cad7$0$53525$dbd45001@news.wanadoo.nl>, Q.G. de Bakker
<qnu@tiscali.nl> wrote:
> Mr. Strat wrote:
>
> > I bought my first Hasselblad in 1971. It's marked as a 500C, but is
> > really a C/M (as the screen is removable). It's probably a transition
> > model.
>
> Pobably.
> Have you checked the date code, and if so, what's the year it was
> manufactured?
I had to look...the serial number on the body starts with "US".
So...using VHPICTURES, that would make it 1970.
In article <4728cad7$0$53525$dbd45001@news.wanadoo.nl>, Q.G. de Bakker
<qnu@tiscali.nl> wrote:
> Mr. Strat wrote:
>
> > I bought my first Hasselblad in 1971. It's marked as a 500C, but is
> > really a C/M (as the screen is removable). It's probably a transition
> > model.
>
> Pobably.
> Have you checked the date code, and if so, what's the year it was
> manufactured?
I had to look...the serial number on the body starts with "US".
So...using VHPICTURES, that would make it 1970.
Re: Hasselblad 500C/M "LATE"
Mr. Strat wrote:
> I had to look...the serial number on the body starts with "US".
> So...using VHPICTURES, that would make it 1970.
Bang on. So a "transitional" 500 C it is.
(Could not have been anything else really. ;-) )
Mr. Strat wrote:
> I had to look...the serial number on the body starts with "US".
> So...using VHPICTURES, that would make it 1970.
Bang on. So a "transitional" 500 C it is.
(Could not have been anything else really. ;-) )
Re: Hasselblad 500C/M "LATE"
"Q.G. de Bakker" <qnu@tiscali.nl> wrote:
> David J. Littleboy wrote:
>
>> When did the "T" coating get replaced with "T*"? Was that before, during,
>> or after the 500C/M?
>
> Cameras, like the 500 C/M, do not have T- or T*-coatings...
When purchased as a kit, they come with a normal lens that does.
> The coating on the C lenses was changed during a period of years, with not
> every lens type changing at the same time. The period spanned from
> (approximately) 1970 - 1976.
> The 500 C to C/M change was in 1969-1970.
So when did the 80/2.8 kit lens switch from T to T*?
Which is relevant here, because "LATE" may (or may not) imply T* coatings on
the standard lens, and we haven't figured that out yet.
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
"Q.G. de Bakker" <qnu@tiscali.nl> wrote:
> David J. Littleboy wrote:
>
>> When did the "T" coating get replaced with "T*"? Was that before, during,
>> or after the 500C/M?
>
> Cameras, like the 500 C/M, do not have T- or T*-coatings...
When purchased as a kit, they come with a normal lens that does.
> The coating on the C lenses was changed during a period of years, with not
> every lens type changing at the same time. The period spanned from
> (approximately) 1970 - 1976.
> The 500 C to C/M change was in 1969-1970.
So when did the 80/2.8 kit lens switch from T to T*?
Which is relevant here, because "LATE" may (or may not) imply T* coatings on
the standard lens, and we haven't figured that out yet.
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
Re: Hasselblad 500C/M "LATE"
David J. Littleboy wrote:
>> Cameras, like the 500 C/M, do not have T- or T*-coatings...
>
> When purchased as a kit, they come with a normal lens that does.
But we're not discussing lenses...
>> The coating on the C lenses was changed during a period of years, with
>> not every lens type changing at the same time. The period spanned from
>> (approximately) 1970 - 1976.
>> The 500 C to C/M change was in 1969-1970.
>
> So when did the 80/2.8 kit lens switch from T to T*?
About 1971.
Well before the change from early C/M to late C/M.
But we're not discussing lenses.
> Which is relevant here, because "LATE" may (or may not) imply T* coatings
> on the standard lens, and we haven't figured that out yet.
Have we not?
Anyway, as you do know, lenses are interchangeable, and a camera that 30+
years later still has the original lens it came with is rather a rarity.
And by the time the 500 C/M changed a bit, all lenses had been T* coated.
In fact, the old lens line that had some single coated lenses earlier had
been replaced by a new line already.
Now you see why we are not discussing when lenses got T* coating?
Of no concern whatsoever when you want to know when a 500 C/M was 'revamp' a
bit.
David J. Littleboy wrote:
>> Cameras, like the 500 C/M, do not have T- or T*-coatings...
>
> When purchased as a kit, they come with a normal lens that does.
But we're not discussing lenses...
>> The coating on the C lenses was changed during a period of years, with
>> not every lens type changing at the same time. The period spanned from
>> (approximately) 1970 - 1976.
>> The 500 C to C/M change was in 1969-1970.
>
> So when did the 80/2.8 kit lens switch from T to T*?
About 1971.
Well before the change from early C/M to late C/M.
But we're not discussing lenses.
> Which is relevant here, because "LATE" may (or may not) imply T* coatings
> on the standard lens, and we haven't figured that out yet.
Have we not?
Anyway, as you do know, lenses are interchangeable, and a camera that 30+
years later still has the original lens it came with is rather a rarity.
And by the time the 500 C/M changed a bit, all lenses had been T* coated.
In fact, the old lens line that had some single coated lenses earlier had
been replaced by a new line already.
Now you see why we are not discussing when lenses got T* coating?
Of no concern whatsoever when you want to know when a 500 C/M was 'revamp' a
bit.
Re: Hasselblad 500C/M "LATE"
On Oct 31, 1:16 am, "Q.G. de Bakker" <q...@tiscali.nl> wrote:
> Bob Kirkpatrick wrote:
> >I have seen several references to a 500C/M "Late" model. I know that
> > Hasselblad went to a crank winder as standard on later models of the
> > 500C/M. Is there anything else that distinguishes a given 500C/M as a
> > "Late" model?
>
> The way the trim curves round the camera ready signal window: round on the
> old model, more angular on the later model.
> The tripod quick shoe and lower magazine hooks: two quite separate things on
> the old model, one metal part, running as a fork from underneath the tripod
> shoe to the hooks on the late model.
> The molding/surface of the rear baffles: hard to describe though.
>
> Not all changes will have been made at the same time.
> The cable hook hole on the camera's left side, for instance, disappeared
> before other changes were made.
Thanks for the information. I've looked through some old catalogs now
and I can see the difference although it's a little like the kid's
puzzle where four of the the six dogs are slightly different. It
appears that another change is the addition to later models of the
shutter pre-release/mirror lock-up button under the winder knob.
On Oct 31, 1:16 am, "Q.G. de Bakker" <q...@tiscali.nl> wrote:
> Bob Kirkpatrick wrote:
> >I have seen several references to a 500C/M "Late" model. I know that
> > Hasselblad went to a crank winder as standard on later models of the
> > 500C/M. Is there anything else that distinguishes a given 500C/M as a
> > "Late" model?
>
> The way the trim curves round the camera ready signal window: round on the
> old model, more angular on the later model.
> The tripod quick shoe and lower magazine hooks: two quite separate things on
> the old model, one metal part, running as a fork from underneath the tripod
> shoe to the hooks on the late model.
> The molding/surface of the rear baffles: hard to describe though.
>
> Not all changes will have been made at the same time.
> The cable hook hole on the camera's left side, for instance, disappeared
> before other changes were made.
Thanks for the information. I've looked through some old catalogs now
and I can see the difference although it's a little like the kid's
puzzle where four of the the six dogs are slightly different. It
appears that another change is the addition to later models of the
shutter pre-release/mirror lock-up button under the winder knob.
Re: Hasselblad 500C/M "LATE"
Bob Kirkpatrick wrote:
> Thanks for the information. I've looked through some old catalogs now
> and I can see the difference although it's a little like the kid's
> puzzle where four of the the six dogs are slightly different. It
> appears that another change is the addition to later models of the
> shutter pre-release/mirror lock-up button under the winder knob.
Not so.
All 500 C(...) models have that button, though it was a bit shorter (and
perhaps harder to see) on earlier models.
;-)
Bob Kirkpatrick wrote:
> Thanks for the information. I've looked through some old catalogs now
> and I can see the difference although it's a little like the kid's
> puzzle where four of the the six dogs are slightly different. It
> appears that another change is the addition to later models of the
> shutter pre-release/mirror lock-up button under the winder knob.
Not so.
All 500 C(...) models have that button, though it was a bit shorter (and
perhaps harder to see) on earlier models.
;-)
