[HUG ] Re: VS: Re: AW: Re: It's a sad Hasselblad day........
- From: James <jmswllms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 12:29:46 -0800 (PST)
Well I know you may not want to hear this but I like the idea that the prices
are low and i hope they stay that way. I need to get some more lens, I only
have
a 60mm and 80mm so I need at least a 150mm or a zoom. I would also like to get
a
903SWC but they are still around 2000.00 an Arcbody or Flexbody one or the
other
not both are on my list but they are still to high. I want to know why you want
the prices to go up unless you are going to sell them. I want to shoot film and
so I want to get them as cheap as possible. Just because they are low priced
does not make them cheaply made, they are some of the best cameras and lens
made.
________________________________
From: Tom Just Olsen <tjols@xxxxxxxxx>.
To: hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Mon, January 24, 2011 2:50:04 AM
Subject: [HUG ] VS: Re: AW: Re: It's a sad Hasselblad day........
Q.G.
All of the Carl Zeiss/Hasselblad lenses I have - and know of that others have
here in Norway, are in perfect working order. My three lenses (250, 80, and
50)
, which I bought myself almost 40 years ago works perfect. A friend of mine
have similar series (150, 80, 50) of these shiny examples from the end of the
60
- also in perfect condition...
It is the testament to the quality of the Hasselblad gear. I think it is just
a
matter of time before prices will go up and the V-series gear will become
collectors items.
Tom of Oslo
> PS - I also have a 203FE with three lenses. Also in perfect order. But this
>set of gear is only 13 years old, - almost new.
>
> > From: Q.G. de Bakker [qnu@xxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: 2011-01-23 23:25:38 MET
> > To: hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [HUG ] Re: AW: Re: It's a sad Hasselblad day........
> >
> > Ulrik Neupert wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Q.G.,
> > > you know that these lenses are very old and none of them was without need
> > > of
> > > major service. My 5.6/60 mm lenses are from 1958 and 1961, the 4.0/60 is
> > > from 1962. I bought one of them in combination with a 553 ELX. For reasons
> > > far beyond me the sight of a EL.. camera lets buyers stay away from such
> > > nice items.
> >
> > A 1958 60 mm would fit my 500 C from that year very well.
> > So, since you have two... ;-)
> >
> > I am a bit puzzled about that service thing. The lenses i bought obviously
> > had had a previous life spanning some decades.
> > And though i of course don't know anything about that previous life, they
> > all came to me in excellent condition. The only mechanical flaw among them
> > is the 'hanging diaphragm' in the 80 mm lens (it will not open completely
> > for viewing at f/2.8, though it will when you fire the shutter at f/2.8. So
> > only a minor problem).
> > The barrels too are very clean. They aged a bit, i.e. show that they are
> > not
> > new, but no scratches to speak of.
> > The 60 mm lenses however... Beaten up and bruised. And indeed in need of
> > major service.
> >
> > Could be because there are far fewer of them than of any other C lens, and
> > while i could ignore the also abundant beaten up, malfunctioning samples of
> > those, it's hard to find a C non-f/3.5 60 mm lens at all, let alone be
> > picky
> > about them.
> > But i am (picky). I don't want a lens just to know i own one. It has to
> > work, and work properly too. And it has to look good as well. (And i even
> > pass on lenses with imperial unit distance scales. Have to be metric for
> > me.)
> >
> >
> > You're right about the EL-models. Surprisingly cheap, oftentimes.
> > But i noticed there are quite a few among them that are not worth even the
> > little money that is asked for them. Now if my EL-repair skills would be a
> > bit better than they are, i could have the time of my life.
> >
> >
> >
>=============================================================================================================
>
> > To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
>account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,)
>and unsubscribe from there.
> >
Other related posts:
