In a way Hassey did fix the problem, they no longer make the cameras which is an end of an era. Bob Haight --- Bob Shell <bob@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Feb 13, 2006, at 6:54 AM, Douglas Nygren wrote: > > > A design that is prone to jamming is a PF stupid > design. And there > > are many, many stories of people whose Hassys > jammed at the wrong > > moment. A bad design is a f--up waiting to happen. > > Anyone who has ever worked as a camera repairman > knows that > Hasselblad 500 series cameras jam frequently. > Hasselblad and Compur > designed the interface and got it wrong. In Japan > Seiko saw the > problems with doing it the H/C way and designed a > different interface > (used by Kowa, Mamiya, Bronica, and maybe others > I've forgotten). > The Seiko design doesn't jam. The only way one of > the cameras using > the Seiko system can jam is if a part actually > breaks. > > The problem is the split shaft used by Hasselblad. > Compur designed > their shutters for SLR cameras to be cocked by a > shaft, but all of > the other cameras using that shutter type mounted > the shutter > permanently on the camera body (Zeiss Ikon, Kodak > and Voigtländer, > primarily) and used interchangeable lenses or lens > heads that plugged > into the shutter. Hasselblad wanted a greater range > of focal lengths > than this would allow, so the shaft was cut in half > and keyed. The > design caused problems from the beginning, but H/C > didn't want to go > back and redo the interface, so it was retained. It > requires that > both body and lens be cocked so that the keyed > halves of the shaft > would fit together properly. If the body is not > cocked the lens will > still go on, but everything jams. To unjam you must > take the film > magazine off, push the light baffles open manually, > insert a long > screwdriver and turn a screw in the direction of the > red arrow. That > the screwhead is there and marked with a red arrow > shows how > Hasselblad knew about jams and provided a way to > deal with them > without dismantling anything. > > This was an endemic problem with the 500 series > cameras. It should > have been fixed early on. I didn't mind that it > wasn't, though, when > I had my repair shop. I made good money unjamming > the cameras! Most > owners were too timid to try it themselves. I > charged $ 25 for doing > it. I used to tell them it was $ 2 for having the > right tool and $ > 23 for knowing what to do with it. > > Bob--- > Rollei List > > - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > with 'subscribe' > in the subject field OR by logging into > www.freelists.org > > - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > with > 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging > into www.freelists.org > > - Online, searchable archives are available at > //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com --- Rollei List - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org - Online, searchable archives are available at //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list