Hasselblad 500c

When Dad died years ago among the things I took out of his house was a box with vintage camera stuff. One piece being a medium format Hasselblad 500. It appears to be just the body section,
no lenses. I find lots of info on the web, but written for the
experienced camera buff, which I am not. There are other bits and pieces, which I can't identify, don't know if they belong to the camera or not. It's unlikely I am going to use it due to what it will cost to buy a lens. It appears to be in fair shape,but no way to tell. Is there anyone specific who can give me more info? Don't want to sell it as I have no way of knowing
whether it can be used or is just scrap

I just looked that camera up on Ebay. It looks like a sweet little box! You should get yourself a lens and have fun!

I agree, but I am a camera idiot. I do fine with a automated digital. If I have to repair the body and buy a lens plus learn how to use it, it's not worth it to me. I am sure that it will cost a fair amount just to look over what I have and see if it can be used.

Well, ok, but you do have a very capable piece of equipment that might not be as bad to get working as you think. And oh, by the way, we were all camera idiots at one time, but learning about photography can be rewarding if you are so inclined.

I appreciate your candor. Now that I am retired I am inclined to learn more about it. Especially since there are not a lot of photos relating to my family history. And there should be.
I do know that UNH offers camera courses and I believe I will take one. I think the fear I have is what it's going to cost. I have many pursuits and like all hobbies tend to add up quickly. I agree that the camera is capable, from what I have read, but is it the best choice to carry around rather that a very good 35MM digital?

Well, to start with (my opinion) a decent Digital SLR (DSLR) would be a good place to start. There are many good entry level cameras these days. In fact, now days you can get a really capably DSLR for under $500 that is more capable that a $6000 camera was 10 years ago. I shoot Canon, but Nikon is also a great brand (I'm not a Canon snob, that just happens to be what I started with).

Here's a list of what CNet thinks are good entry-level DSLRs (Both Canon and Nikon)

http://www.cnet.com/topics/cameras/best-digital-cameras/dslr-for-beginners/

Remember - many entry level DSLRs today are very very capable cameras with capabilities that would have cost thousands just a few years ago,

Thanks, I appreciate it. Good place to start. Is your Canon workable for a novice? I think to start with simpler is better
as to the camera controls with the ability to add to it if needed.

Welcome Number6,
The 500 series Hasselblad was NASA's choice for the Apollo missions. A great camera, but in my opinion, not the best to start out with. It doesn't come with a meter, so you'll need to get your exposure readings another way. Perhaps one of the other things in that box is a meter? There are smartphone apps that work as meters, so that could be a cheap alternative to buying a dedicated one. I haven't used any to give an opinion.

I think the big question is what do you want to get out of photography?

What I want is better shots of classic british cars. My passion.
I do reasonably well with my Sony digital. I want a camera that is easier to hold and has weight in order to get a steadier shot. Ease of use, plus control buttons big fingers can navigate.
The box had several black rings (lens mounts?) a lanyard, pistol grip and a couple of empty vinyl cases. No meter. I assume the cases were to store the meter and other items. There is also
a long cable that looks like a shutter release. Thanks for your word of welcome.

What Sony digital do you have? (model)

Perhaps there is a place you can rent a lens near you. A shop around here has an 80mm for $18/day. You can test the camera function for that cost plus film and processing.

I have a DSC-TX30 and a Sony cybershot DSC-W50 which I like better.
5X and 6X respectively.

I will check around on that possibility. Last camera shop in Portsmouth closed 10 years ago. Probably will be able to find a shop in Boston that rents.

Late to th' party but: Welcome aboard number6.

The 'blad 500C was a pro piece, 2¼" square neg. Interchangeable backs came for either 120 or 220 roll film. There is a digital back available but cost is about as high as Apollo missions went (over the moon). I always found that pistol grip to be useless. A black plastic focusing ring was useful, though. It was a great tool for bride chasing and portraits but a really burdensome lump as a photojournalism camera.

FWIW/JMHO: Better off with a DSLR now; the image quality will largely depend on money spent but will likely equal the 'blad's. Get the best camera you can afford, then grow INTO the capabilities of the thing. A "cheap tool" will disappoint in short order. Whether it be an inferior wrench or camera. Get the best your money can buy, then pursue proficiency with it.

EDIT: Forgot to mention: a 'blad is definitely a two-hands-needed camera.

Doc, I appreciate the feedback. I think I will follow your advice
and get a very good 35. I am taking a hint from Cyborg and going to look at the Canon. Wife works at Best Buy so she can probably
get a decent price. Next step is to take an instruction course,
and get a little grounding.

Good plan.

I picked up a Canon SX50 HS with image stabilizer. So far I am pleased with the controls. I expect to have occasions where I will
use this in low light situations. Shooting cars in dim garages, etc. Would getting an accessory flash unit help with that?

I have an SX50 HS and it is a fantastic camera within certain limitations. One of those limitations is the aperture not very large, which means it is not the greatest in low light. At the wide end of the telephoto range (24mm) you will get f3.4 which isn't too bad, but as you zoom, the aperture quickly gets smaller (lets in less light). If you get a flash, get one you can use off camera. The SX50 has a pop-up flash, but those are not much use except as a fill flash when you are shooting in very bright light and need to "fill" in to soften the shadows. Your users manual lists the recommended flashes for your camera.

I appreciate the info. Thank you.

You're welcome. Go out and try some telephoto shots hand held and you will see what a great camera you have there! You have more reach with that SX50 than you'd have with a digital SLR and a $13,000 800mm Canon L lens! For the price it really is quite an amazing camera!

So far I like everything about it. Took several shots of my cars and am pleased with the outcome. It was about dusk and I didn't have the flash deployed. The small details like chrome accents came out just right and the colors were accurate. Going to the Nubble light tomorrow and will try some telephoto of the car, light and horizon. I remembered what you said about low light and did not use telephoto. It amazes me how much you pick up vs a pocket cybershot.

Be sure to post some pics in the Gallery here!