Hasselblad 1000F Medium Format Classic SLR Camera
Photo courtesy of Fred Sherfy - [email protected]
Visit Fred's Pentax Collector and Photo Home Pages
Related Local Links:
Hasselblad 1600f SLR
Hasselblad Related Notes
History of the Medium Format SLR
Related Links:
170-320mm f/4 Zoomar For Hassy 1000f/1600f
(Stephen Gandy's Cameraquest site)
The Hasselblad 1000f was the second model in the original Hasselblad focal
plane system camera lineup, following the Hasselblad 1600f. As with the earlier model,
the model number 1000 referenced the top shutter speed of 1/1,000th of a
second, and the f refers to the use of a focal plane shutter
(versus, say, the Hasselblad 500c model with a top speed of 1/500th second
and a Compur leaf shutter design).
Some 10,400 of these Hasselblad 1000f cameras were sold between the
introduction in 1952 and the switch to the Hasselblad 500c models in
1957. Compare these sales to the 3,627
sold of the previous Hasselblad 1600f model cameras since its introduction
in 1948 through 1952. The Hasselblad 1000f was quite
popular, due in part to the $100 price reduction you see noted in the ad
below
(the older 1600f models were $499.50 for the basic camera and lens).
The redesign of the Hasselblad shutter to make it more reliable than in
the earlier 1600f series reduced the top shutter speed to 1/1,000th
second. The major improvements were in better reliability. A number of
Hasselblad 1000f models continue to work today, but there are no spare
parts for shutters.
The larger production run also means that these
cameras are available without the collector's premium some of the earlier
models command. So while a Hasselblad 1600f kit may command $1,500+
on Ebay, a 1000f kit may bring
under half that amount. Note however that the backs are reportedly
not compatible with later models, and special screw thread
extension tubes are required.
For a discussion and cautions on the Hasselblad 1000F as a user camera,
see companion article on Medium Format on a
Budget section on this camera.
The standard lenses included the Kodak 80mm f/2.8 Ektar, whose sharp performance set
a high standard optically. The Kodak Ektar 135mm f/3.5 ($285) and Zeiss
250mm f/4 Opton Sonnar ($439) were part of the standard lens offerings.
The lack of wide angle lenses resulting in some of the later 52mm f/3.5
screw thread mount Kaligar and Fujita 66
lenses being modified to fit these cameras. Unfortunately, the performance
of these 52mm wide angle lenses often leads much to be desired. Various
other lenses from Kilfitt, Leitz, Bronica, and others were readily
modified for use on these focal plane bodies.
In general, I suggest users seeking a focal plane 6x6cm system SLR look
into the classic Bronica S/S2/C/EC/ECTL
or Kiev-88 cameras. The Kiev-88 cameras are
especially interesting if you have a working Hasselblad 1000f. The screw
thread mount of both cameras is rather similar, so you can get a machinist
to adapt lenses between the two cameras. The Kiev-88 and Hasselblad
1000f/1600f cameras share identical lens
registration distances thanks to Kiev's copying Hasselblad's mount.
This is a Hasselblad 1000F camera body (SN CU23277), the 80mm f/2.8 Zeiss Tessar (SN 1837442), and a waist level finder (from a 500c).
I checked into a manual for a 1000F a while back & Hasselblad USA said
they'd send one out for $5.00. Here's the info they sent me:
A copy from an original manual can be obtained by sending a five
dollar check to the address below. Please include the model
number with your check.
Consumer Relations Dept.
Hasselblad USA Inc
10 Madison Road
Fairfield, New Jersey 07004
Hope this helps,
Anne
Date: Sat, 16 May 98
From: John Gilbert [email protected]
Subject: Hasselblad Compendium
List members may be interested to note that Richard Nordin's new book,
Hasselblad System Compendium (Hove Books, 1998, ISBN 1 897802 10 2) is
now out, at least here in Australia. It is mainly of interest to
collectors of the Hasselblad system, especially the early
1600F/1000F/SWA/SW cameras but includes descriptions and pictures of
everything made by Hasselblad to the present date. Highly recommended.
Dr John Gilbert
Forensic Science Centre
21 Divett Place
Adelaide SA 5000
AUSTRALIA
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998
From: Alfred Breull [email protected]
Subject: Hasselblad Days / booklet
Hasselblad sells a nice little booklet (DM 5, about USD 2.7)
with the title:
"Hasselblad - The camera system. 50 years. 1948-1998."
ISBN 91-630-5976-2.
It contains a gallery with a total of 78 pictures from
greats like Ansel Adams to Christian Vogt, and pictures
of all Hasselblads and pre-Hasselblads.
The print quality is excellent, language: English.
Alf
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999
From: "Dr. Ulrik Neupert" [email protected]
Subject: Re: Hasselblad 1000F Question
The backs for the 500 series made to the late 1980s fit the 1000F. They
have a
little hole on the top part that faces the camera body which allows a small
linkage rod from the camera to go through.
Ulrik
[email protected] schrieb:
> I want to get a 24 back for my Hassy 1000F. Are the backs for the 500 series > compatible with the 1000F? Thank you for your help in advance. > Bob R.
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Hassy 1000F or 1600F Lens to Hassy 500/200/2000 Body adaptor
Well, yes, theoretically it is possible for such an adaptor allowing 1000F
lenses to be mounted onto the 500's, etc. Very likely it does exist as
well.
I had searched for the longest time for a T-Mount adaptor for the 1000F,
and finally found one made by Kaligar. The only use I've found for it, of
course, is for extreme close-ups allowing me to attach a T-Mount Bellows
to the 1000F without needing to dish out $300 plus for the original
Hasselblad 1000F Bellows. Works great! Remember, these adaptors are hard
to find because those who have them obviously have a use for them.
Oh, I know....Kaligar is Russian made, but other companies could have very
well made these adaptors as well!
Bob R.
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999
From: LEO WOLK [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Hassy 1000F or 1600F Lens to Hassy 500/200/2000 Body adaptor
"In Theory" ANY adapter is possible. Any competent machinist can
fabricate an adapter to mount C-mount lenses on a "Blad (for instance).
The problems that arise are: 1) Will the lens adapted to cover the needed
format? 2) Does it focus at infinity...Are there any pratical
applications?
The problem that arises when trying to adapt a 1000/1600F lens to a
200/2000F series camera is that the length of the mount on 1000/1600F
lenses is longer, it protrudes into the camera farther. So any adapter
would move the lens farther from the film plane than originally designed,
losing any hope of focusing at infinity. "In theory" this would be fine
for Macro applications, but as there was no Macro lens designed
specifically for the 1000/1600F series cameras, this becomes impratical,
in a real world scenario, very quickly.
The Kaligar "adapter" that Bob R. refers to was actually made in Japan to
adapt lenses for for the Kalimar 66 to the Hassy 1000/1600F cameras.
This is possible because the lens-flange to film-plane distance on the
Kalimar 66 is shorter than Hassy 1000/1600F by enough distance to
accomodate the length of the adapter. It is most commonly seen on the
52mm lens, a wide angle lens that Hasselblad never dupicated in their
catalogue.
Best, Leo.
From hasselblad mailing list: Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 From: Austin Franklin [email protected] Subject: [HUG] Value of Hasselblad 1000F... > Just a hobbyist that acquired a Hasselblad 1000f > with the Ektar 80mm f/2.8 lens and was wondering > the approximate value. I do know 1000f was > manufactured between 1952-57 and was after the > Hasselblad 1600 series and before the 500 series. > How much should I insure my Hasselblad It depends on the condition, both cosmetic and operational. If it was completely original, back & body & lense match what was sent from the factory, had a box, shade...focusing screen has no chips, no chrome peel, shutter curtain has no dents etc. (basically in mint condition) it would probably be worth over $1000. If it is pretty beat, but has back, finder, body and lense, and completely operational, between $300 and $500.... In decent shape, back, body, finder, lense, no fungus or marks on lense, no shutter curtain damage, $600-$800. A good source for seeing what things are worth is eBay. Regards, Austin
From hasselblad mailing list: Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 From: Mark Kronquist [email protected] Subject: Re: [HUG] Value of Hasselblad 1000F... I shoot with my 1000F System at least three or four times a month may yours give you equally good service and good photos. Do treat yourself to the Hasselblad Compendium and the Hasselblad Way books. Mark
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format From: [email protected] Subject: Re: Cheap Kievs from Russia - risk assessment Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 Q.G. de Bakker wrote: > Robert Monaghan wrote: >> Lots of older cameras, including the Hassy 1000f and esp. >> 1600f series, are known to have shutter reliability problems, > True. > But then you're talking about 1950's cameras and how they perform now, > almost 50 years later. These problems are entirely age related (no > maintenance, having people used to fix Kievs work on them, etc.), and not > (!!!) something inherent in the design or build quality. Funny ... for some reason that's quite different from what I've heard from people that used them. Of course, not having personal experience with these myself, this is all second-hand, but I was told by several different people that a working Hassy 1000f or 1600f would be rather hard to find, due to the reliability problems _even when new_. Now, is that just a popular myth, or did the Swedes just dump all their marginal-quality Hassy bodies over here or something? > The fact that after so many years you can also find samples of these old > cameras that still work fine, very reliably, is telling, isn't it? Compare the numbers to something like Rolleiflex, or even the budget TLRs of the time - how telling is it really? Anyone have numbers? -- Mikko Nahkola [email protected]
From: "Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected] Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format Subject: Re: "Russian" 30 mm Fisheye Lens Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 Q.G. de Bakker wrote: > A couple of questions about the Ukranian 30 mm Fisheye > > What Kiev model has the same lens mount (and presumably same > lens-mount-to-film distance too?) as the original Hasselblad 1600F/1000F? > And what is the present day, 'former-East-Block-camera jargon' name for this > mount? Just to let you know: the Zodiak in B-mount does not fit a 1000 F (that is: the one i got does not fit my camera). Why is a bit of a mystery, maybe because the mount screw thread is cut too coarse, maybe because of something else, i couldn't tell. It was a bit of a struggle to get the lens into the mount anyway. So now i'm deciding whether i will return the lens (no problem. Hans Roskam is very forthcoming. It really is a pleasure dealing with him), or have it converted so it will fit a modern focal plane shutter Hasselblad instead. The technician told me that it would need removing the filters (which i knew already) and that rumours that this would affect optical quality adversely where completely unfounded. He said, since the filters are plane parallel pieces of glass, all they do is move the image back by a bit, and the only effect removal has is to change the infinity focus. Seems quite plausible. I remember however reading some very definite statements to the contrary, i.e. that it does degrade image quality quite a lot. Any comments would be welcome. The lens i got was an Zodiak 8, from 1989. No 8b, no MC. I guess this means that this lens has only a one layer coating. Can anyone here tell from experience how bad a single coated fisheye would be? And what is the difference between a Zodiak 8 and Zodiak 8b? Oh, and where is Stephe?
From: "Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected] Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format Subject: Re: "Russian" 30 mm Fisheye Lens Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 Robert Monaghan wrote: > I've read that the mounts were very similar, but not exact copies, and > that it took a minor bit of machining to make them fit well on the hassy > 1000/1600f series. One source mentioned machining a "pin" (?). Other > sources I've seen claimed they were identical mounts, but if so, this must > have been for one of the older variant lenses? The mount appears to be identical (same thread) on both the B-mount lens and the Hasselblad, but it will not fit. The lens will not budge after engaging the screw mount threads for a bit, leaving a full 45 degree turn. My suspicion is that the threads on the lens were cut too coarse (they certainly look not as sharp as the ones on the Ektar lens). I see in a post on the URL that you provided (yet another usefull page on your excellent megasite!) that someone managed to fit the Kilfitt 39 mm Leica thread to Hasselblad 1000 F adapter on his Salyut-C, so, unless the Salyut has a thread mount different from the one on the Kiev-88, it should be possible. The pin you mention operates the spring diaphragm in the lens. Pushing it opens (the reverse of what i expected) the diaphragm. With the lens set to its maximum opening, the pin only sticks out a bit, and i can see that it is not the thing responsible for the lens not fitting the Hasselblad. If the lens would seat properly, it would be free to stick out as much as it wants, nothingin the camera will push it, thus allowing the diaphragm to work in non-automatic mode. It is a thing that needs to be taken out though, since it sticks out further when the lens is set to smaller openings, and it will block the lens should one try and remove it with the diaphragm set to anything but the largest opening. This pin also needs to be removed should one try and adapt the lens to a 2000/200 series Hasselblad, and the sprung mechanism inside changed accordingly. Anyway, i have decided not to tinker further trying to make the lens fit (also because it is difficult to even get the lens fit in the Hasselblad to begin with, even before twisting it to engage the thread mount: the slightest skew and it sticks at one place or another), risking doing damage to my nearly 50 years old 1000 F. > My impression is that the 30mm fisheye is one of the lenses that is likely > to benefit most from multicoating due to the likelihood of flare sources > in its wide field. Yes. It's almost self evident, isn't it? Large angleof view, more oblique rays, more reflections. But then, the difference between multicoated and single coated lenses is not that big. I'll have to think about this one a bit more. Thanks. One thing more though, i can't figure out (even after reading several pages on your super site. But your site is so mega, that i probably missed it ;-) ): what would be the difference between a Zodiak 8 and a Zodiak 8b. What does the "b" stand for?
From hasselblad mailing list: Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002 From: "Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected] Subject: Re: [HUG] Russian Fisheye, Hasselblad camera...the answers Mark Kronquist wrote: > The Kiev 88 mount is very similar to the Hasselblad 1600 1000 F mount. If > you remove the stop down pin this lens can be mounted on one of these bodies > (about 5 minutes work) Kiev lens, real blad. Blue Moon Camera has a mint > working 1000F ([email protected]) not sure $$$$. They cone up on e*ay > every couple weeks as well. Just a dissenting voice: i bought a Fisheye from Hans Roskam in Kiev 88 mount recently. It would not (!) fit on my Hasselblad 1000 F. The aperture stop down pin was not the problem. (By the way, aperture "stop down pin" is a misnomer. It actually is an aperture "open up pin".) The threads engaged for a while, but then the whole thing stopped, with yet another 45 degree turn to go. Most likely cause was that the thread on the Kiev was cut too coarse. A bit of extra machining might have helped, but (for several other reasons too) i decided not to go that way. Your suggestion to use it on a Kiev camera perhaps is best, but then what will we do for a cheap fisheye for our Hasselblads? ;-) Instead of trying to "force" this lens onto my precious 1000 F, i asked if they could adapt this lens to fit my 2000 FCW, and, of course, they could. Total cost would have been an amazingly low (equivalent of) $110, plus an old Hasselblad extension tube to provide the Hasselblad bayonet. As you will know, the Ukranian (! ;-)) Fisheye is fitted with filters that screw on to the last lens element. These filters are part of the optical formula of the lens. These filters must be removed in the concersion to clear the path of the mirror. Roskam's technician told me that even then it was a matter of tenths or even hundredths of millimeters, and often he needed to take a file to the back of the lens to get the clearance needed. He also was quite confident that, being planparallel pieces of glass, these filters probably only shift the image back a tiny bit, and could be removed without detrimental effects to the lens' performance. Hans Roskam did not agree: he in turn was quite adamant that they were needed to ensure best performance. Now i'm inclined to believe the technician, but hey...! ;-) The lens i received from Roskam was a late 1980's one, without multicoating. I put it on the 1000 F as far as it went, and did some (close range) tests to see how it performed. It was by no means a good lens, not very bad, but definitely not good: weak contrast, a bit of flare, not extremely sharp in the center, getting rather bad near the corners. I was restricted to maximum aperture though (the aperture open up pin did not clear the innards of the 1000 F), and perhaps performance improved with stopping down. And there reportedly is a wide spread in quality from one sample to another. So i will not say that this lens is a bad one per s�, but i certainly wasn't happy with the one i got, and i have returned it to Roskam. Maybe i will try again later.
From hasselblad mailing list: Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 From: Mark Kronquist [email protected] Subject: Re: [HUG] Re: hasselblad V1 #1622 HCP Historical Camera Press from Spokane Washington had a softcover book on collecting and using Hasselblad 1000F 1600F and SWA Cameras and some bits about the Ross stuff as well. I thumbed through a copy (not for sale) at Blue Moon s Library Anyone know of a source for more copies of the book? Mark > With reference to MF SLRs pre-Hasselblad, take a look at Ivor Matanle's > "Collecting and Using Classic SLRs," published by Thames and Hudson, 1996.
from camera fix mailing list: Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 From: "rick_oleson" [email protected] Subject: Re: What is the worst thing you ever worked on? No contest: a Hasselblad 1000F. :)=
[Ed. note: many thanks to Peter Hjortzberg for providing this info on Hasselblad 1000f/1600f repairs!] Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 From: "Hjortzberg-Nordlund, Peter" [email protected] To: "'[email protected]'" [email protected] Subject: Hasselblad 1600f "spare parts are no longer available for repairs !!" Greetings from Sweden! When I was reading your interesting article concerning the old Hasselblad models 1600f and 1000f you did mention, "spare parts are no longer available for repairs". For your information did a former Hasselblad employee did buy all the remaining spare parts to 1600f and 1000f from Hasselblad. He is a well-known and respected technician in Sweden with. He is doing a lot of work for Hasselblad collectors in Japan principally 1600f and 1000f. Pro-Camerara Service Box 115 S-438 23 Landvetter SWEDEN Phone: +46-31-919403 Best regards Peter Hjortzberg Peter Hjortzberg-Nordlund Anders Lundstr�ms g 4 S-16973 Solna SWEDEN Phone: +46-8-7665876 E-mail: [email protected]
End of Page