FS: Vintage Hasselblad System

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 06:57:41 -0600, "jjs" wrote:

"Bob Ford" wrote in message
.. .

[... Bob reminds us he is asking $2000 ...]

Whoops! I missed that part when I suggested you were asking too much. If the
backs all match, and the hardware is in EX condition, then you are closer to
the mark.


OK. So you are going to buy the outfit, then. Great. Let us know
how it works out.


Gary Gaugler, Ph.D.
Microtechnics, Inc.
Granite Bay, CA 95746
916.791.8191
gary@microtechnics dot com

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 17:30:33 -0800, Gary G see.signature@bottom
wrote:

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 06:57:41 -0600, "jjs" wrote:

"Bob Ford" wrote in message
. ..

[... Bob reminds us he is asking $2000 ...]

Whoops! I missed that part when I suggested you were asking too much. If the
backs all match, and the hardware is in EX condition, then you are closer to
the mark.


OK. So you are going to buy the outfit, then. Great. Let us know
how it works out.

Actually he is too late.

Yes, all the numbers matched on the backs and the hardware and optics
were in excellent condition both mechanically and cosmetically.
I sold it locally enough that I was able to deliver it it person and
take the $1800.00 cash that the buyer cheerfully handed over to me.

It was a great buy IMHO of course :-)

Gary Gaugler, Ph.D.
Microtechnics, Inc.
Granite Bay, CA 95746
916.791.8191
gary@microtechnics dot com

Bob Ford
Images In Motion
www.imagesinmotion.com

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 02:40:18 GMT, Bob Ford
wrote:

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 17:30:33 -0800, Gary G see.signature@bottom
wrote:

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 06:57:41 -0600, "jjs" wrote:

"Bob Ford" wrote in message
...

[... Bob reminds us he is asking $2000 ...]

Whoops! I missed that part when I suggested you were asking too much. If the
backs all match, and the hardware is in EX condition, then you are closer to
the mark.


OK. So you are going to buy the outfit, then. Great. Let us know
how it works out.

Actually he is too late.

Yes, all the numbers matched on the backs and the hardware and optics
were in excellent condition both mechanically and cosmetically.
I sold it locally enough that I was able to deliver it it person and
take the $1800.00 cash that the buyer cheerfully handed over to me.

It was a great buy IMHO of course :-)

Great. You made out. If you look at what you originally paid for all
of the items and now got $1800 for them, what is your total loss?

No need to answer that question since I have been there before.
The/my point is this stuff is just not holding on to its value like it
used to. This is sad. But it is reality. Hassy was over priced to
begin with. But the Zeiss lenses are very tough to beat! I still
love the 180CF.

Gary Gaugler, Ph.D.
Microtechnics, Inc.
Granite Bay, CA 95746
916.791.8191
gary@microtechnics dot com

"Gary G" see.signature@bottom wrote in message
news
Great. You made out. If you look at what you originally paid for all
of the items and now got $1800 for them, what is your total loss?

So Gary, do you believe your current digital camera will last ten years -
presuming you will use it? I predict you will spend more on digital cameras
in ten years than you would for a single 'blad and lens, and all that time
the quality of your images will be less than the hasselblad can produce -
provided, of course, your standards are high enough.

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 07:53:39 -0600, "jjs" wrote:

"Gary G" see.signature@bottom wrote in message
news
Great. You made out. If you look at what you originally paid for all
of the items and now got $1800 for them, what is your total loss?

So Gary, do you believe your current digital camera will last ten years -
presuming you will use it? I predict you will spend more on digital cameras
in ten years than you would for a single 'blad and lens, and all that time
the quality of your images will be less than the hasselblad can produce -
provided, of course, your standards are high enough.

Yeah, as in "you can see" !!


Regards,

John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org
Please remove the "_" when replying via email

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 07:53:39 -0600, "jjs" wrote:

"Gary G" see.signature@bottom wrote in message
news
Great. You made out. If you look at what you originally paid for all
of the items and now got $1800 for them, what is your total loss?

So Gary, do you believe your current digital camera will last ten years -
presuming you will use it? I predict you will spend more on digital cameras
in ten years than you would for a single 'blad and lens, and all that time
the quality of your images will be less than the hasselblad can produce -
provided, of course, your standards are high enough.


Well, my current digicam is a Nikon D1x accompanied by a CP5000.
these are for normal shooting. I found that landscapes and nature
stuff is too mundane and redundant to warrant any attention.
Consequently, I have "focused" on only scientific images over the past
five to six years. This is done with optical microscopes and scanning
electron microscope equipment. All are digital.

My history and recent work can be seen at http://www.photoweb.net

The b/w nudes are quite good IMO, and really convey the quality of the
Zeiss lenses on the Blad. That said, there is not much market for
this sort of images or landscapes... any one with a camera is a
competitor. So, I do scientific images only. My standards are based
on what my agencies will or can sell.


Gary Gaugler, Ph.D.
Microtechnics, Inc.
Granite Bay, CA 95746
916.791.8191
gary@microtechnics dot com

"Gary G" see.signature@bottom wrote in message
...

So Gary, do you believe your current digital camera will last ten years -
presuming you will use it? I predict you will spend more on digital
cameras
in ten years than you would for a single 'blad and lens, and all that time
the quality of your images will be less than the hasselblad can produce -
provided, of course, your standards are high enough.


Well, my current digicam is a Nikon D1x accompanied by a CP5000.
these are for normal shooting. I found that landscapes and nature
stuff is too mundane and redundant to warrant any attention.

I see you cannot resist making an opportunity to be arrogant. Well, we don't
care that you do not do landscapses. Moving on, then;

Consequently, I have "focused" on only scientific images over the past
five to six years. This is done with optical microscopes and scanning
electron microscope equipment. All are digital.

Okay. All you had to say was that you don't _need_ high quality images. I
will stand by my prediction. You will replace that digital camera more three
times in the next ten years.