First Hasselblad in space goes to auction next month

A camera that NEVER went to the moon as well as the crew.

Oct 30, 2014permalink

You don't know much about the Mercury program, do you?

-Suntan

Oct 30, 2014permalink

There's a lot of info on youtube.
That was one of the greatest myths of the last century.
Serious members of the Scientific Community have published books about it.
I'm not going to enter this subject.

Oct 30, 2014permalink

Unless you bring something new to the table, just let the rest of us discuss a camera that "didn't go anywhere".

Oct 30, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

Some men and some Hasselblad's went to the moon. This one didn't.

How could any sane person not believe men went to the moon? Oh! That's because they are not exactly sane.

Amazing piece of history.

Oct 30, 2014permalink

sandy b

Ahh, a flat worlder. You already entered the subject. And any fool or grifter can publish a book. It always amuses me the easiest to prove is the one the conspriacy nuts go after.

Oct 30, 2014permalink

JamesInCA

Regardless of whether you believe the insanity that men never went to the moon ... this isn't advertised as a moon camera.

Oct 30, 2014permalink

TheDreamingWatchman

Typical conspiracy lunatic: He doesn’t know the difference between Mercury and Apollo (nor does he care), but he still thinks he`s the one who knows the truth.

Who cares about such boring stuff as facts, evidence and proof if there are some youtube-videos that claim everything is an amazing, global, gigantic conspiracy?

Oct 30, 2014permalink

Hey papa, leaving aside your conspiracy theories, the Mercury mission was never about going to the moon. That didn't happen until two space projects later.

The fact that you don't know these most basic of details about the 60's space programs, yet have no qualms passing out your version of history just makes you come off as completely delusional.

-Suntan

Oct 31, 2014permalink

Are there people out there that believe the Earth is flat...Mahahahaha!!!!

Oct 31, 2014permalink

Of course the Earth is flat.
I can prove it to you:
Look out your window.
We are lead to believe it's round, but can one actually see the roundness of it?
We know, deep inside ourselves that Earth is flat, but we are afraid to be laughed and ridiculed by others who happily associate themselves with a general concept. We live and restrict our lives by the general rule of not provoking shame upon us.
When all of the contestants who answered my comment will LEARN to read, they will notice that I sustained that this camera and its crew never went to to the Moon, which is true. I don't see the conspiracy on my comment.
Me, a youtubist? Yes. Since it has become the most popular encyclopedia for the masses . There's a lot of crap in Youtube, yes, but here are also many other collaborations of social and scientific value there.
So leave your torches, pics and axes home. This is a friendly forum, NOT an Inquisitional Assembly.

Oct 31, 2014*permalink

@papa natas What about radar signals? They need satellites to bounce the signal because...the Earth is round?! If I sail a boat...it goes all around the world and I don't fall off. Nice troll mate. By the way, I shot JFK as I have a time machine...;)

Oct 31, 2014*permalink

Of course!
Remember the Old Days, when AM radio waves were transmitted by tall towers? The tallest, the better? And where were they more efficient? In the plains.. Then came FM, a shorter wave length, more efficient because it bounced on the atmosphere, and they relayed from the top of mountains. Then we had Ham Radio to get in touch with others on the farther side of our planet. Then came CB, and all Hell broke loose. But people wanted more... So they invented the satellite communications for mortals who wanted to expend more money talking trivialities. Radar is a very different matter. Ask your English WW II Vets. about it. (Or see it on You tube)
About sailing around the world, well, go. And the minute you'll see your hat going straight up into the blue sky, then yes, you are under. I know you didn't shoot JFK.That's a fact.
Another fact is that I do not troll. I explain. Trolling involves insulting and diminishing others on the Net.
Not my style.

Oct 31, 2014permalink

Sailors knew even before scientists that the world is round. You see the masts rising out of the horizontal long before you ser the hull...

Oct 31, 2014permalink

Horizon not horizontal.
(Stupid predictive text)

Oct 31, 2014permalink

keep on trolling...
"you ser..." the hull

Oct 31, 2014*permalink

Of course Earth is flat! Otherwise australians would fall into space...

Oct 31, 2014permalink

Give the man a cigar!!

Oct 31, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

Hey Photoman.

I SHOT JFK.

Oct 31, 2014permalink

And I shot Lee Harvey Oswald. How cool is that?

Oct 31, 2014permalink

And I shot the Sheriff, but I didn't shoot the Deputy.

Oct 31, 2014permalink

This is getting silly.

Oct 31, 2014permalink

It's all Wye' fault.

Oct 31, 2014permalink

"papa natas" or "papa açorda"?

Nov 1, 2014permalink

speak white, sardina freshcua!

Nov 1, 2014permalink

*zing*

Nov 1, 2014permalink

Holger Drallmeyer

Yeah I've seen those stupid conspiracy comments about how it would be impossible to compose and image with a top viewfinder.This 500c modified version as well as the later HEC had the top viewfinder removed. A focus scale was used and distances were guesstimated for closeups and infinity for well...infinity.

Nov 1, 2014permalink

Is it the same people back in history, that thought the Earth was flat also burnt people at the stake for heresy??? You have to watch these people...they have voices in their head...

Nov 2, 2014permalink

Yeah right. And there ought to be an Intelligence Inquisition to burn people who do not *get* satire at the stake.

Nov 3, 2014permalink

@ManuelVilardeMacedo I get the satire, but there is some scary people that don't and would rather trade your life, then their ideas.

Nov 3, 2014permalink

Photoman,
There's a touch for editing text here.
Use it.
By the way, nobody was burn because the earth was or wasn't flat.
They were burn on account of Galileo's Theory exposing that earth wasn't the center of the Universe.
I was there.

Nov 3, 2014*permalink

Papa natas: the Earth IS the centre of the universe!

Nov 3, 2014permalink

Hugo808

If people didn't go to the moon, just where were they going in that enormous rocket?

Nov 13, 2014permalink

Hugo: what rocket? What you've seen was a farce staged by the US in order to convince the USSR of their supremacy in space!
(In case you didn't realize it, we're just having a bit of fun...)

Nov 13, 2014permalink

Hugo808

You might have been but the world is full of people that aren't!

Nov 13, 2014permalink

Stephen Scharf

I love that the onboard equipment list for M/A-9 includes "peanut butter sandwiches". LOL! ;-)

Oct 30, 2014permalink

Paul Farace

Astronaut John Glenn purchased an Ansco/Minolta 35mm at a local drug store to become the first space camera (personal photography was NOT on the mission schedule!)... the Mercury capsule had sequence cameras to photograph the pilot and a periscope camera to photograph the earth, but nothing in the hand of the man inside! The Ansco/Minolta had to be modified with the addition of a Polaroid camera viewfinder glued to the body!!! How's that for a joint effort? The Hassy was likely purchased the same way and if so was NOT public property. And yes, the only "original" part is likely the body... the lens and magazine are likely later versions.

Oct 30, 2014permalink

Just a Photographer

News Read all about it!!!

There is evidence of a big bump in the earth and an alien spaceship on picture 7. ;)

Oct 30, 2014*permalink

OK, let's not panic here.
It's an empty pizza box.

Oct 31, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

It is just a machine, a box that took a few important photographs, but apparently not the "earthrise" series. Here they are still used by students in college.But there were no black lenses, and I believe that as nobody in a helmet could focus accurately enough, the images were made using 50mm f4 Distagon lenses, and the machines were Hasselblad ELs with 70mm film magazines -because you could not change the film outside either.

I have not ever seen a photograph of this model in use in space, but the lens is not original as it is black, and it is missing its viewfinder attachment ( they had made special ones for helmeted folk).

I can remember these things as I was so thrilled at the time and we had the official heavily illustrated books from the States in the house as soon as they became available.

I venture to propose it is a fake

Oct 30, 2014permalink

razadaz

As I recall the first Blad used in space was purchased from a normal camera shop by the astronaut who used it and had it hastily adapted for used in space. It was only later that Hasselblad were commissioned to produce the cameras. It is true that the cameras had silver lenses at that time, but it is possible that the black finish was part of the adaption NASA had made, along with the blackening of the chrome on the body to prevent reflection when shooting out of the ports.

Oct 30, 2014permalink

Simon97

I don't think that it is fake. As to it being a just a box, well yes it is, but the Mona Lisa is just a wooden panel with paint on it. Probably worth a couple bucks at a garage sale if it weren't known the world over.

Oct 30, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

Obviously a wind-up. I have a brother called Simon who does the same thing! I am not fond of the Mona Lisa and made more and better pictures with a Hasselblad.
However, a painting is valued as a unique work, of which there is only a single handmade example, the product of it's artist's skill and imagination, and it has a value based on it's uniqueness: meaning that there is only 1 of them.

It wasn't mass-produced in a factory, and you will always be able to look at it, whereas soon the 'Blad will be thing of the past without available film.

Nov 1, 2014*permalink

Top Dog Imaging

Who currently owns this camera? It should reside in the Smithsonian or at least the Kennedy Space Center. Taxpayers footed the bill.

Oct 30, 2014permalink

David Rossberg

Seeing as you present it as such, do you know this for a fact? Or did you just assume?

Nov 4, 2014permalink

ianpiper

Interesting assertion. Your evidence?

Nov 14, 2014permalink

W4YNE 1

What no pop up flash? ;)

Oct 30, 2014permalink

Mark Banas

And no Swarovski crystal buttons!

Oct 30, 2014permalink

Just a Photographer

Not even a wooden grip and a camera inside that says 'Made by Sony'.

Oct 30, 2014permalink

no selfies either.

Oct 31, 2014permalink

Ken Phillips

How is this NOT property of the citizens of the USA? Was it merely lent by Hassy, and then changed hands a few time? Curious minds want to know.

Oct 30, 2014permalink

Although not substantiated, it was always claimed that Wally Schirra went to a camera store and bought it himself after asking reporters at Nat Geo what kind of camera would be good to take.

-Suntan

Oct 30, 2014permalink

AbrasiveReducer

Ken Rockwell bought it through Shutterbug Ads some years ago.

Oct 30, 2014permalink

ianpiper

So, if any US citizen bought it, it belongs to the USA? Wow.

Nov 14, 2014permalink

Love it.

Oct 30, 2014permalink

The camera is genuine but I doubt the lens is, the black Planars didn't arrive until much later, they were all silver back then

Oct 30, 2014permalink

I am no expert at all, but I may note that as this was likely a special order camera, the lens may be custom too. (if it is indeed genuine, then this may be the explanation). Nice sleuthing.

Oct 30, 2014permalink

Yes, it's possible as on close inspection it doesn't appear to have the T* coating. However all the photos I have ever seen of the early space Blads had silver lenses, Planar Distagon and Sonnar

Oct 30, 2014permalink

I tip the hat again :) great community of gear junkies!

Oct 30, 2014permalink

Knowing the story around photo #4 may give clues too.

Oct 30, 2014permalink

S/N 2823801

Oct 30, 2014permalink

https://rrauction.creatavist.com/rrauction-the-first-hasselblad-in-space

Anyone who knew and used Hasselblads in the 70's wold know this

Oct 30, 2014permalink

AndreaV

Oct 30, 2014permalink

Malikknows

The caption on photo 9 reads, in part, "plus the original metal facing was repainted black to minimize reflections."

Perhaps this is a hint that black was specified.

Good question and I'd bet there is an interesting backstory here.

Very much enjoy these history stories featuring the artifacts of photography.

Oct 30, 2014permalink

Yes I read that but the 'facing' presumably refers to the camera body

Oct 30, 2014permalink

Malikknows

AndreaV's link to the auction site settles the lens question, imho. The photo with the astronauts holding what looks like a straight-out-of-the-box camera pretty much settles the question.

Very informative. Thanks.

Oct 30, 2014*permalink

Yes, it does

Oct 30, 2014permalink