More CFV Woes

[Michael H. Cothran]

February seems to be an important month for me, relating to Hasselblad. I purchased my first Hasselblad in February, 1972 (a new 500CM with 80/2.8 chrome lens and A12 back).
So this month (February 2012) marks the 40th anniversary of my continued relationship with the Swedish company. But it also marks the anniversary of my CFV woes, which are listed here -

February, 2008 - I went digital, purchasing an original CFV for $9000 (Hasselblad had a $1000 incentive at the time).

February, 2010 - My CFV developed some strange fungus underneath the IR filter. Final cost of repair, including sending it to Denmark - Over $500 plus 6 weeks timeframe.

February, 2012 - I took my camera out yesterday (first time this winter), and noted once again some strange artifacts showing up on my images. As my heart sank to my stomach, I shot an image of the overcast sky. Sure enough, I have more crud on my IR filter again. A final scrutiny of the IR filter with a Rodenstock loupe verifies. So it seems that another trip to Denmark, and another $500 in eminent.  

I'm wondering if not using the back for a few months during the winter has anything to do with it? FWIW - my camera rested in its backpack case, with DB and lens mounted. I don't know how this stuff creeps in!!

Below I've included the shot made of an overcast sky, clearly showing all the unwelcome invaders. Hopefully the jpeg enlarges enough to see them. I'm waiting for Hasselblad USA's response before sending it to them.

Note - the black spots you see are a very light colored cyan on the actual IR filter, while the filament pieces are white, almost crystalline.

[jotloob]

Michael

I am sorry to hear that this happened again to your CFV .
Two question arise for me . If it really was fungus the first time , then it looks as if not all fungus-spores could be removed and the fungus grew again ?
An other question is , how do you store your back in the time you don't use it ?
All my gear is "protected" by having little silica gel cusions in glasses placed with the gear in a closed cabinet .
The humidity in the places my gear is stored is never higher than 60% . In wintertime usually around 35% - 40% . Just my 2 cents for the future .
Independant of CFV or other digital equipment .

Regards . Jürgen

[John R Smith]

Michael

You have been very unlucky. Others (on other forums) have posted regarding the same fungal infestation, always (so far) with the 16MP CFV. So you are not alone, but I think you are the first to experience the problem twice.

Why on earth should this happen to Hasselblad DBs, when Phase who use exactly the same Kodak sensors do not experience the problem?

John

[BAB]

did you store it with the batteries in it?

[John R Smith]

did you store it with the batteries in it?

Interesting. And why did you ask the question?

J

[Michael H. Cothran]

I wonder now if I should have done something different in storing the unit. I appreciate the questions. Here's what I did: I stored my entire system in my photo backpack. In fact, all my gear lives there year around. The DB was mounted onto the body along with a lens. The battery was NOT installed. Humidity is fairly high here in the summer, but very low in the winter due to electric heat in my home.

On hindsight, I wonder if, perhaps, I should have activated the back, and fired off a shot or two every few days. Other than that, I don't know what else I could have done differently.

[Kumar]

FWIW, I had a similar problem with my 132C. This happened on a trip to India in fall 2009. The back was stored along with a Betterlight scan back, some lenses and a Sinar camera in a Pelican case with lots of fresh silica gel. Nothing else was affected.

When I returned to Japan, I got in touch with Shriro - the distributor, and at that time, the parent company of Hasselblad. They wanted me to go through a dealer, who was going to be kind enough to charge me 100,000 to 150,000 JPY versus Hasselblad's price of 295 Euro. I wrote to David Grover and then after going up the chain, I was finally able to send the back directly to Denmark at a cost of 40,000 JPY. A few early units of the Sinarback 22 also had a similar problem, but it was quickly resolved by changing the IR filter coating. I now have a Sinarback 54HR and am very happy with it.

A couple more threads here:
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=25619
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=28682

Kumar

[David Grover / Capture One]

I wonder now if I should have done something different in storing the unit. I appreciate the questions. Here's what I did: I stored my entire system in my photo backpack. In fact, all my gear lives there year around. The DB was mounted onto the body along with a lens. The battery was NOT installed. Humidity is fairly high here in the summer, but very low in the winter due to electric heat in my home.

On hindsight, I wonder if, perhaps, I should have activated the back, and fired off a shot or two every few days. Other than that, I don't know what else I could have done differently.

Hey Michael,

Humidity can cause that kind of fungal infection(?) that you have unfortunately seen.  So for storage try to keep it in a cool dry place.  If you are in a particularly humid area then you can get such things as dry boxes for storage.

So very sorry to hear this has happened again, but it is an easy fix.

David

[ced]

It is the "dreaded lurgi"   
I guess too much humidity.
Get your back pack to dry out completely.
Maybe after a long heavy shoot the back was placed in too cool a place causing condensation.

[ondebanks]

Why on earth should this happen to Hasselblad DBs, when Phase who use exactly the same Kodak sensors do not experience the problem?

John: because it's not a Kodak problem - they don't make the IR-blocking filters. It's a Hasselblad/Imacon problem - they integrate the sensors into backs and add the IR filter.


Michael: your filter had a case of "Imacon-itis". It's a known, long-standing vulnerability of the IR filters on many backs made by Imacon (which is what your CFV-16 is). Google "Imacon filter fungus" for example - quite a few problems reported by different users. For a while there, I was keeping on eye on Imacon Flexframe backs for sale on ebay. Nearly every one I saw had evidence of fungus beneath the filter (OK, that's probably part of the reason why they were on ebay!). It wasn't always verbally disclosed, but the photos didn't lie.

Hasselblad/Imacon must know all about this, since for years it's been reported to occasionally happen to their backs, and they must have repaired quite a few with this problem by now. The best explanation I've seen is that the rear of the filter is coated with something which actually (inadvertently) acts as a nourishing culture for fungus. Newer Hasselblad backs have apparently eschewed this.

But I have a BIG problem with them charging you to repair something which is their own design flaw. If this were a car, there would have been a global recall and a grovelling apology to all customers.

I guess I'm lucky, in that I have the same sensor in a Kodak back - and the IR filter clicks off for cleaning or IR shooting or swapping to an AA filter. But Kodak's IR filter does not have that type of vulnerable coating in the first place.

Ray