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)