p.5 #1 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
Just became aware of Hasselblad's campaign and sourcing cameras to influencer YouTubers for advertisement which seems a more and more common practice of camera brands to do in recent years. Hasselblad just exceeded with the amount of cameras they handed out seemingly. I found out about it when watching another unrelated YouTube video about photography where this was mentioned on the side. I am late to the party since I am not following digital medium format, and therefore didn't get any videos about this topic suggested by YouTube.
I am using Hasselblad 500 C/M but only for film which will stay this way.
p.5 #2 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
retrofocus wrote:
Just became aware of Hasselblad's campaign and sourcing cameras to influencer YouTubers for advertisement which seems a more and more common practice of camera brands to do in recent years. Hasselblad just exceeded with the amount of cameras they handed out seemingly.
I think the big distinction most are drawing between what DJI is doing and what the big name brands are doing boils down to: Hasselblad is exchanging about $15,000 worth of gear on average to YouTubers in exchange for 1-3 pieces of content that exist to market the gear, not objectively review it.
Sony, Nikon, Canon, even Fuji...they send review units out for a week to a month and then take the camera or lens back. The income path for a video for one of those brands becomes...who can make the most objective and comprehensive review, because that's what people want to watch.
p.5 #3 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
Yeah, all of the big Japanese brands are pretty respectful of journalistic independence/ethics. In my experience, the Chinese brands are influencer-first and don't really get the ethics at all. I've had to train them to accept shipping lenses back after testing.
p.5 #4 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
deadwolfbones wrote:
Yeah, all of the big Japanese brands are pretty respectful of journalistic independence/ethics. In my experience, the Chinese brands are influencer-first and don't really get the ethics at all. I've had to train them to accept shipping lenses back after testing.
I believe it. And there are thousands of content creators that will happily make full ads for these guys for free for a $100 lens. It's wild to see.
p.5 #5 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
The only reviews I trust are the ones where the reviewer has bought the item themselves with their own money. Everything else is just quasi-entertainment. Whether the reviewer gets to keep the products or has to return them makes some difference, but in the end, in both cases they are accepting something of value from a manufacturer.
The manufacturers' practice of sending out hand-selected review copies does not help building trust, either.
Not that any of this is new, and has been around since the print media days. It is just becoming a bit (okay, a lot) more blatant.
p.5 #6 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
RoamingScott wrote:
...Sony, Nikon, Canon, even Fuji...they send review units out for a week to a month and then take the camera or lens back. The income path for a video for one of those brands becomes...who can make the most objective and comprehensive review, because that's what people want to watch.
That all sounds well and good until an objective review becomes objectionable to the manufacturer because the product was flawed and the reviewer honed in on that. No more loaners after that, at least for the smaller channels.
p.5 #7 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
There were for the X2Dii - but also for many other cameras, the Q3 43 comes to mind - a recurring set of broiler plate statements that were present in most videos. The worst presenters regurgitated the same text blocks verbatim. š¤®
That said, the people who actually know something about both gear and photography had real world anchoring of their comments. In fact, I held off on getting an OG X2D100C precisely because of some of the real world issues raised.
I have been extremely happy with the X2Dii and the two primes that I have, but none of that has been because it has a sleek dark gray luxury look, nor its beacon of an orange shutter button, nor the kitschy H imprinted into the focus ringsā¦
However, the IBIS has been fantastic, AF (for my uses) nearly flawless, controls seamless, and (what matters most) the photos themselves very satisfying. To be fair, I could say the same of the Q3 43.
If anything, the YouTube onslaught might have turned off some experienced photographers, because it diluted the important fact that the camera generates spectacular images. However, as an owner of that system, it is in my best interest for Hassie to have a market sufficiently large to justify their continued investment in more lenses. I am fine with them luring others to the platform by whatever means they like.
[ Note to self to start a YouTube channel and shoot for at least 2000 views]
p.5 #8 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
mranger211 wrote:
The only reviews I trust are the ones where the reviewer has bought the item themselves with their own money. Everything else is just quasi-entertainment. Whether the reviewer gets to keep the products or has to return them makes some difference, but in the end, in both cases they are accepting something of value from a manufacturer.
The manufacturers' practice of sending out hand-selected review copies does not help building trust, either.
Not that any of this is new, and has been around since the print media days. It is just becoming a bit (okay, a lot) more blatant.
For the record, samples from some brands (Nikon, for one) come from their regular fulfillment centers and are definitely not hand-selected. I can't speak to all brands, but many of the more respectable ones are not cherry-picking unicorn copies for reviewers.
p.5 #10 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
Youtube is entertainment. I would never go there for serious reviews of camera equipment. It's fun to see the features, or how the item functions in real life or hear some commentary on it, but for the most part it's all astro turfed and fake as can be. Young people seem to love it though, so it continues to grow. The entire system of hand outs by manufacturers, hype videos by influencers and garbage content is all part of the dystopian modern world we have created and enabled. This is where the value of forums and the like comes in to play as people are able to able to read opinions not influenced by thousands of dollars of free gear.
p.5 #11 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
Youtube influencers are an incredible marketing tool. I don't blame Hasselblad at all for gifting the cams out. Nor would I blame the YT reviewer for flipping the equipment after, that's the whole point if you're not getting paid to do the review.
If I want something approaching objectivity I'll go to DP review. If I want to get an idea of the basics of how the camera, lenses, or system works, plus some sample images, that's what YT is great at.
p.5 #12 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
Online video is an extremely powerful communication modality. Most camera YT people are narcissists, sadly, but you'll get that in a world characterised by rampant individualism. And it's a bit of wild west scene, until it (maybe) settles down.
Often, using subtitles and mute in tandem works well, many make mini-movies free of useful data. One thing you will never hear: 'this lens will suit those with an interest in xxx' - they don't care about you, dear reader, they have never done any market research. It's all about them, their opinions, you are merely the consumer.
For camera/lenses, I often look for the 'after using for six months' videos, or read trusted websites. Treat all of it as data observations, to then be cross-checked as your findings build towards your own still-provisional opinions. Always note the presenter's biases, look at their previous work.
Realise that all you see is approved, that so much of great value is deliberately not available. I use Google AI a lot for factual info, at which it is generally good, and its bias shows up more obviously, so question design is critical.
p.5 #13 · David Imel says the quiet part out loud about Hasselblad
philip_pj wrote:
Online video is an extremely powerful communication modality. Most camera YT people are narcissists, sadly, but you'll get that in a world characterised by rampant individualism. And it's a bit of wild west scene, until it (maybe) settles down.
Parasocial relationships. Guilty as charged. Completely binged Grainydays channel over the past two weeks, of which David Imel happens to feature a lot in, ironically enough. Had no idea how huge analog photography is now. I knew it was popular, but not as massive as it is (now).
I shot film not because I wanted to but because I had to. I was shocked to see how much film these people go through. We were also very careful with our exposures, I can see David Imel is as careful as we were as you can see him working in grainydays youtube videos.
Not trying to disparage anyone, I guess there's not much formal training anymore in regards to film photography to teach the discipline. Also, it seems many of the people shooting film on youtube weren't around when film was all there was and so there's a nostalgia aspect to it that isn't there for us oldtimers. Grasping for a time before.
