I just cannot believe what Hasselblad has done. I read with great disappointment about the new H3D ---misleading advertisement about it being full frame. HOwever, it is now clear you need to purchase it with its own back---- what is the last straw is the fact that future lenses will only be chipped for the H3D. I switched from Contax to Hasselblad because of my concern about what their demise would have on future developments, upgrades, etc. However, what Hasselblad has done is likely going to have similar ramifications for those who are not wetted to using their digital backs. I think their decision is a tragic marketing error that will have severe negative ramifications.
Whether or not they deserved it, Hasselblad had a huge advantage in the MF market. This is clearly going to allow the competetion to catch up.
best article on LL yet. I 'd say photographers not yet invested in this, better rent the gear they need until we have all the new announced systems available
Hasselblad obviously sensed that they were now pretty much the only game in town (even though that was by default rather than merit) and felt that they could use that postion to secure the market for their digital backs. Microsoft has famously done similar things in the software world, by tying other products to their OS. I don't know how good the Hy6 will be, but given it's legacy, it probably won't be as flexible as the the 645 SLR came to be (I had a Rollei 6008i for a while before going to a Contax 645 so I feel qualified to comment on this). Phase One and Leaf (and photgraphers, generally) better hope that Mamiya and any potential successor to Contax get their act together, or they will be laid to waste in the corporate graveyard like the fate of so many software companies were in Microsoft's wake.
EDIT: Just read MR´s comment on LL - it is right on the money! Someone should send it high up in the hierarchy of Hasselblad and hopefully they would think twice over the direction they are heading. I think they are heading downhill with that thinking...
...they are basically telling their customer base that upgrading is no certainty and that they no longer strive towards backward compatibility. Sad.
Trying to corner the market is often a bad idea... ...the new Hassy CEO is not to my liking, he is an agressive and overconfident person judging from his comments on Hassy and the future.
He seems to know precious little of the whims of serious photogs who have been around and tinkered with a lot of stuff.
I am quite sure they will still sell a lot of cameras but thinking like you are the only viable option and limiting your potential buyers options are bad ideas - in any business...
(Funny, we have had more or less the same taste in cameras, I've had the Mamiya 7II with most lenses, the Contax RTSII and III and RX, the G2 set up, I used to shoot the Rollei 6008i and always had that little Ricoh Gr1s/V as a sidekick - you've got great taste by my standards! )
Even though there are other new bodies out there, the Hasselblad's are probably still the best. I think Hassy was tired of people buying their bodies and not their backs (where the most money is).
I think that Hassy want to be the big lonely player of mf like Canon is for DSLR's. I don't think that most people will care that much either. They will buy "the whole Hassy package" and be happy. Not all of course but more than enough of people.
Marbrink: yes, it will work like that until that very niche market sways toward a more cost effective solution. The problem is that Hassy aims at being state of the art - but by locking the system they might be left behind in the long run. They are also aiming at the high end photographer market which for the same reason might choose another, still pricey, option if they believe it to be a better solution for them.
I think they are out on thin ice, if they revert back to a more open standard later on if it doesn't pan out for them they might already have suffered irreparable damage bying restricting the system in the first place...
Henrik,
You may be right about that. I would want to see a more cost effective integrated cameras from Hasselblad..
BTW. Do we know that they won't sell the H2 alongside the H3? I mean the H2 for those who want an open solution and the H3 for a more integrated Hassy solution with better image processing etc...
Read that you won't be able to use the new 28mm on H1 and H2. That's just stupid because both are fairly new and very expensive cameras. I'm starting to agree with you guys but I still think many will stay with Hassy..
Forgetting the color balance non-sense (and some 'oversharpened' comments for a totally unsharpened image!) -might wnt to see a few P25 vs P45 images I posted (for got which thread?? )
. I am very surprised how much the detail carries even in small images. Means less sharpening, more accurate color (in a P45 image, you can take all four RGBG pixels and you STILL have the resolutionof the DMR!)
Anyone having H1/H2 better hold on to it and hope that LEAF and Phase One continue to support. At least the older Hassey's will be able to use the fine HV lenses.
For anyone wanting to return to the fold, I have this spare Contax 645 body....
IMO it is debatable how much it will hurt them to make the H3D closed wrt. backs, but what is really a bonehead move is to lock in the new lens to the H3D. That shoots everyone in the back who has already invested in a Hassie body, but has another back. I understand that Hassie/Imacon users will be able to upgrade fairly reasonably to the H3D, but that is simply not enough.
It seems clear that they were feeling in control of the market and made a monopolistic move. Thank dog that the new Leaf/Sinar/Rollei came now. That just might save Rollei, which is good in itself, and it might also boost Sinar/Leica to a position in the MF market which they could not have reached on its own. It might even boost poor Mamiya's fortune.
I am Danish of background, and was always proud of the "little" Skandinavian camera that could, but now I am just ashamed. I wonder if the CEO ever took pictures. What a cockup.
carstenw wrote:
I am Danish of background, and was always proud of the "little" Skandinavian camera that could, but now I am just ashamed. I wonder if the CEO ever took pictures. What a cockup.
Then you can still back Phase One, based in Copenhagen
Hasselblad is trying to bury Phase One and Leaf. I wouldn't care if I liked the H series but I don't, and right now I am very glad I didn't invest in it. I wouldn't choose the Hasselblad backs over P1 or Leaf either.
I have never been so excited by a camera announcement as I am about the Hy6. Simply can't wait. A German/Danish collaboration like a Phase One Hy6 should be perfect for a Dane in Germany
They try to lock photographers into a system where Hasselblad decides what lenses and what sensors to use, as well as the prices. Looks like something that Sony would have done, except Sony's customers are mainly ignorant consumers. It's difficult to see what Hasselblad can gain here. They are more or less throwing out customers with big investments in non-Hasselblad backs. Not a smart move.
I wonder how Fuji looks at this. As far as I know, they don't supply a digital back for the GX645 in Japan, but I asume that their customers buy from other sources. Will they accept this very limited choice of backs for what in Japan is marketed as a Japanese product? Or maybe there won't be a Fuji version?
I'd love to know more about how the back interfaces with the camera. Is it really possible for them to make a camera that won't interface with another brand back Gotta be someone out there who can fabricate a workaround.
MF digital is a small market - mistakes like this can sink a company quite easily. Unlike the Microsoft example I don't think Hassleblad quite has the market dominance required to succede with this anti competative strategy and unlike the PC market ( back then) the MF digital market is likely shrinking rather than rapidly expanding. MF digital has not been success it was meant to be IMO - most working pro's who used MF film cameras for their work have now found that Canon FF DSLR's do the job just as well and have no need to make the massive investment needed in MF digital. The 5x4 sector is where MF digital now competes - jobs that require the very highest quality for large repro sizes - from what I'm hearing a lot of pro's in this sector simply hire in the camera on a per job basis. If potential buyers are now going to be tied into a particular back/body/lens combination it will make them all the more hesitant to make that commitment.
foto-z wrote:
Not yet. I believe the only limiting factor was price and that will inevitably continue to drop.
Not so in my humble opinion - unless there is a large growth in the market then prices will not move significantly and for a large growth in the market people have to be convinced that the extra resolution and image quality is worth the investment and this has not been the case as yet. At whatever pace MF technology can move forwards you can be sure that Canon, Leica Nikon etc will advancing behind at the same or perhaps even a greater rate.
Hasselblad’s core value for many years has been non-obsolescence. For example, if one bought an expensive Zeiss lens, one knew they could use it on future Hasselblads. I am a ‘V’ system owner for this reason.
Maybe now their core value is planned obsolescence.
foto-z wrote:
Not yet. I believe the only limiting factor was price and that will inevitably continue to drop.
Early adapters have advantages, but they pay a price for it, too.
I think this is one reason for sure, but another one is, that a lot of photographers waited, the entire MF-digistuff to become more "mature", too . Hassi's actual upgrade-policy is a clear indication, that this "mature" level isn't achieved, yet. Compared to the DSLR, where the innovations have sort of slow down.
Once, the MFback-developments are more "stable", more photographers will follow.
I haven't counted, how many diffrent backs & MF-cams have been released by Sinar only, during the last years...
This feels like the decision which killed Hasselblad (and Imacon) to me. I am sure that Christian Poulsen wanted the Imacon backs to be the same (moderate) success that the Hasselblad cameras were, but he really screwed up here.
The point about non-obsolescence is a very good one. Hasselblads were always compatible, except the hickups on the way from V to F and and V/F to H, neither of which were avoidable, IMO, to realise the benefits that they were after at the time. This move is quite the opposite, totally unnecessary.
shirozina, wise words spoken. I agree that price is the main obstacle, but I also agree that the price cannot come down until the volume goes up, something which may never happen. This does make the Leica/Sinar move very interesting though. Leica has a strong new investor (well, new as majority shareholder) and the synergies between the 35mm and MF developments, given that Leica uses MF-style CCD sensors anyway, are quite strong. This could save both companies a lot of money, and help both because of the excellence of the other. What at first looked very strange now looks very clever. They will never need to compete against each other, but share so much in terms of development costs. I suppose that there will be tech-heads flying between Solms and Switzerland on a regular basis now.
) 
) 
Gotta be someone out there who can fabricate a workaround.