gdstaples wrote:
Gary - the problem I have with Hasselblad is that they are changing mid-stream and leaving many shooters that have purchased many thousands of dollars of their gear stranded.
If they would have said last year that after the H2 there will be no further support for third party backs, many people would not have purchased the H1/H2 and $15K worth of lenses.
Sure you can sell the gear at $.50-$.60 on the dollar but that screws many depreciation schedules up in a rather big way.
I agree they can/should do what they feel is necessary for their company - just be honest and up-front about it from the get-go.
"Our H1D, H2D, and now the H3D are strictly medium format DSLR products that we will offer. Because our technology of manufacturing the front end (the camera body), we can create a much more powerful digital magazine."
"Hasselblad is developing a DSLR solution in an effort to provide the highest image quality only attainable by knowing the technical specifications of each component (lens, body, digital magazine.)
Things like Digital APO - and now Lens Distortion - are technologies we simply do not know about on other digital magazines (similar to a Canon body/lens not optimized for a Nikon sensor.)
So it is with this point in mind that we have developed the H3 - to take the image quality further than we have been able to in the past."
These arguments, while having some technical merit, still don't hold up as a reason for making the H3 a closed system. In fact, just the opposite argument could be made that since Hasselblads own backs would be superior to others for these reasons, then why not still make the back of the H3 open so that eveyone could see this for themeselves when comparing against Leaf and Phase One thereby proving their claim(and then eveyone would want Hasselblad Imacon backs anyway, right?). And, of course, there is no reason both Leaf and Phase One could not program their backs to correct for any lens distortion or vignetting once they tested a particular lens. Nope, both points are just a cop out and an empty excuse.
mark1958 wrote:
Roland you are heavily invested... in H1-- HC stuff.. what are you going to do.. at least you did not go with the back yet
That is a really good question Mark. Honestly I still haven’t made up my mind. But this is part of the reason I held out until Photokina to buy a back. I decided I might as well wait until Photokina to buy a digital back and have as much information as possible before making a decision this big. Now that we have the information it opens up more questions than it answers.
I sell hardware for a living and I’m used to this nonsense that Hasselblad is pulling. Remember when motherboards could take either an Intel or an AMD CPU? They shared the same socket, the same chipset, etc. There was no technical reason for that to change. But Intel wanted to crap on AMD so they came out with the new CPU socket that they patented the socket for the sole purpose of leaving AMD stranded to die. AMD fought back and climbed out of their hole and designed their own sockets and chipsets. The result is two completely incompatible motherboards for AMD and Intel CPUs respectively. Often these boards use different incompatible types of RAM and use different kinds of graphics cards for a given generation. This has no technical merit and adds endless amounts of complexity to the daily operations of companies maintaining their fleet of systems. It is a PIA. But the hardware industry does this all the time to set up land mines for their competitors – wash, rinse and repeat. Look at the RAMBUS fiasco! And the software industry is no better. SCO vs. IBM over the Linux kernel source code? (See groklaw if you haven’t followed this little treasure). What foolishness!
We all know why Hasselblad did this. They’re up to no good. They can dress it up any way they want but a pig is a pig even with lipstick on it. They can say what they want but it was Hasselblad that commented that they would leave the H system open in response to feedback from their customers that told them they wanted an open system with a choice of backs, etc. Shame on them.
I have to concede it looks like the majority of vocal photographers out there are jumping off the Hasselblad ship right now and it is lisping badly to one side from the exodus. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a whole lot of perfectly good H compatible backs and H mount lenses and bodies up for sale on eBay over the next year.
However, I also have to concede that Hasselblad makes some fine gear. The Fuji glass is extremely sharp for digital work. Combined with a 20 -39MP back the results are outstanding. Canon and Leica do what they do best and they can’t be beat for 90% of daily work. But when you want to go medium format and print really large the Hasselblad kit delivers.
I don’t buy that there is a viable alternative right now on the market. Hassy V? No way – did you see they just discontinued the 553ELD? Only the 503 series is left now. They are pruning the 500 series back and it has no future in digital and everyone knows that. Pentax? Not as good as Hasselblad, sorry. Mamiya? Are they even still alive? No thanks…too uncertain. I do really hope that they come back to life and become a fierce competitor to Hasselblad. We’ll see. Contax maybe a great system today but it has no future and things are really going to evolve with medium format digital and while it may be great today I doubt it’ll look so great a couple of years down the road short of a second coming and we all know second comings can be way overdue.
Then there is Rollei. I always liked Rollei because their company is named after me. And because my first medium format system was a Rollei. So that gives me warm fuzzy feelings. The glass is good. The system has potential and there seems to be a lot of momentum behind the new system. Yet, I must concede again it is only potential. It’s easy to get caught up in the excitement about the next new best thing. Before it arrives everyone talks about how great it’ll be. Then it gets delayed. Then it arrives but there are quality control issues for a year and so on. Meanwhile do we really know much of anything about this system? I’ve read some of the specs but how does the back integration work with various backs? Are you still stuck with a Leaf mount or a Sinar mount, etc? Can Phase Play? Who knows? Is Rollei viable? Can they really put the millions of dollar into R&D that it’ll take to move digital to the next level? I don’t know the answers to these questions. I’m not sure Rollei knows the answer to these questions.
It is a tough call. To be safe I could wait it out. See what Rollei does… see what Mamiya does… wait for the bugs to get worked out. Wait for distribution to come to the US. Wait more for a support network to be built. Sounds like a lot of waiting and not too much fun.
So I’m torn right now with proceeding down the Hasselblad digital route and looking more seriously at the future Rollei solution. But the Hasselblad route is proven in terms of what it can deliver image-wise right now as of today. There are a lot of viable options with Hasselblad digital. All Rollei has right now, today, is the 6008 and I already decided I didn’t want a 6008. So there you go. By the time they do come out with a new body and it is shipping in the US, etc it could be a year. By then who knows what companies like Canon or Leica will have to offer. So the Hasselblad direction is still looking very appealing to me right now.
You can tell by my rambling answer that I’m still trying to piece together what the Hasselblad bombshell has torn asunder. I’m slow at making decisions and I can tell I haven’t gotten to the point of making this one yet. But once everything has settled in I’ll know I’ve made they best decision I can based on the available facts and I’ve thought it through. Right now I’d have to say I’m really leaning towards the Hasselblad H system still and taking it digital. I don’t think anything at Photokina has changed that.
Guy Mancuso wrote:
As someone that was thinking of jumping up , I seriously doubt that i would put 35k into a closed systems as a NEW customer. If they made this change today than 2 years down the road decide to make another sweeping change than and given the fact they shut out there own customers does not give me a lot of buying faith. Now i may be carzy but i ain't stupid either do we honestly think new customers like myself would not think the same as me. Did someone in the hassy camp not play the role as a new customer in a counterpoint discussion. That boardroom meeting to decide this was based on shutting out Leaf and Phase and NOT thinking of there customer and new customer base . I think a few folks there missed the logical thinking training....Show more →
I think the Imacon team deeply regrets that the H system was even open to their competitors’ (Leaf, Sinar and Phase) backs. If they could go back in time they would start over with an H1 with two options, film or a nice shiny Imacon back. Trying to sever this compatibility with Leaf, Sinar and Phase backs after the fact is a painful process. They’ve entangled themselves in a mess and now they’ve chosen a cure that is almost as bad as the poison.
They tried to achieve the same result a couple of years ago by coming out with the H2 and legally barring Leaf, Sinar and Phase from making backs for the H2 (via licensing). But that attempt failed. So the logical reaction to the failure of the legal approach was to come up with a physical method to prevent Leaf, Sinar and Phase from making products for the H series. So I think a lot of people in the industry kind of expected this to happen at some point.
I think from their perspective this is a clean slate and a fresh start. This gets the monkey off their back. But the end result really hurts their customers as much as it hurts Leaf, Sinar and Phase.
All I know is I love the versatility of my v-mount P25. When I'm shooting product, I slap it on the view camera. Architecture, I throw it on the Cambo WDS, and of course there's still the Trailerblad (500 c/m) when I need it. Sure I'd love more resolution and sharper lenses, but my clients are happy with the results, and that works for me.
While I understand the benefits of a closed system producing the ultimate in image quality, I rate flexibility/adaptability up there as well. It would be very hard for me to be locked into one system...at this point it's just not my style.
gdstaples wrote:
A note from Hasselblad when I informed my rep that I would be purchasing a Leaf back and most likely Contax or Pentax body system. Take it with a grain of salt as I do:
The pentax is a closed system like the Hasselblad, perhaps even more so as you can't remove the back at all.
Lotusm50 wrote:
I didn't know that the Pentax 645af could take a digtal back at all. How does that work since none of the Pentax 645 models (645, 645N, 645NII) have interchangable backs?
They don't that's why I don't understand his problem with the Hassy, the Pentax is even more limited.
The commentary on LL contains a disputable point-- that Hasselblad might be doing something illegal by shutting out competitors from its H3 system. While I'm no lawyer too, this claim quite sensational-- you mean no one is allowed to release a proprietary lens mount or digital back mount?
LL also talks about the use of confusing marketing terms "full-frame", "DSLR", etc. Well, that's marketing for you.
As to whether Hasselblad's H3 proprietary strategy is wise, obviously it's pissing some existing customers off. However, new customers with no legacy backs/lenses may not care too much. Just like Mac users, for the longest time, bought Mac stuff and didn't mind paying a premium, as long as it was superior to PC stuff.
waileong wrote: However, new customers with no legacy backs/lenses may not care too much. Just like Mac users, for the longest time, bought Mac stuff and didn't mind paying a premium, as long as it was superior to PC stuff.
But they should care, even if it is superior. While most would suggest the back are not superior now, there is a very good chance they won't be in the future.
As for the Mac reference, maybe that is why Apple only ever have had a tiny share of the market -- no matter how good they may (or may not) be. I prefer the Microsoft analogy. Both MS and Hasselblad are in the dominant postion in their markets (by default rather than merit) and have chosen to expolit that dominant postion by tying other products to their product that is in the dominant (monopoly) position. We get trapped/locked into inferior software with MS, and potentially inferior backs and software with Hassy
netexpress wrote:
You can tell by my rambling answer that I’m still trying to piece together what the Hasselblad bombshell has torn asunder. I’m slow at making decisions and I can tell I haven’t gotten to the point of making this one yet. But once everything has settled in I’ll know I’ve made they best decision I can based on the available facts and I’ve thought it through. Right now I’d have to say I’m really leaning towards the Hasselblad H system still and taking it digital. I don’t think anything at Photokina has changed that.
I think there are only two reasonable options for you, one of which is better than the other. First of all, *if* you can still get decent prices for your H-system, then you can sell right now, but that leaves the option open of what to do next. Secondly, and probably the best option for anyone on the market today, keep what you have, pick up a P25 or Aptus 60 or something, and use it until it is written off. In the meantime, things will probably have shaken out, and you won't lose too much money by switching systems or buying into top-end equipment like the P45 or Aptus 75.
Guy,
Again you are too practical and I like it. Despite I am still young () but I cannot see myself out live these cameras that are available now. This is why I opted for the Contax 645 system and put my money on the best lens. I will not judge the philosophy of any company doing business. Only time will tell if they are making the best decision for themselves and for their loyal based clients. I believe the right thing to do is to make sure you take care of your loyal based clients; simply a longevity stand point of doing business.
osera wrote:
Not sure, although the Hasselblad literature does say: "film compatibility"
So then any of the in-camera software corrections they are touting that fixes barrel distortion, CA, etc., (IOW, their shoddy lens design) will be then unavailable!
Guy Mancuso wrote:
3rd option buy a extra H1 or H2 and ride the camel until it dies. The backs will not get much better than what Aptus and Phase have now, so for folks like Mark that just bought into it, than i would ride that until the end, selling it now may only bring 60 cents on the dollar because of this action by hassy
I just don't see that Guy, I really don't we are what, 6 years into the digital revolution and you say they won't get much better? Ten years from now, maybe even 5 we will be seeing foveon chips with the same megapixel count, featuring the duel sensor technology that Fuji is using all in 16-22 bit, an iso 1600 to compare with Canons latest and the ability to do noisless minute long exposures, far far faster response and buffer times, far better battery power and cooling systems, maybe even anti shake for heavens sake!
5 Years from now the contax 645 and H series will have long been hung out to dry by all 3rd parties and they will be selling on ebay as complete digital systems back included for bubkes but don't expect any help if it breaks...
I was speaking to someone today about a H1 I knew hadn't left their closet almost since they bought it. They told me that they saw which way it was going when the H2D was announced and sold it then for a lot more than it would sell for now. It could well be that those hanging onto those bodies but not having married them to a digital back investment yet would do well to sell now when the cameras can collect some value and put the money aside for a year. Any digital solution, cameras, backs, etc depreciate heavily by the week, if the camera is not paying for itself then it should be sold.
My Canon 5D has depreciated by over a grand in a year, infact almost half its value and that is if I hadn't used it and it was still new in the box. Don't even ask about the 1Ds that preceded it. Of course they paid for themselves in that time, but if the camera is not paying for itself then it is losing you money!
Here is part of it outlining who is working with whom (sadly, Zeiss, Kyocera, and Contax are not even mentioned):
"New alliances
Leaf also announced that it is entering into a long-term business and technology relationship with Jenoptik to further develop medium format digital cameras. 'We're looking into the future,' Leaf's Yair Shahar told BJP. 'We already have Hasselblad and Imacon working together, now everyone else is trying to do something. We need to secure ourselves with a platform.'
He also revealed that Leaf had been in on the early design stages. 'We set up an online survey where we asked 600 photographers worldwide what they wanted. We collected it all together and Jenoptik listened, because we're their biggest client.'
Meanwhile, Sinar will continue to work with Jenoptik, despite the fact that the latter has sold its controlling share to Leica. 'Sinar and Jenoptik joined forces to share technology for the development of digital backs,' Lorenz Koch of Sinar told BJP. 'These projects are now complete but the contract still prevails. We will continue to work with Jenoptik on the R&D of Sinar backs, software and the new Sinar camera.'
He added: 'Mr Kaufman (the wealthy photography enthusiast who owns between 85 and 95% of Leica's shares) believed he had bought a high-end amateur photography outfit in Leica. Now he also has a high-end professional outfit in Sinar. It is a very nice portfolio for him. Leica has the marketing and manpower, whereas Sinar has been in the digital market since 1992.'
Leica says it intends to allow Sinar to continue to develop its own specialist products, but that it is too early to say whether there will be any significant synergies in terms of joint product development. Leica will continue its relationship with Jenoptik.
Phase One, meanwhile, held a pre-Photokina meeting with its international dealers to let them know about its new partnership agreement with Mamiya.
A spokesman for Phase One was unable to elaborate on the deal, but said that a more formal announcement is expected in the New Year. He also said that the agreement would not preclude Phase One working with the Franke & Heidecke platform, news on which is expected in the near future. A spokesman for Mamiya's UK distributor said it was too early to comment on the partnership.
Pentax, on the other hand, failed to deliver its 645 AFD camera at Photokina, saying it had no idea when its first digital medium format camera would be ready, but indicating that it is now working on a 30m pixel resolution model. It had previously said that the camera would be ready for the biennial trade show, featuring a resolution of 18 million pixels."
foto-z wrote:
Wait for the Sinar Hy6.
www.sinar.ch
The big disadvantage of that system is that it is a 6x6 box, meaning the big 6x6 mirror. That makes for a deeper mirror box as compared to the Hassy. A deeper mirror box will severly complicate making wide angle lenses for that camera. The Contax 645 had a 35mm lens, and now Harry has a 28mm lens announced, but designing such a wide (that is affordable) for a 6x6 with its much longer flange to film distance will take nothing short of a miracle.
Here is one notion to consider: Hasselblad will now be locked into the 36mm x48mm format. The Rolliflex's 6x6 platform will allow a larger sensor, so if issues surronding high ISO noise, pixel density, etc, need to be addressed, they will be the only ones that can take advantage of making a larger area sensor! If Leaf and Jenoptic are partnering, perhaps they will be talking to either Dalsa or kodak about making a larger chip.
netexpress wrote:
I think the Imacon team deeply regrets that the H system was even open to their competitors’ (Leaf, Sinar and Phase) backs. If they could go back in time they would start over with an H1 with two options, film or a nice shiny Imacon back. Trying to sever this compatibility with Leaf, Sinar and Phase backs after the fact is a painful process. They’ve entangled themselves in a mess and now they’ve chosen a cure that is almost as bad as the poison.
They tried to achieve the same result a couple of years ago by coming out with the H2 and legally barring Leaf, Sinar and Phase from making backs for the H2 (via licensing). But that attempt failed. So the logical reaction to the failure of the legal approach was to come up with a physical method to prevent Leaf, Sinar and Phase from making products for the H series. So I think a lot of people in the industry kind of expected this to happen at some point.
I think from their perspective this is a clean slate and a fresh start. This gets the monkey off their back. But the end result really hurts their customers as much as it hurts Leaf, Sinar and Phase. ...Show more →
) but I cannot see myself out live these cameras that are available now. This is why I opted for the Contax 645 system and put my money on the best lens. I will not judge the philosophy of any company doing business. Only time will tell if they are making the best decision for themselves and for their loyal based clients. I believe the right thing to do is to make sure you take care of your loyal based clients; simply a longevity stand point of doing business.