Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Breaking Hassleblad/Sony: "Lunar" mirrorless with sony E/A mount 5k EUR

6

6x6

Member
Ok so lets imagine we are those Hasselblad people sitting around that table. What would we decide bearing in mind what we had IP wise and our history?

For me

1. A digital X-Pan with 2 FF sensors stuck together. Anything that gets the size to between 30-40MB. I don't care if they are CMOS or CCD. Define a new digital format and create a new market. How many would sell? No idea but I would buy one.

2. Develop a reasonably priced 30-40MB back in combination with a modernised 203FE. Remove anything unnecessary, keep the lovely mirror sound. Keep the price at about $7,000 - $8,000 and allow all old lenses to work with it. Keep the exposure metering through the WLF. Make the package as small as possible. Oh and black. Again no idea how many people would buy one, but I would at that price.
 
A

Aaron

New member
On the bright side, Hasselblads new owners are going to get the message that this is not the route to take.

It would have been worse if they had designed a nice mirrorless like the Fuji X series at a reasonable price, they would have sold loads and been encouraged to continue down this road.

But the backlash from this monstrosity will send a very clear message.

This camera won't sell, if they were given away free most people would be embarrassed to carry one. And dont think theres some secret place in China (or wherever) that billionaires are so totally lacking in common sense and lacking in taste.
 
H

hcubell

Well-known member
Jorgen Udvang said:
I've been wondering about this for a while. "Traditional" Hasselblad cameras still have a huge following, and they must have had the resources available at some point to make a modernised, more compact, digital camera that picked up inspiration and design elements from the V Series. Leica has been mentioned a number of times, but also the Hy6 is a good example of what can be done by combining contemporary and classic design elements.

What we see now is probably the result of a process that started many years ago, before the H1.
Click to expand...
The Hy6 a good example? The marketplace spoke loudly and clearly and made it a colossal failure. Photographers are no different from other consumers. They vote with their wallets. Sure, there are a few people that are intensely loyal to the Hy6, but there are always a few people loyal to things like the Edsel automobile. Phase actually bought Leaf for a song and owned all of the R&D and tooling to use the Hy6 as its new camera platform but chose not to do so. This was not an accident.
 
B

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
Was Hasselblad ever a luxury brand? It was always a very solid pro tool but I don't remember it ever being a rich mans toy. Unlike Leica which was only ever affordable to a higher wage bracket for all that it was made to a standard that justified the marketing position. It's being marketed as if it was a Leica but it just isn't. Especially not when underneath it's a Sony with bling. Even the Hermes Leicas were still Leicas underneath. This is a non luxury brand based on far from luxury innards. I'm not quite sure what they were smoking.
 
G

gazwas

Active member
I'd love to hear David Grover's (ex Hasselbald now Phase One) opinion on all of this. He must have known this was in the works before he left HB and have some insight to the background of its creation.
 
T

torger

Active member
I'm thinking that these cameras may sell to the same people that buy Vertu phones (luxury Nokias). Don't know if they sell a lot though.

By the way, has anyone spoken to Hasselblad in the photokina stand? Are they aware that they are ridiculed all over the 'net?
 
Shashin

Shashin

Well-known member
Hasselblad is NOT a luxury brand. Their cameras are expensive because they cost a lot to make. But these are not luxury goods, just like an oil tanker is not a luxury ship simply because of the cost of production. And this is the mistake the management has made and it will be a big failure.

Hopefully, they will do what Leica is doing with the Sir Ive designed M. Simply make one and auction it off.
 
P

pophoto

New member
Shashin said:
Hasselblad is NOT a luxury brand. Their cameras are expensive because they cost a lot to make. But these are not luxury goods, just like an oil tanker is not a luxury ship simply because of the cost of production. And this is the mistake the management has made and it will be a big failure.

Hopefully, they will do what Leica is doing with the Sir Ive designed M. Simply make one and auction it off.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, Hasselblad (expensive camera) is a luxury brand. The same could be said for Cartier not being a luxury brand because diamonds are simply expensive to acquire.

An oil tanker isn't a luxury item, for it's usual expensive price until everyone will like an oild tanker at home but cannot afford one. At the same time it will be one when it adds italian leather seats, air conditioning, tv screens and walnut shift knobs! Just saying :)
 
T

torger

Active member
pophoto said:
Unfortunately, Hasselblad (expensive camera) is a luxury brand.
Click to expand...
Hasselblad has been associated to being a professional workhorse tool, like most digital medium format systems.

The Lunar is about luxury like jewelry. To be successful with jewelry-like luxury the brand should have such associations.

In Leica's case the luxury brand is Hermes, not Leica itself. Leica is the fine camera underneath.

In Hasselblad's case the luxury brand is uhh... Hasselblad, and the camera is Sony. How cool is that?
 
Shashin

Shashin

Well-known member
pophoto said:
Unfortunately, Hasselblad (expensive camera) is a luxury brand. The same could be said for Cartier not being a luxury brand because diamonds are simply expensive to acquire.
Click to expand...
But the diamonds are decoration and not essential to the machine. Hasselblad is rather protean in its design and not made for broad consumer use. Hasselblad is a working tool--medium-format is not exactly a consumer format. So to say Hasselblad is a luxury brand is simply because it is expensive is like saying Olympus endoscopes are luxury products because they are expensive.
 
David Duffin

David Duffin

Member
Ventizz people are not stupid or they wouldn't be as successful. My thoughts are that the Lunar may be viewed in future as a rather clever move to keep HB alive and self-sufficient as development progresses on a high-spec successor to the H-series, much as Phase has announced the DF645+ as a stop-gap until development of their new unit is complete.

I'm not a Hassy guy -- at least not yet -- but do use an HB 300mm/4.5 (via adapter) that's just superb. Certainly I am not in the market for a rebadged NEX although I do think the ballsy design transforms it into something much more interesting than Sony's.

Let's all hope that Ventizz has some real underlying innovation and quality in its sights for Hasselblad. My guess is that they do.
 
D

David Grover / Phase One

New member
gazwas said:
I'd love to hear David Grover's (ex Hasselbald now Phase One) opinion on all of this. He must have known this was in the works before he left HB and have some insight to the background of its creation.
Click to expand...
I actually can't say I did! So I can't really shed any light.

Anyway, I am in the software business now. ;)

I would hope that Ventizz did their market research and have an idea of unit sales, in whatever country that may be.

D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top