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!

Hasselblad to be sold to Phase One...?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Stefan Steib

Active member
Stefan,

I invested nothing close to 50k in MF. The same back I bought can be had for 4 digits NEW now and the low end of MF will continue to be offered around that price range (Or even lower, hopefully).

If I drop or break mine, I will first try to repair it (After calling my insurance woman, first ). At least for Phase/ Leaf, the timeframe between product discontinuation and service discontinuation is quite long, so I am not worried too much that it will not be repairable.

Failing that, either go to the used market or buy another low end MF back. However, most owners are lucky in that regard and I know people who still shoot with Lightphase or Volare backs in the studio, still going strong.

I can't speak for everyone here, but I shoot for personal pleasure, so providing work for customers at 20% of the cost etc. Is not a factor for me. Maximum smiles/hour while I create my art however is. :)

Sandeep
Actually you have answered the thread question perfectly with your answer to my answer.

This is the reason, why the MF market is where it is.
Nobody (or at least much fewer people) can make a living from this.

I mean Hasselblad did understand this, but their Lunar&Stellar etc. approach was just nonsense.

Sad.

Regards
Stefan
 

synn

New member
I am not sure that you got the meaning of what I said.

I shoot for myself. I don't need to make a living out of photography. Doesn't mean that there aren't people who make their living shooting MF. I know several and they have their valid reasons to stay with MF.

In any case, why would a manufacturer care if their customer is a professional or an enthusiast? A unit sold is a unit sold. Phase knows how to market themselves to photographers, pro and enthusiast alike, Hasselblad forgot how to do it and started chasing after Hermes and Bulgari instead. Hopefully they will reverse that trend under new ownership.
 

Swissblad

Well-known member
Stefan is correct - a few hobbyists cannot keep a large R&D enterprise going.

In its heyday, every pro photographer worth his salt had MF gear...HB, Mamiya or Pentax etc.

Today, the scene is very different - just take a look at pro photographer blogs - and see how few still use MF or MFD.

In essence MF is now going the same route as large format.....once the dedicated tool of many photojournalists - yet today, who can even remember a Graflex Speed Graphic - the tool of Weegee etc.

As a 4x5" user, HB 6x6 film and MFD and Xpan - I also view it is a sad development - but it is a simple hard reality.

That said, I still would like a CFV-50c for 5k..... as I still have my old 'blad..... and would love to put her to use.

In the interim I'll enjoy my Nikon's and Fuji's, and eagerly await other developments on the horizon.
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
To learn about and integrate true focus into their body.
As about all AF Technology is patented by Japanese companies, I wouldn´t be too astonished if that patent is held by Fuji and Hasselblad has only the usage rights for it. So I´m pretty sure not even that asset is owned by Blad.

Regards
Stefan
 

fotografz

Well-known member
LOL! A HUGE amount of speculation based on an unsubstantiated rumor … all discussed as if it were fact. Gotta love the internet.

IMHO "35mm FF is the new MFD" is just more of the dumbing down of photography. While it is very nice that we have high resolution smaller sensor cameras, (especially relevant when the economy went bust and was slow to recover), it doesn't mean that there aren't substantial differences between the two. If there weren't, then a 40 meg cell phone would be "the new 35mm FF":) … i.e.. my cell phone is as good as your Sony A7R-II and cost substantially less. Just depends on how far one wants too dumb down photography.

- Marc
 

Swissblad

Well-known member
IMHO "35mm FF is the new MFD" is just more of the dumbing down of photography.

- Marc
Not sure why this should be dumbing down....rather it seems to be a logical development driven largely by the consumer and market share.

It will be interesting to see if Sony will develop any new MF chips etc., now that they have a new company for this purpose.

Concerning MF optics - there hasn't been anything of note in ages - and there is nothing on the horizon.

Gone are the days when a blue striped Hassy was the star at Fotokina.

On the other hand, with regard to the original comment, I'm sure Oscar Barnack was accused of the same when he developed the original Leica.

I find it rather ironic, that this rather distorted lopsided format is the one to survive (and thrive).
 

tjv

Active member
The new Phase 35mm is a pretty sweet new development in MF optics, no? Many people are comparing it to the Rodenstock 40mm / 32mm HR lenses, so that's saying something.

With regards to MF surviving or 35mm being the new MF (whatever that means, as it's physically impossible on spec.,) I think it depends on the individuals use case. I knew when buying my Credo 60 that I was never going to shoot it over a certain ISO and expect top end CMOS noise or DR; knew it didn't have the best or sharpest screen (marketing speak might tell you that it does, but it certainly doesn't. It's good, but IMHO barely good enough to check critical focus as the preview is too soft, especially in the shadows.) What I did do was test it for my own use case and very, very quickly I found out it is perfect for use on my Techno and the work I want to do. The frame ratio is perfect, so no cropping of valuable MPX to get the format I want; at base ISO–which 95% of my shooting is at–is perfect, even when I expose to preserve highlights on bright days and need to push the shadows in post; the colour is fabulous (although I'm a novice with C1 and have hard time with it,) and the user interface is brilliant and the most simple and elegant I've come across in the digital world. Most importantly to me thought is I get the IQ that I want and need (especially comparing to my previous 4x5" and 6x7cm film / Imacon 949 scanning workflow,) and that using the back on my camera of choice does something to inspire me in the field. I was really worried about this when I made the move; that I'd lose the zen like enjoyment of using a view camera in the field, but it's actually been the opposite. It's been liberating.

With regards to Hasselblad's financial trouble, it's hard to see–at least from my very distant perspectice–how they can keep their heads above water without the imminent release and sales success of a revolutionary product. Like a full frame CMOS back with 2016 screen, interface and functionality together with an H6 body that touts more than incrimental gains in features. I've said it many times before, but Hasselblad were long and in many ways still are my preferred DMF SLR camera. In the end though, being a technical camera user, the poor screen and external battery options moved me to Leaf (that and I got a great deal on my back.) I only wish my back was H mount rather than V, to be honest.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Not sure why this should be dumbing down....rather it seems to be a logical development driven largely by the consumer and market share.

It will be interesting to see if Sony will develop any new MF chips etc., now that they have a new company for this purpose.

Concerning MF optics - there hasn't been anything of note in ages - and there is nothing on the horizon.

Gone are the days when a blue striped Hassy was the star at Fotokina.

On the other hand, with regard to the original comment, I'm sure Oscar Barnack was accused of the same when he developed the original Leica.

I find it rather ironic, that this rather distorted lopsided format is the one to survive (and thrive).
I don't think anyone would dispute why photographic gear is moving in the direction it is … as you say … "largely driven by the consumer market share".

However, the far more dominate influence has been the cell phone, not 35mm from the previous century. Cell phones have revolutionized how people interact with a camera, and integrate photography into their lives. It is far more organic than ever before.

In a sense, the cell phone is the perfect personification of the old saying: "f/8 and be there"

When the Pope visited the US recently, the amount of old fashioned 35mm cameras of any kind was a grain of sand in a massive beach of cell phone toting folks seeking a "selfie" with him. I don't recall people lined up around the block at a Sony store for the latest A camera like for the new iPhone-6s in Rose Gold.:rolleyes:

In short, one doesn't need to know very much about photography when using a cell phone to take a picture. It is this majority experience that is driving consumer expectations of photographic tools … "making a photo" has become "taking a photo". Even amongst more involved advanced amateurs (especially younger ones), there is a lot of pressure to mimic cell phone features. It's like when pocket calculators hit the mainstream, and everyone forgot how to add and multiply:ROTFL: It's the process of "dumbing down" photography.

This dumbing down has also influenced expectations of results. For decades I interacted with the public doing weddings and portrait work. Despite evolving tools and really working at the art and craft of photography, the recognition of either by consumers eroded exponentially. Quality was replaced with "digital quantity and expediency". Fewer and fewer actually printed anything. FaceBook was their Wedding Album, and 15 minutes of fame their mantra. Horrible cell shots of an ill lit bride posted on social sites by guests garnered a million "likes" and "oohs & ahhs".

So, one could say that "survival and thriving" applied to 35mm are relative terms, and a transient ones at that. It is just a matter of time before the combination of hardware and software will make it all a moot point.

Regarding "nothing of note for MF optics" … I think this overlooks the offerings from Leica, Phase One, Hasselblad, Pentax and killer tech lenses from Rodenstock and Schneider. Hasselblad updated a number of their H focal lengths in recent years and added a 24mm … notably the new HC50-II is a stunning optical achievement, to which they added a C/U objective that matched it. Phase has brought forward a number of well liked Schneider optics. Most notable has been Leica's S series lenses for larger than 35mm format. All new from the ground up. Recently they added the 45/2.8, and very recently the 100/2 which are a couple of my favorite MF lenses of all time.

Personally, I've been opting out of mainstream 35mm in favor of more specialized tools supplemented by … my iPhone:shocked:. When I shoot with the Leica MM, I use the iPhone for any color snaps I would normally take. When I shoot with the Leica S camera it's either in the studio where peeping through a tiny 35mm electronic viewfinder all day is a chore compared to the big bright finder of the S, or when working mobile with lighting I can toggle between FP ad CS modes at will. Specialization as opposed to generalization of photographic tools is what works for me now … and the iPhone picks up the rest.

This isn't meant to take away from those who love the cornucopia of stuff belching out of the Sony brand. Use what suits you. But I sure wouldn't call it an inexpensive venture. For the price of the annual camera updates most people have been engaging in, and all new lenses for the A-FE mount system, the CFVc can now be had … but that is a totally different photographic experience … albeit one I personally loved a lot, and miss to this day.:cry:

BTW, when I scan through all the images in the Fun With MF, and likewise FF Sony, I'm always struck by the obvious differences in IQ rather than the often touted similarities. Nothing I can do about that. It is what it is.

- Marc
 

Swissblad

Well-known member
Marc

I in no way wanted to start a flame war - I am after all a Hassy user.

As you've stated the cell phone camera has completely changed public/camera interaction - I don't think a single one of my graduate students has a camera other than their iPhone.

After a recent Fotokina, my local camera store disposed of all his stock and focussed exclusively on Leica - the reason being that at the Cologne exhibition - one only saw 2 types of cameras - iPhones and Leica M's.

The sad truth is that just as Hassy is struggling now, we may well see Nikon & Canon is the same boat a few years down the road - especially if they cannot resolve their QC issues. e.g. D600, D800,300mm PF, new 200-500 zoom etc.

Let's enjoy what we have, and make images worthy of sharing - whatever gear we use.

Cheers, S ;)
 

Swissblad

Well-known member
While we're on the topic of iPhones vs other cameras.....


One this is for sure the major manufacturers can no longer rest on their ******s.
 

modator

Member
hi hi hi :ROTFL:

The truth is in the middle, I don't think the next medium format is the FF optically they are different the difference in DOF of a MF form a FF is like the difference form a FF and a 1" compact camera...
About the proliferation of camera-phone and compact etc that have comparable IQ of a FF is another story.....
A Professional photographer that need MF digital camera simply need it and he knows Why.
I read many that say x, y, z, is better than MF but in the reality is only vapor, MF have practically the same quality of large format.

Of course if we reduce the discussion about size, cost, etc, Saying in the future the Images are relegate to little size for Internet pubblications and online magazine, All MF etc. Producer have to close.

Both H and P1 are in trouble, Nikon & Canon are in trouble too and the selling of FF is falling Year after Year......

Maybe if H or P1 join togheter in a newco they can stand this crisis.... Who know? The important thing is they have to continue producing H and P1 cameras body, lenses, and Backs !! :thumbup:
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Marc

I in no way wanted to start a flame war - I am after all a Hassy user.

As you've stated the cell phone camera has completely changed public/camera interaction - I don't think a single one of my graduate students has a camera other than their iPhone.

After a recent Fotokina, my local camera store disposed of all his stock and focussed exclusively on Leica - the reason being that at the Cologne exhibition - one only saw 2 types of cameras - iPhones and Leica M's.

The sad truth is that just as Hassy is struggling now, we may well see Nikon & Canon is the same boat a few years down the road - especially if they cannot resolve their QC issues. e.g. D600, D800,300mm PF, new 200-500 zoom etc.

Let's enjoy what we have, and make images worthy of sharing - whatever gear we use.

Cheers, S ;)
I, for one, didn't take any of this as a "flame war"".

Just a frank discussion and sharing of opinions regarding the forces and influences that are exerting change.

Outside of the cell-phone revolution, there is no doubt that higher resolution mirror-less offerings are exerting the most disruptive technologies on traditional photographic practices. We are probably only one generation away from the demise of most MF systems based on technology from the previous century. The question is … will there be a place for larger sensor cameras (larger than 35mm), with enough user support to financially sustain the necessary new-tech advancements?

From a purely pragmatic perspective, I'd say no, there is not. Once the current MFD user base with the means and dogged nostalgia has been eclipsed by the upcoming generations of serious photographers that cut their teeth on fast mutating new tech, I seriously doubt MFD will survive. The exception to that could be realized IF the makers of larger sensor cameras would be more aggressive in making MFD more accessible, while promoting the real differences one could realize in certain or specific artistic expression, as opposed to just pragmatic general comparisons.

Believe me, I get the reluctance to drop 6X to 10X the cost of FF 35mm for ANY MFD camera. When I was shooting for money even part-time, it was much easier to keep current. Now that I'm retired, I really have to weigh the practical against the gain in certain artistic expressions as I see it (i.e., not someone else's opinion).

I'm about to drop bundle on a new S(007) while watching the value of my 1.5 year old, pristine S(006) plummet in value. The question becomes, will this new S CMOS camera make a difference in my art? How much difference? For how long?

Answer: At my age "time" is more important than practical considerations. If I am to engage in photography, it will be on my own artistic terms and preferred user experience … not some highly rationalized compromises.

However, were this me 15 or 20 years ago, but operating in this climate of very rapid change and less certain commercial opportunity, I'd be hard pressed to justify the gap in price between high-res 35mm and MFD.

So, for many who DO see and value the artistic merits that MFD could offer, I'd speculate that PRICE/VALUE has always been the real barrier, and all other rationalizations are just that … rational excuses to avoid paying the heavy tariff. What if MFD were merely 2X the cost of 35mm?

Frankly, the MFD arena has been plagued by the "what ifs". What if MFD presented as a better value earlier (pre-Pentax)? What if all of them had been less arrogant? What if MFD companies had seen the handwriting earlier and banned together to more aggressively pursue CMOS? What if they had addressed the incredibly poor LCD issues earlier? What if there had been a 56X56 sensor for the square format cameras? All of us probably could add to this "What IF" list.

What if …. it's to late?

- Marc
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
Hi Marc

I don´t think MF will disappear completely. There will always be a specialized customer like cultural heritage institutions , libraries, Museums, technology based applications for industrial usage. I´d say a company like Phase will make it. But with a different portfolio.
Their Software need to become database aware and programmable for these users. SDKs for this will become a real business and they will just quietly leave the "normal" photography market. (take Megavision as an example)

The economic question of R&D , new lenses and customer support as a small company, as well as the current dealer models will simply make this impossible to sustain further.

Canon knows this and is now moving into this direction, I´d say the 5Dsr is the closest competitor for MF, especially if you take into account their professional setup, like CPS, enough highend lenses and a working support channel.

Sony ist targeting another market, the semipro and the volume.
I wish there will be a place for Nikon, but I fear they are too small.
And this is simply an economic question, not one of the better cameras.

Greetings from Germany
Stefan
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Hi Marc

I don´t think MF will disappear completely. There will always be a specialized customer like cultural heritage institutions , libraries, Museums, technology based applications for industrial usage. I´d say a company like Phase will make it. But with a different portfolio.
Their Software need to become database aware and programmable for these users. SDKs for this will become a real business and they will just quietly leave the "normal" photography market. (take Megavision as an example)

The economic question of R&D , new lenses and customer support as a small company, as well as the current dealer models will simply make this impossible to sustain further.

Canon knows this and is now moving into this direction, I´d say the 5Dsr is the closest competitor for MF, especially if you take into account their professional setup, like CPS, enough highend lenses and a working support channel.

Sony ist targeting another market, the semipro and the volume.
I wish there will be a place for Nikon, but I fear they are too small.
And this is simply an economic question, not one of the better cameras.

Greetings from Germany
Stefan
I didn't mean to imply that MFD will disappear completely, which is why I said "MFD based on last century's technology". BUT, I do think that is a real possibility it could be gone in a generation IF something drastic doesn't happen.

I also think that institutional and industrial applications will be attacked from a number of alternative directions in the coming years … by technology we can't even predict right now. Whether that has Phase logo on it is up for speculation. I seriously doubt it.

I do not believe it will be like the MF of the past, where people could nurse the discontinued mechanical wonders for a long time (like the venerated V). The problem with MFD as a small base, cult product is one of technical sustainability for the owner. Old backs are very hard to sustain, as soon as Kodak abandoned digital, getting a battery to run a Proback became extremely difficult.

The question is what would be that drastic thing that revitalizes MFD and allows us to reap the benefits of large sensor photography?

Remember when Hasselblad teased us with something new coming? Speculation immediately went to an EVF version of the Mamiya 7. Instead we got the Lunar lunacy.

- Marc
 

Uaiomex

Member
In the film days MF systems cost around 3X the cost of 35mm. With the advent of the super MP FF bodies and the need for sharper glass, the prices are coming higher every year while MF bodies are coming down. Perhaps when DMF prices get to be again 3X the prices of FF, DMF survival will be guaranteed.
Eduardo



I am not so sure FF is the new MF. I think (but I may be completely wrong) that Sony made their 50Mpix MF sensor to test the waters. I think the test was positive, and there will be more MF sensors coming from Sony.

I suspect (again, could be wrong) that sensor size may become a significant marketing argument to sell "serious" cameras. As camera-phone with small sensors become more and more popular (but can they be more popular than now) and FF cameras are getting "too cheap" to make good money out of them, selling an expensive camera with good margins becomes more and more difficult. And the only "easy" argument why camera A costing 5k Euros is better than camera B costing 1k Euros will be "because it has a bigger sensor".

But again, maybe MF is dying and FF will remain the only "reasonable" alternative.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top