stephengilbert
Active member
"[M]aking a loss on every camera?"
But you could make up for it in volume.
But you could make up for it in volume.
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!
It will be only a loss for the moment, but an investment in the future. Win customers for the H System and sell them new lenses and new backs over many years to come"[M]aking a loss on every camera?"
But you could make up for it in volume.
Peterbut with the standards of the H System
Hasselblad please listen
I would be also a buyer into that. Because I actually do not need a fast MF system but a very exactly working and good one. As I am mainly in landscapes and flowers etc.Peter
I would not mind H standards , although I am not a friend of AF .
I found the CZ lenses extremely good for digital and believe , that HC lenses are not any better , even if HASSELBLAD wants to make us believe that .
The 4.5x6 format has never been attractive for me , and I do believe , that it was a big mistake from HASSELBLAD , to go for that format with the H1 , instead of develeoping the V-SYSTEM .
Now , as the facts are pinned down to 4.5x6 , all I would like to have , is a good square format digi back , bigger than my CFV . HASSELBLAD does not seem to be willing to go into that direction .
I use to say , other mothers also have nice daughters .
In other words , if HASSELBLAD does not do it , others might , and I will give them a great welcome . I am thinking mainly of LEAF .
Jürgen
Why would we "abandon ship"? Only non-Hasselbald customers say stuff like that. The people that were pissed about the H3D weren't customers using their digital backs ... for the most part, they were H1 & H2 users with Phase One or some other back. I much prefer what they ARE doing for their real digital camera customers ... innovation to solve real world job requirements and making the H system more and more useful.I am not sure about such a strategy. Recall that Leica is much larger than the others in the MF field. If Hasselblad hurts itself with too low prices, then due to its size and solid backing, Leica would be able to pull through, but Hasselblad may not. I think the best strategy is to try to differentiate the products. If the Leica S2 is really better for some uses, then emphasize the rest, and try not to lose too much ground. In the end the market will be much better off with this kind of strategy, and the companies will be healthier. Dirty fighting leads to bloody noses, and the instigator doesn't always come away unscathed. Besides, Hasselblad has already pulled two fast ones (killing off the V, going closed between H2 and H3D), and shouldn't play too much with fire, lest their customers finally abandon ship.
That is very true. The margins are pretty hefty and they are more so when the manufacturer is also the national distributor.If the recent price drops by other makers is any indication, there is some pretty hefty margins built into this kind of gear.
Nope!That is very true. The margins are pretty hefty and they are more so when the manufacturer is also the national distributor.
Has anyone noticed that Hasselblad has appointed as executive chairman, the former Carl Zeiss Asia-Pacific CEO, Dr. Larry Hansen? My gut feel suggests that Hasselblad may be working with Carl Zeiss again for its H-system.
You wouldn't, and probably many, perhaps even most others wouldn't. But if Hasselblad keeps making unpopular moves like this, it does affect how people think about them, and it just sits there in your head and simmers. If one day an opportunity arises for a switch, some might just take it. A loss of faith can change things very fast. Have you read "The Tipping Point"?Why would we "abandon ship"?
The *existing* V owners. You talk only about new sales. New sales had dropped off a cliff because Hasselblad has provided no way forward with the system, not the other way around. People love their Vs. Hasselblad was one of the companies which ignored digital for way too long. There are still lots of V owners who harbour resentment for the abandonment of their V cameras. I thought that you were a big fan of the 203FE. Doesn't it bother you in the slightest that a large square sensor was never released? We frequent the same forums. I don't know why you don't notice the people lamenting the death of their V system. I do.Abandoned the V system. Who cares?
At this point it is no longer clear if it would be a success, although I tend to believe that it would. It would have to a simple back with good integration with the V system, for a low price, however. V owners are probably not the buyers of P65+ and AFiII-10 backs... $12k for a 30MP 48x48mm back would probably be a good place. When that it economically feasible, someone should do it, I don't care who.That said, there are a ton of legacy V users that would love a bigger square sensor. However, I seriously doubt it would be a barn burner in terms of sales unless by some miracle it was a CFV-II 48X48 priced below $15K.
It may increase sales. But it may also just lower income. It is always a gamble. If the coming system (speaking generally here...) is hotly anticipated, then it may change nothing, except your profit margin.Also, why wouldn't any company blunt the intro of a potential competitor by using a entry level pricing strategy? That strategy doesn't produce a bloody nose, it produces sales into your system rather than the competitor's.
Couldn't agree more, forget the large square sensor. Concentrate instead on reducing H3D prices to make them more attractive to a wider audience, including starving artist/photographers.All of which is good as far as I'm concerned ... the lower the price of this stuff the better ... especially now when business is so bad. But admittedly not so great for Leica trying to launch into the marketplace with competitors who's R&D costs have already been amortized to a great extent[/B]
Believe me, the love affair with the square still exists - witness my website, not a rectangle in sight - and there are there are plenty of film based solutions out there catering for this market.It is as if the love of the square never existed, or as if it was a brief (decade-long actually) love affair. I don't understand why no one caters to this market. The square is still a wonderful way to frame things.
...or shoot film and scan.And so for high-res digital squares, you need to crop or stitch, not always possible or attractive options.