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 acquired by DJI
- Thread starter richardman
- Start date
It's because ten years ago they where what KR calls "the Hasselblad it used to be" (and wants it to be back for the benefit of competition). It's the 2015 and (mostly) the 2016 recent introductions of new products that made Hasselblad to shine out from (direct) competition.
It's the potential (from the time that they decide to invest) that secures profit for investors, if the investors would judge that competition does things better, or is able to compete at the same level (and therefore their investment will be more profitable), then they would have invested in the competition.
Ten years ago, marketing results (sales) for Hasselblad were far inferior than competition, now they are by far superior...
Last edited:
jerome_m
Member
If one wanted to report the merger facts in a neutral way, one would have either have written the simple fact that there was a merger or presented the positive and negative sides in the article. Kevin Rabber has obviously chosen to do it differently: as you wrote it is "a very negatively slanted piece that could not have been more effective in spreading FUD than if Phase One or Fuji had written it".
The problem, however, is not that the tone is negative, it is that the piece is slanted. I would be just as shocked by a piece presenting the merger as the best thing to happen under the sun.
Why so many people on photography forums suddenly feel motivated to write extended justifications for the article is also beyond me.
The standard of Volvo safety features, it will be a while before the Chinese bastardised the safety features to its level. As for Chinablad, that's another story...
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
So if it's a slanted piece written than WHY in the world does anyone even care. As stated earlier get a clue folks he worked and was a investor in Phase one for many years. He left on his own free will. Example I was laid off from HONEYWELL after 9/11 I should be pissed for all intentsive purposes. But if I fly in any commercial aircraft I want HONEYWELL avionics on board. I'm still biased towards them . So WTF do you expect. Not saying he is a bad guy at all I worked with him and consider him a friend but let's get real here. If Hassy pulls this off and does a great job of it than no end user will care.
"Chinablad"? I have never heard the iPhone being referred to as a "Chinaphone". I have had quite a few of them and they are beautifully made.The standard of Volvo safety features, it will be a while before the Chinese bastardised the safety features to its level. As for Chinablad, that's another story...
And then some wonder why Ming Thein as an ethnic Chinese took offense to so much of what has been said on the internet about DJI allegedly assuming control of Hasselblad.
jerome_m
Member
Maybe, but you don't publish articles under the guise of journalism.
jerome_m
Member
Because it is not presented as such. That is the problem with the article. I said it before: Phase One is certainly entitled to run their own forum if they feel like it, just like Leica, Nikon, Canon run forums for their users. And I don't complain if dpreview finds amazon to be the best place to shop, because it is public knowledge who owns whom. But in the case of that article, we do not have a warning at the top of the article as we do in the magazines when they published paid content. It is deceptive.
ejpeiker
Member
KeithL
Well-known member
Seriously, have you read a newspaper lately?
Impartiality doesn't exactly spring to mind.
jerome_m
Member
Sure, if I read the "Pravda", I will not quite have the same articles than if I read the "Economist". Which may be a reason why the press is finding it more and more difficult to sell, as reader find themselves less and less motivated to pay for what is little more than thinly disguised advertisement. But I digress: if I buy the "Pravda", I know what I am buying. If I read "luminous landscape", where does it indicate it is a Phase One subsidiary?
You can turn it whichever way you want, it still is deceptive.
pegelli
Well-known member
This is a dirty blow below the belt and not the right spirit in this forum. You're free to disagree with Kevin Raber and his article on DJI and HB, but such statements are without merit. How can anyone take you seriously if you spread blatant lies!
ErikKaffehr
Well-known member
Hi,
Kevin Raber posted a couple of interviews with Perry Oosting and also a positive review of the X1D.
I would agree that his article sends some bad vibrations. But that may reflect information you and I don't have. If a Chinese firm makes an investment they may make changes the organisation does not appreciate.
My company has hired some engineers from Volvo after Geely has acquired Volvo and they left Volvo because of the Chinese involvement, but Volvo is still Volvo and they are very successful.
Unfortunately, Hasselblad doesn't give any information, except that they are delivering very slowly. So Kevin may be the best information we have as there is no information from Hasselblad.
Hasselblad may have a cash flow problem. They can sell a lot of cameras but they may need to purchase assets to be able to produce.
Would Hasselblad be better at communicating we may have decent information, but they are not.
So, I feel that it is wrong to put the blame on Kevin. He seems to be pretty sure that the information he has is solid. Put the blame on Hasselblad who just yields a vacuum of information.
Best regards
Erik
Kevin Raber posted a couple of interviews with Perry Oosting and also a positive review of the X1D.
I would agree that his article sends some bad vibrations. But that may reflect information you and I don't have. If a Chinese firm makes an investment they may make changes the organisation does not appreciate.
My company has hired some engineers from Volvo after Geely has acquired Volvo and they left Volvo because of the Chinese involvement, but Volvo is still Volvo and they are very successful.
Unfortunately, Hasselblad doesn't give any information, except that they are delivering very slowly. So Kevin may be the best information we have as there is no information from Hasselblad.
Hasselblad may have a cash flow problem. They can sell a lot of cameras but they may need to purchase assets to be able to produce.
Would Hasselblad be better at communicating we may have decent information, but they are not.
So, I feel that it is wrong to put the blame on Kevin. He seems to be pretty sure that the information he has is solid. Put the blame on Hasselblad who just yields a vacuum of information.
Best regards
Erik
KeithL
Well-known member
I took issue with Kevin Raber's article and said as much here and on LuLa, but it was as I expected it to be and therefore I wasn't deceived.
I believe there is a good reason on why people should concentrate on the motive behind KR's post...
For years, MF was under-specified than FF cameras. This was never the case during the film days, during those days, MF was bulkier but that was all one had to deal with.
One has to remember that until the Cmos 50mp Sony sensor hit the market some three years ago (introduced with Hasselblad H5D-50) there was no high ISO, no video and no LV available for those that where MF equipment users. On top, for one to use MF, it would cost some 10X the price of a respective FF equipment although it was under specified in crucial specs that was causing the equipment to under perform.
As a result, it was more than MF sales that were affected, Technical camera makers where also affected, them being trapped with the (under-specified) image areas one had to use and the cost of them. Let alone the fact that cost did shoot over the roof due to the "special" lenses needed or the extra shutters and sliding backs one had to use...
Then, the Sony α7 appeared and it being mirrorless, the Technical camera market started picking up again, it was clear that functionality and (significant reduction of) cost was more important than larger image area size.
By the time the above history happened, both Hassy and Phase were under specified, very expensive and as a consequence, sales were dropping at a rapid rate which was leading with mathematical terms to the end of the MF market. Simply, MF market of modular systems sales, dropped down to negligible as to keep going. Only thing that attracted some customers anymore, was the "better image quality" (due to larger sensor), but even that, was improving fast with FF cameras to the degree that more and more users were saying the "what the hey" word.
Then, one day, one out of the two makers of that (almost not existent) MF market, decided to "wake up", they worked their "a** off" as to STOP being under specified, make a mirrorless and reduce prices... The other maker, stayed in its deep sleep thinking that "we will always have customers - "its the (fake) "image" that we have to work on" and then they decided to use "past practices" for keeping their "image"... forums and (fake) propaganda.
It's as simple as that... Fuji GFX is coming next month, Hassy isn't under-specified anymore, prices have been reduced, the technical camera market will boost with the GFX (used as image area with shutter and LV) coming. People (and pros) will use their existing line of lenses on their (new) view camera which will be smaller than ever and (by far) cheaper than ever. The Sony a7 (and more mirrorless cameras to come) will provide a "first step" for people to upgrade later towards MF (especially as use with technical cameras is concerned), Hassy will continue to collaborate with "talented makers" (as Perry Osting calls them) as to provide (very beneficial for them financial) support to the higher end of the market.
Nobody will miss those that are stuck with past practices, they can continue sleeping as much as they want, nobody will invest on them either... simply, nobody needs them and (of course) all FUD will return to the creators of it just like the ancient Australian weapon (the boomerang?) returns to its origin.
For years, MF was under-specified than FF cameras. This was never the case during the film days, during those days, MF was bulkier but that was all one had to deal with.
One has to remember that until the Cmos 50mp Sony sensor hit the market some three years ago (introduced with Hasselblad H5D-50) there was no high ISO, no video and no LV available for those that where MF equipment users. On top, for one to use MF, it would cost some 10X the price of a respective FF equipment although it was under specified in crucial specs that was causing the equipment to under perform.
As a result, it was more than MF sales that were affected, Technical camera makers where also affected, them being trapped with the (under-specified) image areas one had to use and the cost of them. Let alone the fact that cost did shoot over the roof due to the "special" lenses needed or the extra shutters and sliding backs one had to use...
Then, the Sony α7 appeared and it being mirrorless, the Technical camera market started picking up again, it was clear that functionality and (significant reduction of) cost was more important than larger image area size.
By the time the above history happened, both Hassy and Phase were under specified, very expensive and as a consequence, sales were dropping at a rapid rate which was leading with mathematical terms to the end of the MF market. Simply, MF market of modular systems sales, dropped down to negligible as to keep going. Only thing that attracted some customers anymore, was the "better image quality" (due to larger sensor), but even that, was improving fast with FF cameras to the degree that more and more users were saying the "what the hey" word.
Then, one day, one out of the two makers of that (almost not existent) MF market, decided to "wake up", they worked their "a** off" as to STOP being under specified, make a mirrorless and reduce prices... The other maker, stayed in its deep sleep thinking that "we will always have customers - "its the (fake) "image" that we have to work on" and then they decided to use "past practices" for keeping their "image"... forums and (fake) propaganda.
It's as simple as that... Fuji GFX is coming next month, Hassy isn't under-specified anymore, prices have been reduced, the technical camera market will boost with the GFX (used as image area with shutter and LV) coming. People (and pros) will use their existing line of lenses on their (new) view camera which will be smaller than ever and (by far) cheaper than ever. The Sony a7 (and more mirrorless cameras to come) will provide a "first step" for people to upgrade later towards MF (especially as use with technical cameras is concerned), Hassy will continue to collaborate with "talented makers" (as Perry Osting calls them) as to provide (very beneficial for them financial) support to the higher end of the market.
Nobody will miss those that are stuck with past practices, they can continue sleeping as much as they want, nobody will invest on them either... simply, nobody needs them and (of course) all FUD will return to the creators of it just like the ancient Australian weapon (the boomerang?) returns to its origin.
Probably the most pertinent and on the money post in this thread (or forum!)
"Then, the Sony α7 appeared and it being mirrorless, the Technical camera market started picking up again, it was clear that functionality and (significant reduction of) cost was more important than larger image area size."
Was pondering this the other day as I used my Actus. I laughed as I remembered using a rollie view camera with various dongles control units and cables hanging of it years ago on a shoot. Remind me again how much all that stuff cost?
MFD looks like it has a healthy immediate future but long term I doubt that involves a flappy mirror and a combined weight that means a camera should come with a wrist support or a grip exerciser.
"Then, the Sony α7 appeared and it being mirrorless, the Technical camera market started picking up again, it was clear that functionality and (significant reduction of) cost was more important than larger image area size."
Was pondering this the other day as I used my Actus. I laughed as I remembered using a rollie view camera with various dongles control units and cables hanging of it years ago on a shoot. Remind me again how much all that stuff cost?
MFD looks like it has a healthy immediate future but long term I doubt that involves a flappy mirror and a combined weight that means a camera should come with a wrist support or a grip exerciser.