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!

More Price Wars?

fotografz

Well-known member
I'm a little surprised about that. You would think those backs in the square format for the V would sell at a very low price point. Certainly not the newest format or back out there.
The CFV back is unique in that it's the only one that doesn't require any sync cord from lens to back when mounted to a V camera ... and the only one that works at all shutter speeds on a 200 series focal plane camera at all ... plus it looks exactly like the chrome edged V film backs cosmetically ... which are two of it's main selling features over and above just being a 16 meg square like many other makers offer.

There isn't any advantage to Hasselblad in terms of upsell since this is a one of a kind back ... or selling more accessory gear for the V series which can be had used most anywhere ... so I guess some of us V users are lucky they made the CFV at all.
 

carstenw

Active member
Geez, Hasselblad could get the upsell if they would just make a 22MP, 31MP or 39MP CFV! They have built their own jail here.

Anyway, the more I think about the S2, the more I think that it is not really aimed at cannibalizing the MF market, but rather to give an easy step up for a 1Ds3 or D3x using pro who wants a little more, without a change of lifestyle. A few have probably made the jump to MF and are frustrated with the limitations, quality or workflow, but the majority will come from below. Successful FF-35mm pros who want to separate from the crowds. Hasselblad's problem is that they (apparently) saw themselves being in this position, and the Leica S2 squeezes in between. It will be interesting to see what happens when the S2 is released.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Some maybe frustrated but i certainly am not. You want high quality files than the work involved is worth the effort putting into it. I do not find it limiting. This goes back to a statement I said earlier and as you progress in format going up the more work or more effort goes into it. Have you ever shot a 8x 10 view camera. Certainly more effort in that than MF. To me and I have been shooting MF since the beginning of time it is not a whole lot different than anything else in many ways . Lens on camera and shoot. The M8 is just as hard as a MF camera you have to work it. We are far away from P&S camera and again to me 35mm is not the comparable camera. You want to compare than let's compare to 4x5 film because that is the equal ground when it comes to quality of file NOT 35mm. MF was and is designed to give high quality files and any limitations to it are more user issues than anything else. I use it for everything and yes maybe not the most useful tool to get it done but with work and effort i get the results. Limitations are in peoples heads not the camera's. Whatever physical limitations there are in any camera it is up to the user to work around it and adjust. WE have to be adaptable to whatever we pick up that day to actually work with.

Sports do we really need 10 FPS NO YOU DO NOT. What the heck EVER happened to the decisive moment. Let's remember not long ago this stuff was being done with a speed graphic 4x5 and many great sports shooters got amazing images with it and considered slower than taking a dump. Sorry for the graphic there but you get the idea. We are spoiled as hell and it gets worse and worse with every new generation of digital wonder that hits the streets.We are forgetting about photography and how to get images and more focused on what we can't do. Why do we put those so called limitations on ourselves or think our gear has them. Honestly I really hate that we are giving up on our abilities and just calling it a day and say this is a PITA to work with and so on.

Maybe I come at this differently than most but I have been a shooter all my life since I was 15 years old and any camera limitations we learned to work around them. I shot Kodachome with no Polaroid for years with 10 lights on a set . Talk about guessing and limitations. I would have KILLED for a LCD screen back in the 60,70,80 and 90's.

Now we complain it's not big enough. Sometimes I bang my head on these topics. We need to focus on what WE can do not what a camera can't do. Sorry that was my Saturday morning pep talk and not directed at anyone just my second espresso thoughts. LOL

If I could change the tide i would to focus on what we can do than what we can't do, maybe that is why I love to teach. I get this stuff off my chest .
 

Steve Hendrix

Well-known member
Fair enough on chosen pricing, although at the 15k price point, the difference in value is the cost of an H3DII + HC 80, which are priced higher than the Mamiya camera kit.

Where the price difference really shows up is in refurbished and demo units, where the Phase prices are distinctly higher than Hasselblad's. A refurbished P30+ costs $3k more than a complete H3DII-31 kit, both from dealers, for example.

Cartsen - I'm sorry I didn't quite follow your first statement here.

On the second, how much are H3DII-31 refurbished (not to be confused with demo units, used, etc) units going for?


Steve Hendrix
Phase One
 

LJL

New member
Guy,
I do not think many would argue with your points (except some idiot sports shooter like me over the need for 10fps speed....not to rip off 10+ frames, but to get those 2-3 frames at just the right moment to show a transition or something....but I digress).

Personally, all of this "want", "need", and other talk is sort of stemming from our growing appreciation and dependence on technology. I think that is great. If there is really good tech to help things out, why not use it. However, like you and many others that have been shooting for some time, technology cannot replace genuine knowledge and skills, nor should it for creative things. It can make lots of things a bit easier, but only if one really has the fundamentals that are not changing.....light, direction and intensity, creative composition, timing, etc.

I think in some cases, the technology advancements are both fantastic and frightening. Many do want all the latest features for some things, but the pace of change for some of that stuff easily outstrips our abilities to replace gear economically to incorporate some of those things. Think about it.....there has only been "live view" on digicams and DSLRs rather recently. Now we expect/want that feature on MFDBs. (Let's set aside the CCD v CMOS tech issues and just assume it could work easily.) All that does is replace the ground glass and loupe, for the most part unless one tethers to a large screen. Great feature that many would like to see, but how many folks would ditch their present backs just to get that? We say similar things about higher ISO, yet most folks still shoot in the 50-200 range, venturing to 400-800 only when pressed. Both are technologies that should/could be incorporated, but at what costs? The advances in some areas are supported by the shear volumes of sales in other areas, and with MF, that does not exist, because the prices have been very high due to lower volumes. The tech is pretty much the same, but the turnover to incorporate some of that tech is simply not there to match the cycle that some would like to see. (The one exception, I think, is the LCD. THAT is a pretty mature tech at this point, and it is hard to believe back makers cannot incorporate better displays than they have, especially since that is also the one thing that almost all shooters keep asking for....still mystifies me.)

More to your points....we are, in general, a demanding and somewhat impatient lot, especially since Pandora's Box of technology has come along and been opened. The argument in favor is that if any of these features can reduce the time you need to spend fiddling around, that should be good, and they should be incorporated. Yet the number of devices being made and sold is still fairly small, so prices are quite high. That is an argument that I think is starting to unravel a bit. The story has always been that the gear costs so much more because the sensors cost so much to fab. Well, fabs have gotten a whole lot better and cheaper, so we should be seeing declines. The other part of this that we do not see is just how many sensor were fabbed and when. If we are to believe that all of these newly offered cheaper backs have sensors that were made from the first orders/batches, then why were the prices so high when the backs were first being sold?

Well, like you, I am not sure where all of this is going in this discussion either.....time for me to get a second or third espresso myself ;-)

LJ
 

carstenw

Active member
With the first point, I just meant that the H3DII-31 kit includes the H3DII and the HC 80, with a combined value of more like $3k.

Procentre in London sells demo (not refurbished...) units for 7000 Pounds. What is the significant difference between demo and refurbished, other than the obvious different history?
 

LJL

New member
Carsten,
From what I understand, refurb units have gone back to the factory to check all components and bring things within spec, much as a new unit going out, but obviously having been used. That may include replacing parts that are worn or not meeting specs. Demos and other used gear is usually sold "as is", and has not had the cleaning, testing, adjusting to bring things to spec as a new unit, for the most part.

LJ
 

Steve Hendrix

Well-known member
Actually I knew Steve well enough as I bought an H3DII-39 with the 28 and 100 lenses (in addition to the kit 80) from him in June of this year. Needless to say the competition was Phase and he was very pointed in his praise of the Hassy compared to the Phase. Of course this is to be expected as he represented Hassy and not Phase.) And of course he now reps Phase so Hassy is the competition. I would have expected Steve to take the high road and focus his commentaries on Phase positive attributes and not on his (now) analysis of Hassy weaknesses, as he sees them. Having spent over $30K with Steve (and his company PPR of Atlanta) and then watching the price reduction of almost 25% only weeks later without a word from either Steve or PPR I am simply no longer a fan!

I would never have commented about anything regarding Steve had he not dissed his old firm and by implication let down his former customers. i don't like the tactics and said so. End of story. I won't respond to any more posts as these things start to flame and I don't want to be a part of that.

I'm sorry if it is perceived that I said what I did about a guy who has many many friends and former customers here and elsewhere. I was part of that group as well.


Woody


I would love to let this go also, but unfortunately I do have a dog in it and it has been let out.

Woody, I am disappointed you have made the statements you have because they are filled with inaccuracy. Let's speak factually. I have not dissed Hasselblad (and certainly not PPR, if that's what you meant) anywhere. The only statement I made in reaction to Hasselblad is that their price drops generate a lot of interest. They were the first to dramatically drop their prices, so they are now seen as a sort of price leader compared to their competitors, which they are not. Those are simply facts that I have pointed out.

I think you'll find - as many people have - that I do not slam competitive products. I will discuss them and voice my opinions but I believe those opinions are certainly fair minded and well reasoned, and if they are not, I'll be the first to admit it.

What surprises me the most Woody, is your account of your experience purchasing from me while at PPR. Let's get some things corrected:

Last May, I saw on GetDPI that you were about to purchase a Phase One P45+from Lance Schad. I saw you lived in Fort Collins and I was going to Fort Collins that week to participate in a photographic conference. I asked if you'd wait until I arrived to show you an H3D. I showed you, you liked it. I became entangled in a nasty bidding war with Lance (the first, last, and only one). You did not spend $30,000. You spent $21,995 and you got the deal of the century which included an H3DII-39, a 28mm lens, and the CF adapter. At the time, the price of the H3DII-39 alone was $33,995! Even today with all of Hasselblad's price reductions, that would be a great deal. It was the only time I ever really attempted to compete with Phase One on price and I lost money on the deal - lost money. You were only too happy to accept the lower pricing...at the time. And you received the complete full service and support that we were known for as I took a number of calls from you at various hours and helped you with the situations youw ere encountering.

Two months later - with no warning to their dealers!!! - Hasselblad suddenly dropped pricing. So excuse me for not telling you something I wasn't told of myself. PPR themselves also got caught with existing demo equipment that we were suddenly upside down in. So you're no longer a fan of someone who gave you the deal of the century and who got caught in an abrupt price reduction with no warning just as you were? Ok, then.

You also seem to resent the fact that 2 months after you bought from PPR, I decided to make a job change. I had been at PPR 6 years and was ready for a change. You are the only customer of mine who seemed to have a problem with that. All of my other customers congratulated me and wished me well. The fact is, you still retained the support of PPR, and Hasselblad behind them. It is not like you were just left out in the cold.

I have never "dissed" as you put it, Hasselblad, PPR, or any of my "old firms". While at PPR, I respected Phase One as a brand. Now at Phase One, I respect Hasselblad, Leaf, and Sinar as brands. But don't expect me not to compete. Woody, with all your experience, you of all people should know better than that. Ultimately, I feel badly that you feel this way, and hurt that you would - out of nowhere - voice these feelings publicly, rather than personally.

Sorry everyone for the long public post.


Steve Hendrix
Phase One
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I think the basic fact is some systems cost more than others and no getting around it. I can't even think about buying a Sinar, maybe the body and back are in the same ballpark but the lenses are very costly. I think we see things on the glossy side and never actually do the math as a system of parts and only look at the part costs. I bet if we added this all up on a 5 lens kit brand new off the factory floor between all the systems it maybe just be a very revealing total number. We don't really buy parts but we do buy to add to the overall system. One lens from one OEM maybe 1k more than another OEM but it maybe reverse on another lens. I like to think system myself because ultimately that is what is in your bag and that is what you use is the system. Be interesting to see this from a top down view of the overall system cost. Not sure who would be more or less and maybe does not matter either because the all do things differently. Also we look at raw costs and not what the warranties and such things like that are. There is value in warranties and it does go into the price.
 
S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
Now we complain it's not big enough. Sometimes I bang my head on these topics. We need to focus on what WE can do not what a camera can't do. Sorry that was my Saturday morning pep talk and not directed at anyone just my second espresso thoughts. LOL
Preach on Brother... preach on.

You're speakin' my language here.
 

bensonga

Well-known member
The CFV back is unique <snip>....so I guess some of us V users are lucky they made the CFV at all.
Very true and as a relatively new Hasselblad V-series owner, I'm really glad they did make the CFV. For me, the 503CWD-II with the 40mm IF lens was a deal too good to pass up, even at the $12,995 full retail price I paid (with no hesitation or regrets). But I have friends (all of us non-pros) with V-series systems who would like to have the CFV back....but they aren't about to spend almost $10k for one.

Geez, Hasselblad could get the upsell if they would just make a 22MP, 31MP or 39MP CFV!
I agree....it's disappointing that there is no upgrade path for the 16mp CFV. I suppose the bean counters and marketers at Hasselblad know what they are doing.....but it's still a shame that this appears to be the end of the road.

Gary
Alaska
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Geez, Hasselblad could get the upsell if they would just make a 22MP, 31MP or 39MP CFV! They have built their own jail here.

Anyway, the more I think about the S2, the more I think that it is not really aimed at cannibalizing the MF market, but rather to give an easy step up for a 1Ds3 or D3x using pro who wants a little more, without a change of lifestyle. A few have probably made the jump to MF and are frustrated with the limitations, quality or workflow, but the majority will come from below. Successful FF-35mm pros who want to separate from the crowds. Hasselblad's problem is that they (apparently) saw themselves being in this position, and the Leica S2 squeezes in between. It will be interesting to see what happens when the S2 is released.
Ever try to hold a V camera on it's side? Hassey doesn't have a rotating back system, and they aren't going to spend the R&D to make it happen either since that system has been slowly going bye-bye. A CFV sensor needs to be square or have a rotating sensor like the Leaf 54 ... which also won't happen since V users generally wouldn't spend that much cash on their 501CM. If one of the sensor makers comes up with a 48X48 or larger sensor, then maybe ... but I double doubt that'll happen either.

If the S2 is to "Squeeze in" it'll have to be a "system" (camera and base lens) for around $10K with other basic WA and Tele workhorse lenses coming in at around $3-4K ... which would be highly uncharacteristic for Leica. My bet is that Ice Cream will be served in Hell before that happens ;)
 
Last edited:

jonoslack

Active member
Right now I doubt the S2 is viable. I'll be surprised if it is released at all, or if it is, it will be at a lower than expected price. Its far too niche to secure volume sales at the prices I have seen.
I suppose it all depends on what you define as 'volume sales'. With respect to Marc's response, I agree, the switchers from other MF systems (at least at first) is going to be negligible.

But I don't think that Leica EVER succeeded at ANYTHING on the basis of being competitive, and that the success or failure of the S2 depends much more on the quality of output than it's price.

If the quality really is good, then the convenience / speed / weather proofing / lenses is going to prove attractive to people.

If Leica have built their business model on being 'competitive' rather than on being 'excellent' then it's clearly doomed . . . but excellence will find a market.

I'm not a professional photographer, but even if a useable S2 kit is $50,000, then, if it comes up with the goods, it seems to be a reasonable business expense . . . Look at truck drivers . . . how much does a truck cost!!!! Certainly in my business that kind of expense is something one grimaces at and spends . . . if it's going to come up with the goods.


Everyone here seems to be assuming that competitiveness is the only game. . . . .
 
S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
I suppose it all depends on what you define as 'volume sales'. With respect to Marc's response, I agree, the switchers from other MF systems (at least at first) is going to be negligible.

But I don't think that Leica EVER succeeded at ANYTHING on the basis of being competitive, and that the success or failure of the S2 depends much more on the quality of output than it's price.

If the quality really is good, then the convenience / speed / weather proofing / lenses is going to prove attractive to people.

If Leica have built their business model on being 'competitive' rather than on being 'excellent' then it's clearly doomed . . . but excellence will find a market.

I'm not a professional photographer, but even if a useable S2 kit is $50,000, then, if it comes up with the goods, it seems to be a reasonable business expense . . . Look at truck drivers . . . how much does a truck cost!!!! Certainly in my business that kind of expense is something one grimaces at and spends . . . if it's going to come up with the goods.


Everyone here seems to be assuming that competitiveness is the only game. . . . .
Hey Jonathan, I agree with much of what you have to say... but I think the dark horse here is the economy. Competitiveness does, indeed, rule the roost these day... take the 5dII as an example, especially in the regards to how many pros seem to choose it over the d3x.

I don't think "competitiveness" will rule forever, but given the strong move towards non-print media as well as the ever encroaching quality of 35mm... the value proposition of the S2 is problematic. Not that Leica was ever about "value proposition" :D

I do hope the S2 is all that it's been made out to be, but in the face of lower hassie/phase prices, one has to wonder about it. When all else fails (like with the d3x)... there are always doctors, lawyers, and dentists to buy into the leica system (and I don't mean that, at all, pejoratively!).
 
S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
oh... and I have to add, laughingly... that I'm in the midst of setting up for a medium format purchase.

... so "value proposition" is lost on me as well :ROTFL:
 

robertwright

New member
Ever try to hold a V camera on it's side? Hassey doesn't have a rotating back system, and they aren't going to spend the R&D to make it happen either since that system has been slowly going bye-bye. A CFV sensor needs to be square or have a rotating sensor like the Leaf 54 ... which also won't happen since V users generally wouldn't spend that much cash on their 501CM. If one of the sensor makers comes up with a 48X48 or larger sensor, then maybe ... but I double doubt that'll happen either.

If the S2 is to "Squeeze in" it'll have to be a "system" (camera and base lens) for around $10K with other basic WA and Tele workhorse lenses coming in at around $3-4K ... which would be highly uncharacteristic for Leica. My bet is that Ice Cream will be served in Hell before that happens ;)
they do have a 90 degree prism. I used mine sideways with the pm45 for years, but got funny looks from people (the ones not in the photograph:p)

count me as another wisher for a larger cfv back. clearly there is not enough in it for them to bother.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I suppose it all depends on what you define as 'volume sales'. With respect to Marc's response, I agree, the switchers from other MF systems (at least at first) is going to be negligible.

But I don't think that Leica EVER succeeded at ANYTHING on the basis of being competitive, and that the success or failure of the S2 depends much more on the quality of output than it's price.

If the quality really is good, then the convenience / speed / weather proofing / lenses is going to prove attractive to people.

If Leica have built their business model on being 'competitive' rather than on being 'excellent' then it's clearly doomed . . . but excellence will find a market.

I'm not a professional photographer, but even if a useable S2 kit is $50,000, then, if it comes up with the goods, it seems to be a reasonable business expense . . . Look at truck drivers . . . how much does a truck cost!!!! Certainly in my business that kind of expense is something one grimaces at and spends . . . if it's going to come up with the goods.


Everyone here seems to be assuming that competitiveness is the only game. . . . .
Some good points about the quality output. However, a competitive set always exists, and for a long time in 35mm there really wasn't an IQ competitor to Leica. This may be a different matter given the MF IQ competitive set.

50K sounds reasonable to you maybe, but not to just about any working pro that I know. Some top end shooters are even hurting right now. The Hy6 and Schnieder lenses topped in at about 50K for a basic 3 lens kit ... but you could use existing Rollei lenses on it ... even then, it was really hard to discern a difference that was worth 50K + the bath you'd take on dumping your current gear.

Would I like a S2, you bet! Will I buy one? Don't bet on it. I tested the Hy6 and like it a lot, but didn't buy it. Good thing too with the way prices are going, and the rotten economy.

BTW, your truck driver analogy has to be completed ... you'd have to factor in that trucking revenue had dropped like a stone ... then ask whether the truck driver would buy a new truck or keep at it with his/her existing rig.
 

Quentin_Bargate

Well-known member
I suppose it all depends on what you define as 'volume sales'. With respect to Marc's response, I agree, the switchers from other MF systems (at least at first) is going to be negligible.

But I don't think that Leica EVER succeeded at ANYTHING on the basis of being competitive, and that the success or failure of the S2 depends much more on the quality of output than it's price.

If the quality really is good, then the convenience / speed / weather proofing / lenses is going to prove attractive to people.

If Leica have built their business model on being 'competitive' rather than on being 'excellent' then it's clearly doomed . . . but excellence will find a market.

I'm not a professional photographer, but even if a useable S2 kit is $50,000, then, if it comes up with the goods, it seems to be a reasonable business expense . . . Look at truck drivers . . . how much does a truck cost!!!! Certainly in my business that kind of expense is something one grimaces at and spends . . . if it's going to come up with the goods.


Everyone here seems to be assuming that competitiveness is the only game. . . . .
Hi Jono,

If the S2 is $50k, then truly Leica would have lost the plot.

Look at a guy like Charles G, our mutual friend. He is having a lot of success as a full time pro, works for some big name brands, but he uses standard Nikon dslr's - says he can't afform medium format digital and the Nikon kit is very versatile. Look at us, for that matter. We both sell pictures, we are reasonably successful in our respective professional fields, but the farthest I have got up the digital food chain (Dicomed scan back aside) is a Mamiya ZD. The reason is twofold in all three examples: 35mm digital has become very good indeed (I no longer use the ZD), and the cost of digital medium format is prohibitive.

On the other hand, I do have a (used) drum scanner and an 8x10 camera. You could buy both today for the same price as a high end 35mm dslr body.

The big picture is bleak for MF digital outside a small niche.

Quentin
 
Top