Hasselblad Lunar : they go defensive

[Michiel Schierbeek]

I want mine designed as is but compleetly flat, so it will fit in my briefcase.
(not the ones with wooden grips, I have to watch out for my fingers)

(I know somebody who knows somebody who has a friend that uses a steamroller)

 

[Stuart Richardson]

Basically, I want mine to look like this, only with less chronograph and more live view.

It's made in Switzerland of the highest quality materials, so it must be tasteful and elegant. I am sure the same will be true of the Swedish made Lunars...

Here's the V series version, by the way: http://alanwatch.homestead.com/explorer.html

 

[Michiel Schierbeek]

Mmmm Stuart, I think Mugabe will like it.

I like mine pure and flat.

 

[georgl]

We have wondered what kind of investor Ventizz actually is - I was on PK and seen the "new Hasselblad" and it was clear to me: It's the worst kind, greedy businessmen, shortsighted and stupid - when the first investors of this kind appeared about 20 years ago people couldn't believe that they are THIS stupid and "comic-evil", there must be a deeper meaning that "old-school"-people just don't understand - but after a few hundred companies destroyed (in Germany alone!) with no positive long-term effects whatsoever, people start to understand...

Machining a full-metal body to tight tolerances can take hours and can be very expensive, but this is nothing more than a re-housed NEX-7, period.

Leica just finally came up with the very first mirrorless full-frame digital camera that can be used with nearly all kinds of lenses, they must have invested serious money into R&D with unique electronics to achieve an unique product. The Lunar is more like the X2... Will they use the earned money (given the Lunar will be a success among brand-loving rich people) for R&D and production of a real Hasselblad again? I doubt that but I still hope I'm wrong. A digital, mirrorless MF could be a big success amongst professionals...

Even smaller companies don't have to give up in the digital world, the digital cinematography camera with over 85% market-share in the US-series-market is made by a fairly small company (although with 95 years of experience in this market) leaving huge consumer-electronics manufacturers like Sony, Canon or Panasonic behind. It's not only about size... But it takes some resources that only long-sighted specialists caring about the company are willing to invest - Ventizz doesn't seem to be interested in that.

 

[Quentin_Bargate]

What worries me about this thread is we are giving away great ideas for free. If Hasselblad now produce an updated design that folds flat, incorprates a blender, with elements of Rhino horn, tiger testicles and whale bone, we only have ourseleves to blame for not having cashed in and sold the ideas to Hasselblad.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

I want mine designed as is but compleetly flat, so it will fit in my briefcase.
(not the ones with wooden grips, I have to watch out for my fingers)

(I know somebody who knows somebody who has a friend that uses a steamroller)

You clearly want the Hasselblad Lunar Corolla Sports that is under development with a high-end Japanese car manufacturer. The revolutionary new camera body is made from surplus parts from 1969 Toyota Corollas shaped into a revolutionary as well as innovative camera body using water dripping from a broken, Russian tap, to celebrate that Mr. Toyoda and his wife watched the moon landing on the 20th July that year from that very car, on a revolutionary Panasonic portable TV. The platinum Toyota logo is backlighted with electric blue moonstones picked during the Apollo 11 expedition at a city dump on the outskirts of Manila.

The Lunar Corolla Sports will only be 120% more expensive that the ordinary Rhino version.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Folks maybe we should move this now to another forum like the sunset bar since its a real mixture of formats now

 

[gerald.d]

Folks maybe we should move this now to another forum like the sunset bar since its a real mixture of formats now

Agreed.

Just think about that for a moment though.

A thread on a new Hasselblad. Consigned to the sunset bar.

Fitting.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Its in the bar now and this only leads to one conclusion. We need to drink heavily. LOL

 

[simonstucki]

wow I just read the whole thread and that made me wonder why I did.
I really don't know weather the lunar will sell and I really don't care, I doubt it will sell but then of course I don't know all the markets for such "things". Myself I also struggle to find words to describe how bad I feel about that camera.

so why did I read the whole thread? the lunar is definitely the camera I care the least about. but it is also definitely the camera I'm most disappointed about. I was really hoping for something really new and groundbreaking (well maybe not groundbreaking but at least something that no one else offerst (like a digital xpan for example, with evf)) from Hasselblad and that's why I was so disappointed and I guess many others feel just the same and that disappointment is the reason why everybody seems to hate the lunar.
lets face it it isn't going to be a bad camera (of course they better improve the build quality and finishing of the final version compared to the prototypes) it is a nex 7 after all. what if louis viutton made that camera? they may even have gotten some credit for at least using a high quality camera as a base. we would have just ignored the camera.
now to come back to the point I'm trying to make, I think the reaction to the lunar just shows how much Hasselblad has lost and what they could have made with that name. while the digital H system wasn't nearly as successful as the V system back in the film days it was still a good system and didn't harm the brand much. so if hasselblad would have come out with a really professional mirrorless system with a good large sensor (that would have been a smart choice for a collaboration with sony), good liveview and good compatibility with different lens systems and most importantly somewhat competitive prices (with a nikon d800, of course not as low as a d800 but also not 10x more), they probably would have been quite successful. of course such a camera woud have been a serious threat to mfd and thus also to the HXD series but they don't seem to make that much cash anyway so why not kill them...

anyway I think now that chance has been lost. so who will do it? mamiya? sony? leica? panasonic? I wonder why nobody does that.

 

[T.Karma]

Edit

At first sight I was convinced that some alien beings must have influenced the designing process, cause it looks so unearthly.


:clap: Let us praise the Lord for this transcendental beauty. :clap:

 

[wattsy]

Why? what on earth has the Lunar got to do with Hasselblad's medium format line

I'm surprised you are seriously asking the question. The Lunar has everything to do with Hasselblad's medium format line (unless you know something about that line being hived off to another company under different management). Far from being simply a boost to the company's bottom line, the shoddy launch of the Lunar has all the hallmarks of a desperate attempt to stop Hasselblad becoming the next Rollei.

 

[fotografz]

wow I just read the whole thread and that made me wonder why I did.
I really don't know weather the lunar will sell and I really don't care, I doubt it will sell but then of course I don't know all the markets for such "things". Myself I also struggle to find words to describe how bad I feel about that camera.

so why did I read the whole thread? the lunar is definitely the camera I care the least about. but it is also definitely the camera I'm most disappointed about. I was really hoping for something really new and groundbreaking (well maybe not groundbreaking but at least something that no one else offerst (like a digital xpan for example, with evf)) from Hasselblad and that's why I was so disappointed and I guess many others feel just the same and that disappointment is the reason why everybody seems to hate the lunar.
lets face it it isn't going to be a bad camera (of course they better improve the build quality and finishing of the final version compared to the prototypes) it is a nex 7 after all. what if louis viutton made that camera? they may even have gotten some credit for at least using a high quality camera as a base. we would have just ignored the camera.
now to come back to the point I'm trying to make, I think the reaction to the lunar just shows how much Hasselblad has lost and what they could have made with that name. while the digital H system wasn't nearly as successful as the V system back in the film days it was still a good system and didn't harm the brand much. so if hasselblad would have come out with a really professional mirrorless system with a good large sensor (that would have been a smart choice for a collaboration with sony), good liveview and good compatibility with different lens systems and most importantly somewhat competitive prices (with a nikon d800, of course not as low as a d800 but also not 10x more), they probably would have been quite successful. of course such a camera woud have been a serious threat to mfd and thus also to the HXD series but they don't seem to make that much cash anyway so why not kill them...

anyway I think now that chance has been lost. so who will do it? mamiya? sony? leica? panasonic? I wonder why nobody does that.

Hasselblad stated that they wanted to recapture the 65% enthusiasts market they once had some ten or so years ago. The V camera was the basis of that market share, However, the V camera tanked well before the H became popular with commercial shooters. The 35mm film cameras took a huge chunk of their business first, then the 35mm DSLRs finished the job. Add the fact that anyone could buy a used V for a fraction of the new price, and it is a darned good thing there were those Pros to keep them afloat by buying the H system.

Now, they are attempting to regain the enthusiasts, and using a Luxury strategy to do it. The problem they face is the Price/Value equation. Today's enthusiasts are no different than in past, the V camera was an upgrade in image quality, but the Lunar is not. The V camera defied obsoleteness using a timeless functional industrial design ... the Lunar will become dated looking very quickly.

That leaves those less knowledgable about photography willing to part with $6,500 for yesterdays' technology packaged in a AMC Pacer design = not only a fool, but an embarrassed fool.

Maybe it'll garner counter-culture kitch status and be all the rage. Thus providing Hasselblad with its 15 minutes of fame ... then eternal obscurity except in the history of photography regarding what once was.

-Marc

 

[Shashin]

I find it ironic that the Lunar thread is in the Sunset Bar (on so many levels).

About the market, I don't think there is one for this camera.

 

[ausemmao]

I can only agree to this .
I believe VICTOR would roll over in his grave .

"In the end, Hasselblad, with this new initiative, is hoping to attract a larger, younger audience to its range of cameras, says Peter Stig-Nielsen, Hasselblad's director of professional camera products. "I've been longing to talk to a younger audience of potential professionals, and I really believe the Sony name is familiar to this audience. Sony is in the gaming industry, the music industry – things that relate to a young generation. I think the Sony brand and the Lunar product is going to help spread the message about what Hasselblad is."

Young people want fun and shoot with smart phones and P&S cameras .
They don't have much money anyway , but if , they would surely not spend it for LUNAR .
Young photographers don't have much money either and would rather buy a second hand MFD or lens instead of LUNAR .

Give us tools , NOT toys .

I'm another one of those "younger audience of potential photographers", and what's more, one who could (if I really stretched) buy a camera + lenses in the price range that Hasselblad seems to be looking for.

You know what makes me sad? The rebranding thing actually could have worked.

Imagine a (well, 2) Hasselblad Lunar(s) that was an RX-1 with a built in EVF, and the 35mm lens replaced with a 24/2 on version A and a 50/1.4 or a 75/2 on version B, released simultaneously and marked up 50% (to get them the silly margins they seem intent on). While expensive, it at least would offer something new and something useful, AND given them something that was breaking new ground in some way. It'd even preserve their reputation for quality and producing things photographers want.

Then again, that'd require actual intelligence and a desire to innovate.

 

[Tony]

I'm another one of those "younger audience of potential photographers", and what's more, one who could (if I really stretched) buy a camera + lenses in the price range that Hasselblad seems to be looking for.

You know what makes me sad? The rebranding thing actually could have worked.

Imagine a (well, 2) Hasselblad Lunar(s) that was an RX-1 with a built in EVF, and the 35mm lens replaced with a 24/2 on version A and a 50/1.4 or a 75/2 on version B, released simultaneously and marked up 50% (to get them the silly margins they seem intent on). While expensive, it at least would offer something new and something useful, AND given them something that was breaking new ground in some way. It'd even preserve their reputation for quality and producing things photographers want.

Then again, that'd require actual intelligence and a desire to innovate.

I am guessing that there are tens of thousands of the apparently desirable "younger audience of potential photographers (customers)" already shooting with Hasselblad cameras. I really wish they could figure out a way to bring a full frame 9 micron sensor to the market at a price non-professionals can afford.
I would sell every camera I own to buy it.

 

[Vivek]

Someone already has their sketch book out and sharpening the pencil...

 

[ausemmao]

I am guessing that there are tens of thousands of the apparently desirable "younger audience of potential photographers (customers)" already shooting with Hasselblad cameras. I really wish they could figure out a way to bring a full frame 9 micron sensor to the market at a price non-professionals can afford.
I would sell every camera I own to buy it.

Oh, there'll be plenty who shoot with or have shot with hasselblads. It's the number who own (or want to own) new MF digital bodies that they're interested in. Camera club at my uni has a fair few people who primarily shoot a range of 645, 6x6 and 6x7 film cameras, and even one or 2 who primarily shoot 4x5 and 8x10 film.

There are a bunch (somewhat overlapping with the above) who shoot high end APS-C or 135 digital, and a number have more "specialised" kit.

Noone has their own MF digital or MFDB.
Quite a few will be in a position where they could own their own MFDB kit.

Every one of them thinks the Lunar is a joke.

None of them care that much about cameras being plastic rather than metal (a lot of us have engineering backgrounds, we know how metals can fail and how good plastics can be), and there is virtually no brand fanaticism. Most do care that their cameras are well supported and not needlessly crippled, and that they have good software interfaces and support.

The RX-1 is the camera almost the entire club was most excited about.

 

[gerald.d]

And here come the reviews...

genotypewritings: Hasselblad Lunar Review

 

[Bob]

Lunar and Lunatic have the same root.
-bob