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 Lunar : they go defensive

Stefan Steib

Active member
Autsch. Now I ask myself what have they done the last 8 months ?
Design new Hasselblad Logos ? This does not look much different than the Prototypes they where showing on the Photokina..........???

I wish them much luck. They will need it.

Greetings from Germany
Stefan
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Has it been 8 months already?

Many impossible things happened in the meantime.

Leica announced and started releasing slowly their best ever digi cam ever, the MM.

Even more of an impossible thing- though I swore (ever since the revolutionary Panasonic G1 appeared) that live view less cams are not useful, I managed to buy a Leica MM, in all its RF crippled glory and am delighted with using it. :ROTFL:

And to think that the MM was over priced...:ROTFL:
 

BANKER1

Member
It is a tribute to ego and turning a blind eye that Hasselblad would go forward with this project given the laughter and derision that followed the announcement of the Lunar. Hasselblad knew they made a horrible decision, because the Chairman made a statement to the press trying to justify the freaky camera. As a proud Hasselblad owner since the early '70s, I was embarrassed by the announcement. Actually, I was more mad than embarrassed since I viewed it as the beginning of the end for Hasselblad as a viable organization.

The partnership with Sony could have been very successful had Hasselblad announced a groundbreaking camera or improvement that would have a chance of being viable. But, they chose to take an aging technology (a pig) and put a fancy exterior on it (lipstick). In the end you still have a pig wearing lipstick.

They could have offered a full frame 35 mm camera using Sony or Zeiss lenses and maybe even an adapter for Leica lenses. Had they had the courage to offer a mirrorless CMOS sensor camera larger than full frame 35 mm with a full lineup of lenses, they would have had a winner on their hands. But they decided to milk the trademark without bringing any improvement in technology or upgrades to the photographic industry. Thank you Hasselblad for your pig wearing lipstick.

Greg
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
@Greg

if they would have taken the RX1 and apply interchangeable lenses, launch lets say with 4 focal lenght Zeiss lenses, say 20,35, 55 and 90mm all with the same f1,4 and the same quality (as the RX 35mm) maybe add a 1,4 teleconverter and a nice set of stylish bags and shades, an EV and a nice flash in the same design - that would have been nice and a real successor to the X-Pan.

@Vivek

........ so the CMOS isn´t actually that bad.......:)

Greetings from a sunny Allgäu
Stefan
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
I am simply embarrassed for Hasselblad and embarrassed that they would have the hubris to continue with this debacle. One day, I think this will be an example on how difficult it is to stop a train wreck like this once it has started. They should have killed it after the unanimous derision at the launch (has anyone...literally any professional reviewer or industry voice received this camera well?), but they probably felt that they could sell it in China and/or Russia. I think they will be disappointed though...these markets value flash and name recognition, but I think they are more aware of quality than Hasselblad gives them credit for. 7000 dollars for this camera is verging on unethical...this has the makings of a fiasco.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I am simply embarrassed for Hasselblad and embarrassed that they would have the hubris to continue with this debacle. One day, I think this will be an example on how difficult it is to stop a train wreck like this once it has started. They should have killed it after the unanimous derision at the launch (has anyone...literally any professional reviewer or industry voice received this camera well?), but they probably felt that they could sell it in China and/or Russia. I think they will be disappointed though...these markets value flash and name recognition, but I think they are more aware of quality than Hasselblad gives them credit for. 7000 dollars for this camera is verging on unethical...this has the makings of a fiasco.
Hi Stuart, When one of the Hassy guys said that they were not out to rob people, the story ended right then and there. RIP, Habbelsad.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
It is a tribute to ego and turning a blind eye that Hasselblad would go forward with this project given the laughter and derision that followed the announcement of the Lunar. Hasselblad knew they made a horrible decision, because the Chairman made a statement to the press trying to justify the freaky camera. As a proud Hasselblad owner since the early '70s, I was embarrassed by the announcement. Actually, I was more mad than embarrassed since I viewed it as the beginning of the end for Hasselblad as a viable organization.

The partnership with Sony could have been very successful had Hasselblad announced a groundbreaking camera or improvement that would have a chance of being viable. But, they chose to take an aging technology (a pig) and put a fancy exterior on it (lipstick). In the end you still have a pig wearing lipstick.

They could have offered a full frame 35 mm camera using Sony or Zeiss lenses and maybe even an adapter for Leica lenses. Had they had the courage to offer a mirrorless CMOS sensor camera larger than full frame 35 mm with a full lineup of lenses, they would have had a winner on their hands. But they decided to milk the trademark without bringing any improvement in technology or upgrades to the photographic industry. Thank you Hasselblad for your pig wearing lipstick.

Greg
That is an insult to Pigs and Lipstick ;)

Pigs are useful ... mmmm ... the delicious Pork Loin I had just last evening, and the bi-annual BLT my wife allows me to indulge in.

Lipstick ... well ... you know :thumbup:

Hasselblad coulda, woulda, shoulda ... but they didn't.

Instead they see the consumer as an idiot willing to shell out $7K for a creaky old sheep on its last leg dressed in ill fitting Wolf's clothing with dead eyes and extracted fangs.

To be honest, I wouldn't want one of these if one were given to me free for fear people would think I actually paid for it :ROTFL:

-Marc
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
First I thought this is a mockup, but following your link : IT´S REAL !!!!
OMG....
Whereas the Photographer is doing a good job and at least they are using MF H´Blads for the shooting. So they invest a lot to make it stylish.
Maybe for people who don´t have ANY clue about photography but too much money this will work.

And yes of course this attempt is an insult for any existing Hasselblad owner on the planet. Think about it, that´s pretty crazy........

Greetings from Germany
Stefan

Don't worry, the boutique strategy will do the trick








screen dumps from Hasselblad tv
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Uh oh.... this has turned out worse than I thought was possible. The 7 Hasselblad logos tells the story: If you can't give people real values, give them "exclusive" logos. Unfortunately, this whole operation has degraded the Hasselblad logo to a level it may never recover from. The close-up photos reveal bad industrial design, plain and simple. When Leica almost bankrupted themselves selling limited editions, at least they did it with re-painted versions of their own products. These guys show a lack of common sense that exceeds my wildest fantasies.

Good to know though, that the lid for the battery compartment seems to be made in Sweden :ROTFL:
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Looking on the bright side I assume they'll sell so few that they'll crush the rest and make it a collectible?

Better yet, just crush them all. :D
 
Last edited:
V

Vivek

Guest
Now we know why it costs so much!

BTW, How many launches and rollouts are they planning?
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Re: not available - maybe due to high demand ?

Gotta add "Buzz" to push this Frankencamera I guess. Sad to see the old space warrior duped into any connection with this mess ... Hasselblad should be ashamed. There is absolutely no connection what-so-ever between this Lunitic camera, and the venerated V machines the astronauts took to the moon.

I hope their promotion agency goes down with the spaceship, and the Italian government steps in to disavow any claims of italian design.

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

- Marc
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
This is what Hasselblad could have done:
They could have launched a "budget" version of the H-series camera, priced it around the level of the Pentax 645D (which isn't much more expensive than the Lunar anyway), made it "open source", a kind of "H4X Cheap" and included a film back. There are enough photographers around dreaming about digital MF to make a move like that a success and a profitable one. Instead, they are digging a deep, wide hole for the brand name to sink into with the Lunar.

I would be a typical customer for the H4 Cheap. I'm on my way into digital MF, in spite of being a relatively satisfied Nikon user with the option of buying a D800 (which I might buy anyway), and the choice is between Hasselblad and Rollei. The two most important arguments against Hasselblad:

- Except for the H4X, which is some kind of "special promotion", it's a closed system. If Hasselblad goes, the investment goes with it.
- The Lunar, which to me is a sign of a manufacturer that is losing the grip.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
There is a million things they could have done in line with their heritage, but didn't.

They could have made the H5 a dual shutter camera and offered e-adapters for the CFE and FE lenses ... but didn't.

They could have had the moxie to be the first to introduce a MF CMOS back with real live view ... but didn't.

They could have made a smaller S type body that natively takes H lenses ... but didn't (instead Leica did).

Etc., etc., etc.

- Marc
 
Top