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!

Oh Dear .. tho the writing did seem to be on the Wall

stngoldberg

Well-known member
I really enjoy using my H5D50, but with the new Sony chip in all the medium format cameras(except Lecia); is there really a need for multiple medium format manufacturers (Brands)?
Unless Hasselblad unleashes a technical break through of some sort, does the company have any real value for a new buyer?
Maybe the the most important question is can Hasselblad survive selling cameras at $15,000 or less?
Stanley
 

Giorgio

Member
When we see the Hasselblad story in the NY Times or WSJ then I'll pay attention.

VC firms are interested in making profits, 3x 5x 7x times investment. That is the reason for the existence of any VC firm.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
VC firms are interested in making profits, 3x 5x 7x times investment. That is the reason for the existence of any VC firm.
Amen to that.

Unfortunately, Hasselblad has made a string of strategic mistakes the last 15 years:

- Developing and launching the H-series which wasn't very attractive to the amateur enthusiasts that made up a large part of Hasselblad's customer base.
- Making the H-series a closed system, losing many of their professional customers.
- When they finally launched the H4X, it was only available as a trade-in for H1 and H2 owners. Although the market may not have been very large for that camera, the whole concept of making a camera that isn't really available comes forward as a rather hostile way of relating to prospective customers.
- Spending an unknown number of millions (pick your currency) on the Lunar project, a project that most photographers, market analysts etc. could have told them that was doomed to fail.
- Discontinuing the V-series instead of developing it.

Hasselblad has been through times of crisis before and they have changed owners before as well. I really hope that they will survive, but they have made it difficult for themselves. The only reasonably "safe harbours" for them would be something like Fuji. Sony is a company that is far too pragmatic when it comes to buying, selling and closing down. The fact that Sony makes their latest sensor doesn't change that. Sony makes sensors for anybody. The cooperation with Fuji is much more unique, from the X-Pan to the lenses for the H-series. A European investor with a long term plan and modest needs for ROI would be another option, but there aren't many of those around.
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

I am absolutely certain Hasselblad could survive with a good owner, being part of a larger company.

If Pentax can build the 645Z for 8K and survive so could Hasselblad building a somewhat more expensive camera. But they need to share technology with a larger firm.

Best regards
Erik


I really enjoy using my H5D50, but with the new Sony chip in all the medium format cameras(except Lecia); is there really a need for multiple medium format manufacturers (Brands)?
Unless Hasselblad unleashes a technical break through of some sort, does the company have any real value for a new buyer?
Maybe the the most important question is can Hasselblad survive selling cameras at $15,000 or less?
Stanley
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

Fuji buying Hasselblad makes only sense if they are seriously interested in MFD. But absolutely, the cooperation worked well for both companies.

The reason I feel Sony may be interested is that I would think it is possible they would make a back for their sensors and needed a body to put it on.

Best regards
Erik


Amen to that.

The only reasonably "safe harbours" for them would be something like Fuji. Sony is a company that is far too pragmatic when it comes to buying, selling and closing down. The fact that Sony makes their latest sensor doesn't change that. Sony makes sensors for anybody. The cooperation with Fuji is much more unique, from the X-Pan to the lenses for the H-series. A European investor with a long term plan and modest needs for ROI would be another option, but there aren't many of those around.
 

torger

Active member
Hasselblad in financial trouble? Oh what a surprising rumour :D

I think that's kind of what all of us have been thinking the last few years. They've not exactly been focused on long-term development.

As others have said, it could be a good thing if Hasselblad gets sold, it all depends on what the new buyer will do. If the new buyer has both financial muscle and long term thinking in their mindset (ie not just some venture captial firm) it could be a very good thing.

I think the opportunities are there, but maybe not so much with the old medium format business model (ie extremely high prices and narrow high overhead distribution channels). Imagine Hasselblad doing something like Pentax, ie much lower prices, be attractive to lots of advanced amateurs, I think that could be a financially more successful model, but it requires both financial muscle and long term thinking to reach that position. It will cost lots of money and require guts to go there.

Maybe Fuji could provide that?
 
why not Fuji ?
the current Hasselblad (camera and lenses) are essentially Fuji (as far as i know).
By that same metric, one could say that Zeiss is essentially a luxury brand name for Cosina and Sony lenses, since the only Zeiss lenses actually made in Germany comprise something like 0.001% of their business.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
As a long time Hasselblad user, I find it sad to see such a rumor … again.

Personally, I don't subscribe to the usual "reasons why" as discussed here. I believe the root of their problem is/was poor marketing decisions that directly affected the product, and even worst communication with their targeted consumers regarding the good decisions they did make.

There is an adage in marketing that says "Perception Is Reality". Hasselblad violated that on a regular basis. Whether out of arrogance or ignorance is irrelevant, only the long term net results count.

Hasselblad launched the H camera with perceptual mistake #1. They severed their long time relationship with Zeiss to make lenses for the H system. It doesn't matter what the reality of the H lenses may be, how good they actually are, or who designed them and who made them, it created a perceptual inequity that persists to this day.

They insisted on making the H camera "Plain Jane" grey, ignoring the over-whelming majority preference for a black camera.

Hasselblad ignored the fact that their backs could not be used on a technical field camera, effectively handing all that potential pro and growing enthusiasts business to their competitors. The recent clip-on battery for the H5 is too little, too late.

Hasselblad and Imacon became one, but the camera seemed to dominate in innovations, while the DBs consistently trailed Phase One DB innovations. A clear case of the tail wagging the dog. It is medium format DIGITAL, not MEDIUM FORMAT digital. Their camera was already ahead of the game, so they should have concentrated on the DBs.

Instead of using their lead in camera development (perceptual or real), they closed the H system to use of other DBs. In reality, there were some good reasons to unify all components … but it defied "Perception is Reality", and Hasselblad never clearly communicated the technical reasons why they closed the system, so the perception was universally negative with no mitigating argument for doing what they did. The H4X marketing was yet another "mean move" that pissed off even more photographers.

In their most recent act of "Marketing Suicide", they ignored the reality that photographers intuitively know a "digital con" when they see one. Not to mention that photographers are visual people, and usually know ugly when they see it. No single act they have done has had the perceptual impact of the Lunar Lunacy.

There is more, but the slow road to oblivion seems the path Hasselblad kept choosing one decision at a time.

- Marc
 

jlm

Workshop Member
in spite of the fact that Phase makes a camera that everyone seems to dislike ergonomically, they seem to prosper and claim that tech camera use is a small proportion
 

torger

Active member
I'm quite sure that here in scandinavia where both Phase One and Hasselblad are located, tech camera use is virtually non-existent, which I know from my contact with Scandinavian dealers and other users. My feeling is that tech camera use is much larger in the US. I don't know about europe as a whole. I don't know much about exactly how the scandinavian professional market looks, but judging from the contact with dealers and how they market themselves I'm quite sure it's almost 100% about studio fashion and portrait photography, with perhaps a little product/food on the side.

About the V system here in Scandinavia -- it's stone dead. No professional is using it. I don't blame Hasseblad for discontinuing it. Amateurs might have used it if the digital backs didn't cost $15k. When I contacted the Swedish dealer with an interest in the CFV-50 they offered me to sell their last demo ex, so I would expect the CFV-50 to be last V back and be discontinued quite soon.

I think the tech cam segment has a good growth potential though, especially in the amateur market. I would guess that in the US where tech cams are more common, it's more common to sell to an amateur than to a professional. So I don't think it would hurt for Hasselblad to be a bit more open and tech cam friendly. Their newest backs are supposedly quite easy to use with a tech cam, but their display etc (which is important for tech cam use) is still a bit behind Phase One.
 

stngoldberg

Well-known member
I'm quite sure that here in scandinavia where both Phase One and Hasselblad are located, tech camera use is virtually non-existent, which I know from my contact with Scandinavian dealers and other users. My feeling is that tech camera use is much larger in the US. I don't know about europe as a whole. I don't know much about exactly how the scandinavian professional market looks, but judging from the contact with dealers and how they market themselves I'm quite sure it's almost 100% about studio fashion and portrait photography, with perhaps a little product/food on the side.

About the V system here in Scandinavia -- it's stone dead. No professional is using it. I don't blame Hasseblad for discontinuing it. Amateurs might have used it if the digital backs didn't cost $15k. When I contacted the Swedish dealer with an interest in the CFV-50 they offered me to sell their last demo ex, so I would expect the CFV-50 to be last V back and be discontinued

I think the tech cam segment has a good growth potential though, especially in the amateur market. I would guess that in the US where tech cams are more common, it's more common to sell to an amateur than to a professional. So I don't think it would hurt for Hasselblad to be a bit more open and tech cam friendly. Their newest backs are supposedly quite easy to use with a tech cam, but their display etc (which is important for tech cam use) is still a bit behind Phase One.

I enjoy using my H5 with a tech cam (in my case Arca Swiss); however I must report that Hasselblad has not yet solved all of the design problems relative to making the user experience enjoyable.
For example the clip on battery necessary to power the back is held on to the bottom of the camera with a male plug which will not support the weight of the battery holder and battery. To avoid the battery continuously falling off the camera, I have to secure the battery with a rubber band for support.
Think about what I paid for the camera and the need for a rubber band to hold the system together. Hasselblad does not offer the focus mask that Phase One offers nor untethered live view although tethering with Phocus works well.
Nevertheless, the resulting images are worth the inconvenience!
Stanley
 

Douglas Fairbank

New member
About the V system here in Scandinavia -- it's stone dead. No professional is using it. I don't blame Hasseblad for discontinuing it. Amateurs might have used it if the digital backs didn't cost $15k. When I contacted the Swedish dealer with an interest in the CFV-50 they offered me to sell their last demo ex, so I would expect the CFV-50 to be last V back and be discontinued quite soon.
I discovered many years ago that the Hasselblad market in diferent countries can be hugely different. In the UK at least, many professional photographers still use the V system and many more are moving back to it. Some do it to experience again the discipline and reward of film photography and others are buying into it and getting digital backs at the same time, can I help someone find a secondhand CFV back is my most common question. Many colleges and students still use Hasselblad V system. I do agree that the demand for new equipment is very small so even I cannot expect a great revival but it is not dead and where there is demand there is hope.
 

Chris Giles

New member
My issues with Hasselblad have been the lack of availability to extend the warranty.

As any MF user will know, repair is COSTLY. But paying £3000 to get a years warranty on a unit with only 10,000 clicks doesn't seem reasonable vs the trade in value.

Interesting times. I still think the H series is the best. I would of loved them to unlock the backs so I can swap between film and digital. (Without buying a H4X). Perhaps there's a technical reason why they can't or maybe it's a simple case of a firmware upgrade.
 

tjv

Active member
It's just my own opinion, but I think the H body and general system of lenses is by far preferable to the DF+. I'd much rather have an IQ back to a H back though. Swings and roundabouts? I'm not so sure. While I'm not into rumour ware, Phase have repeatedly said they're to release a new body. Perhaps they should buy Hasselblad? (Only kind of joking here...)
 
Top